E.O.12866 Review 2060-AQ-42 email 012411 +13 att.txt

From: Sharon Nizich/RTP/USEPA/US

To: cortney_higgins@omb.eop.gov

Date: 01/24/2011 09:49 AM

Subject: Part of E.O. 12866 Review: EPA Staff Response: Doe Run Consent Decree pertaining to Primary Lead RTR, RIN 2060-AQ42

Attachments: Final Consent Decree (3).PDF; Final Appendix A to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix B to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix C to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix D to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix E to Consent Decree (3).PDF; Final Appendix F to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix G to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix H to Consent Decree (3).PDF; Final Appendix I to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix J to Consent Decree (3).PDF; Final Appendix K to Consent Decree (2).PDF; Final Appendix L to Consent Decree (2).PDF

Hello CortneyPlease find attached the consent decree for Doe Run. We should have the next rule package revisions to you at about 10:00 a.m.

Sharon V. Nizich Metals and Minerals Group Sector Policies and Programs Division OAQPS - US EPA RTP NC 27711 919/541-2825

----- Forwarded by Sharon Nizich/RTP/USEPA/US on 01/24/2011 09:47 AM

-----

From: Stephanie Doolan/R7/USEPA/US

To: Sharon Nizich/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 09/22/2010 04:12 PM

Subject: Fw: fyi FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant Page 1E.O.12866 Review 2060-AQ-42 email 012411 +13 att.txt signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent

Stephanie Doolan U. S. EPA Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, KS 66101 (913) 551-7719 doolan.stephanie@epa.gov ----- Forwarded by Stephanie Doolan/R7/USEPA/US on 09/22/2010 03:11 PM

-----

From: "Winkelmann, Joe" <joe.winkelmann@dnr.mo.gov>

To: Stephanie Doolan/R7/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 09/17/2010 02:20 PM

Subject: fyi FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent

fyi

Joe Winkelmann Environmental Engineer Air Quality Planning Section, Rules & SIP Unit Air Pollution Control Program Missouri Department of Natural Resources PO Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102- 0176 Phone: (573) 751-4817 Fax: (573) 751-2706

From: Vit, Wendy Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 2:58 PM To: Winkelmann, Joe; Holmer, Katy; Graf, Wayne; Ku, Calvin; Moore, Kyra; Jeffery, Paul Subject: FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent Page 2E.O.12866 Review 2060-AQ-42 email 012411 +13 att.txt
fyi
From: Kavanaugh, Jim Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 2:07 PM To: Vit, Wendy Subject: FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent

___________________________ James L. Kavanaugh, Director Air Pollution Control Program Department of Natural Resources Phone 573-751-7840 Fax 573-751-2706 Email Jim.Kavanaugh@dnr.mo.gov

From: Crawford, Betsy Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 11:46 AM To: Kavanaugh, Jim Cc: Feeler, Steve Subject: FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent
Is this what you're looking for? bc

From: Brenner, Lauren Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 11:43 AM To: Crawford, Betsy Subject: FW: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent

Consent decree

Lauren Brenner Legal Counsel Missouri Department of Natural Resources (573) 522-9911 (573) 751-9277 (fax) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information intended for the use of the designated recipients named above. Do not disclose this information to any other party without my authorization. If you have received this communication in error, please contact me immediately and destroy all copies of this communication and any attachments. PLEASE NOTE: Please be aware that (1) e-mail is not a secure method of communication; (2) any e-mail that is sent to you or by you may be copied and held by various computers as it passes from me to you or vice versa; and (3) persons not participating in our communication may intercept our communications by improperly accessing your computer or my computer or even some computer unconnected to either of us which the e-mail passed through. I am communicating to you via e-mail because you have consented to receive communications via this medium. If you change your mind and want future communications to be sent in a different fashion, please let me know AT ONCE.

Page 3E.O.12866 Review 2060-AQ-42 email 012411 +13 att.txt

From: Ferguson, Cynthia (ENRD) [mailto:Cynthia.Ferguson@usdoj.gov] Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 10:00 PM To: skelley.dana@epa.gov; Sanders.Steven@epamail.epa.gov; fidler.danielle@epa.gov; Toensing.Donald@epamail.epa.gov; miller.patriciag@epa.gov; Valentine, Kara; Brenner, Lauren Cc: Stewart.Andrew@epamail.epa.gov; hermann.caroline@epa.gov Subject: DRRC Doe Run multi media Consent Decree Defendant signatures - FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent
We have signatures!!!
Thank you all (and everyone else who labored to get us to this point) so much for your excellent and very hard work on this!!!

Cynthia M. Ferguson Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division Environmental Enforcement Section Regular Mail: P.O. Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044-7611 Overnight Mail: ENRD / EES, Room 6546, 601 D Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 616-6560 Fax: (202) 514-4180 Email: Cynthia.Ferguson@usdoj.gov This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidentialand it may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This email, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me by return mail, e-mail or at (202) 616-6560. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

From: Stotts, Stacy [mailto:SStotts@stinson.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 6:54 PM To: Ferguson, Cynthia (ENRD) Cc: lmarucheau@DoeRun.com; Miller, Aaron Subject: FW: Final Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix A to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix B to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix C to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix D to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix E to Consent Decree.PDF;Final Appendix F to Consent Dec
Cynthia – Please find the attached final Consent Decree that is signed by Defendants and all appendices. I understand that the Government may add some header or footer materials when the CD is lodged.

Stacy Stotts | Partner | Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP 1201 Walnut Street, Suite 2900 | Kansas City, MO 64106-2150 T: 816.691.3363 | F: 816.412.9326 | M: 816.304.3067 SStotts@stinson.com | www.stinson.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Page 4E.O.12866 Review 2060-AQ-42 email 012411 +13 att.txt
This communication is from a law firm and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If it has been sent to you in error, please contact the sender for instructions concerning return or destruction, and do not use or disclose the contents to others.(See attached file: Final Consent Decree (3).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix A to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix B to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix C to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix D to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix E to Consent Decree (3).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix F to Consent Decree (2).PDF) (See attached file: Final Appendix G to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix H to Consent Decree (3).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix I to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix J to Consent Decree (3).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix K to Consent Decree (2).PDF)(See attached file: Final Appendix L to Consent Decree (2).PDF)

Page 5DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and ) STATE OF MISSOURI ) ) Plaintiff s , ) ) ) Civil Action No.

____________ v. ) ) ) CONSENT DECREE

THE DOE RUN RESOURCES ) CORPORATION; THE DOE RUN RESOURCES ) CORPORATION d/b/a THE DOE ) RUN COMPANY; and ) THE BUICK RESOURCE ) RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC ) ) Defendants. ) )DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - ii

TABL E OF CONTENTS

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

................................ ................................ .................... - 3

-

II. APPLICABILITY

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... - 5

-

III. DEFINITIONS

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... - 8

-

IV. CIVIL PENALTY

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ - 1 7

-

V. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : CLEAN AIR ACT

................................ ............ - 1 9

-

A. Sulfur Dioxide and Lead Emissions Compliance Schedule and Interim Limits at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter

................................ .............. - 1 9

-

B. Prohibition o n Netting Credits o r Offsets From Required Controls

................... - 25

-

C. Installation of Pressure Drop Monitor at the Buick Mine/Mill

........................... - 2 6

-

VI. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : CLEAN WATER ACT

................................ .... - 2 7

-

A. Ove rview of CW A Requirements

................................ ................................ ...... - 2 7

-

B. Compliance Measures for all CWA Facilities

................................ ................... - 3 1

-

VII. CLEAN WATER ACT PERMITS : RESOLUTION OF MISSOURI STATE OPERATING PERMIT APPEALS AND COMPLIANCE DEADLINES

................ - 5 2

-

A. CWA Permitting Obligations

................................ ................................ ............. - 5 2

-

B. Resolu tion of Pending MSOP Appeals

................................ .............................. - 53

-

C. Identification of Remaining Permit Appeal Issues

................................ ............ - 60

-

D. Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations

................................ .................. - 62

-

E. WET Sampling and Testing Procedures

................................ ............................ - 72

-

F. Special Master and Consultant to the Special Ma ster Appointment and Decision

- Making Process

................................ ................................ .................. - 7 4

-DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - iii

G. Procedures for Permit Appeal Issues Before the Special Master

....................... - 7 7

-

H. Procedures for Finality of Permit Appeal Resolution

................................ ........ - 79

-

I. Schedule for Compliance With Missouri State Operating Perm its

................... - 80

-

VII I

. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : RCRA

................................ ............................... - 84

-

A. Buick Mine/Mill Facility

................................ ................................ ................... - 84

-

B. Buick Resource Recycling Facility

................................ ................................ .... - 9 0

-

C. Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

................................ ................................ ... - 92

-

IX. SITE REMEDIATI O N

- HERCULANEUM

................................ ............................... - 94

-

X. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES

................................ ................................ ..................... - 96

-

XI. TRANSPORTATION ORDER

................................ ................................ ................. - 102

-

XII

. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : APPROVAL OF DELIVERABLES

.............. - 104

-

X III

. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS: PERMITS

................................ ....................... - 10 7

-

XI V

. ADDITIONAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

................................ ................................ .... - 109

-

XV

. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION PROJECTS

................................ .................... - 115

-

XVI

. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

................................ ................................ ............. - 11 9

-

XVII

. STIPULATED PENALTIES

................................ ................................ ..................... - 12 3

-

X V III

. FORCE MAJEURE

................................ ................................ ................................ ... - 135

-

XIX

. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

................................ ................................ ......................... - 13 8

-

XX

. INFORMATION COLLECTION AND RETENTION

................................ ............. - 14 1

-

XXI

. EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT/RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

................................ .. - 143

-

XXII

. COSTS

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... - 154

-DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - iv

X X III

. NOTICES

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... - 15 5

-

XXIV

. EFFECTIVE DATE

................................ ................................ ................................ ... - 15 7

-

XXV

. RETENTION OF JURISDICTION

................................ ................................ ........... - 157

-

XXVI

. MODIFICATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... - 158

-

XXVII

. TERMINATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ - 158

-

X X V III

. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

................................ ................................ ....................... - 160

-

XXIX

. SIGNATORIES/SERVICE

................................ ................................ ........................ - 16 1

-

XXX

. INTEGRATION

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... - 161

-

XXXI

. FINAL JUDGME NT

................................ ................................ ................................ . - 16 2

-

XXXII. APPENDICES

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... - 162

-DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 1

- WHEREAS

, Plaintiff United States of America, on behalf of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency ( “ EPA ” )

, and the State of Missouri, at the relation of Chris

Koster, Attorney General, and the Missouri Departm ent of Natural Resources

, ha ve filed a joint

complaint in this action concurrently with this Consent Decree alleging that Defendant s The Doe

Run Resources Corporation, The Doe Run Resources Corporation d/b/a “The Doe Run

Company,” and The Buick Resource Re cycling Facility, LLC violated the following

environmental statutes and their implementing federal and state regulations at one or more of

each Defendant’s lead smelting, recycling, mining, or milling facilities located throughout

Missouri : the Clean Air A ct (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401

- 7671q for violations of (a) the

Federally

- enforceable Missouri State Implementation Plan (the “Missouri SIP”), (b) Title V of

the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661

- 7661f, (c) the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”)

provisions of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7470

- 74 92 , (d) the New Source Performance Standards

(“NSPS”) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7411, and (e) the Nonattainment New Source Review

(“NNSR”) requirements of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7501

- 7515; the Missouri Air Conservation

Law, Ch apter 643, RSMo; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C.

§§ 6901

- 6992k; the Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law, §§ 260.350

- 260.434, RSMo;

the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. §§1251

- 1387; the Missouri Clean Water Law, Chapter

644, RSMo; the Emergency Planning and Community Right

- to

- Know Act (“EPCRA”), 42

U.S.C. §§ 11001

- 11050; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and

Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601

- 9675 ; and the Administrative Order on Consent,

Do cket No. RCRA

- 07

- 2007

- 0008 ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 2

- WHEREAS , t he Complaint against Defendant alleges that the U.S. EPA has

provided notice of the CAA violations alleged herein to the Defendants and to the State of

Missouri pursuant to Section 113(a) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(a ), and Defendants stipulate

that they have received actual notice of the violations alleged in the Complaint and that they do

not contest the adequacy of the notice provided ;

WHEREAS

, the Parties anticipate that the injunctive relief implemented by

Defenda nts pursuant to this Consent Decree will achieve significant reductions in SO 2 

### , lead, and

other pollutant emissions, thereby improving air, water, and soil quality ;

WHEREAS , as part of the overall settlement, and in approximately the same

timeframe as th is Consent Decree is lodged and notice thereof is published in the Federal

Register , the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing and providing public notice of

two administrative orders on consent with The Doe Run Resources Corporation ( “ DRRC ” ).

First, a modification to an existing administrative order, Docket No. RCRA

- 07

- 2007

- 0008,

pertaining to DRRC’s handling and transportation of concentrate, ore, and other lead

- bearing

materials, will address alleged violations of that order and continue to improve upon DRRC’s

transportation practices. Second, a new administrative order, Docket No. RCRA

- 07

- 2010

- 0031

,
requires DRRC to implement actions consisting of sampling and cleanup of residential

properties, churches and high child impact areas in and a round DRRC’s smelter in Herculaneum,

Missouri, with lead soil concentrations exceeding 400 parts per million ( “ ppm ” ) ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 3

- WHEREAS , by agreeing to entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant s do not

admit any liability to the United States or the State arising out of the transactions or occurrences

alleged in the Complaint;

WHEREAS , t he Parties recognize, and the Court by entering this Consent Decree

finds, that this Consent Decree has been negotiated by the Parties in good faith and will avoid

litigation among th e Parties and that this Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, and in the public

interest.

NOW, THEREFORE

, before the taking of any testimony, without the

adjudication or admission of any issue of fact or law excep t as provided in Section I (Jurisdiction

and Venue) , and with the consent of the Parties, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED, ORDERED,

AND DECREED as follows:

I.

1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over the

Parties pu rsuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1345, 1355, and 1367; Section 113(b) of the CAA,

42 U.S.C. § 7413(b); Sections 301, 309, and 402 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1311, 1319, and

1342; Section 3008 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6928; Sections 304, 313, and 325 of EPCRA,

42 U.S .C. §§ 11004, 11023, and 11045; and Sections 109(c) and 113 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 9609(c) and 9613. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c) and

1395(a), because the violations alleged in the Complaint are alleged to have occ urred in, and

Defendants conduct business in

, this judicial District. This venue is also consistent with Section

113(b) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b); CWA Section 309(b), 33 U.S.C. § 1319(b); RCRA JURISDICTION AND VENUEDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 4

- Section 3008(a), 42 U.S.C. § 6928(a); EPCRA Section 325( b), 42 U.S.C. § 11045(b); and

CERCLA Section 113(b), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(b).

2. Solely for the purposes of this Consent Decree and any action to enforce this

Consent Decree, Defendants waive all objections and defenses that they may have to the Court’s

jurisdi ction over this action, to the Court’s jurisdiction over Defendants, and to venue in this

judicial District. Defendants shall not challenge the terms of this Consent Decree or this Court’s

jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree.

3. For purp oses of this Consent Decree, Defendant s agree that the Complaint states

claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to the following environmental statutes and

their implementing federal and state regulations: the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401

- 7671q for

viol ations of (a) the Federally

- enforceable Missouri SIP, (b) Title V of the Act, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 7661

- 7661f, (c) the PSD provisions of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7470

- 74 92, (d) the NSPS

provisions of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7411, and (e) the NNSR requirements of the Act , 42 U.S.C.

§§ 7501

- 7515; the Missouri Air Conservation Law, Chapter 643, RSMo; RCRA, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 6901

- 6992k; the Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law, §§ 260.350

- 260.434, RSMo;

the CWA, 33 U.S.C. §§1251

- 1387; the Missouri Clean Water Law, Chapter 644, RSMo;

EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 11001

- 11050; and CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601

- 9675

.

4. Notice of the commencement of this action has been given to the State of

Missouri as required by Section 309(b) of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1319(b), and Section 113 of the

CAA , 42 U.S .C. § 7413.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 5

- II.

5. The obligations of this Consent Decree apply to and are binding upon the United

States and the State , and upon Defendant s and any successors, assigns, or other entities or

persons otherwise boun d by law. APPLICABILITY

6. Defendant s shall provide a copy of this Consent Decree to all officers, employees,

and agents whose duties might reasonably include compliance with any provision of this Decree,

as well as to any vendor, supplier, or contractor retained to perfo rm work required under this

Consent Decree. Defendant s shall condition any such contract upon performance of the work in

conformity with the terms of this Consent Decree.

7. In any action to enforce this Consent Decree, Defendant s shall not raise as a

defen se the failure by any of their officers, directors, employees, agents, vendors, suppliers, or

contractors to take any actions necessary to comply with the provisions of this Consent Decree

unless Defendants establish that such failure resulted from a Force Majeure event under Section

XVIII (Force Majeure) of this Consent Decree

.

8. Transfer of Ownership or Operation

a. No transfer of ownership or operation , in whole or in part, of any of the

Doe Run Facilities, whether in compliance with the procedures of t his Paragraph 8 or

otherwise, shall relieve Defendants of their obligation to ensure that the terms of the

Decree are implemented

, except as provide d in Paragraph 8e.

, below

. Any attempt to

transfer ownership or operation of any of the Doe Run Facilities without complying with .DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 6

- this Paragraph 8 (Transfer of Ownership or Operation) constitutes a violation of this

Decree.

b. If Defendants propose to sell or transfer ownership or operation, in whole

or in part

, of any of the Doe Run Facilities, they shall provide the prospective transferee

with a copy of this Cons ent Decree at least sixty (60) D ays before such sale or transfer,

and shall simultaneously provide written notice of the prospective transfer, together with

a copy of the prospective transfer agree ment, to the Plaintiffs pursuant to Section XXIII

(Notices) of this Consent Decree.

c

. No sale or transfer of ownership or operation, in whole or in part, of any of

the Doe Run Facilities shall take place before the transferee, Defendants, and the

Plainti ffs have executed, and the Court has approved, a modification pursuant to Section

XXVI (Modification) of this Consent Decree making the transferee a party defendant to

this Consent Decree and jointly and severally liable with Defendants for all requirement s

of this Decree , with the exception of the obligations set forth in Section IX (Site

Remediation

– Herculaneum)

, Section X (Financial Assurances), Paragraphs 155

, 156

,
158, 161, and 1 62 (Stream Mitigation provisions ) of Section XIV ( Additional Injunctive

Relief ) , and Section XV (Environmental Mitigation Projects), which may be applicable to

the tr ansferred or purchased Doe Run F acilities, except as provided in Paragraph 8e.

,

below.

d

. This Consent D e cree shall not be construed to impede the transfer of an y

ownership interests as long as the requirements of this Consent Decree are met. ThisDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 7

- Consent Decree shall not be construed to prohibit a contractual allocation

– as between

Defendants and any transferee

– of the burdens of compliance with this Decree, p rovided

that both Defendants and the transferee shall remain jointly and severally liable to the

Plaintiffs for the obligations of the Decree applicable to the transferred or purchased

Ownership Interests, except as provided in Paragraph 8e. , below.

e

. If the Plaintiffs agree that the transferee has the technical and financial

ability to assume the obligations and liabilities of the Consent Decree and consent, in

writing, to release Defendants from the obligations and liabilities of this Consent Decree

app licable to the transferred Doe Run Facilities, then the Parties and the transferee may

execute a modification that relieves Defendants of their liability under this Consent

Decree for, and make s the transferee liable for, all obligations and liabilities ap plicable to

the purchased or transferred Doe Run Facilities. Notwithstanding the foregoing,

however, Defendants may not assign, and may not be released from, any obligation under

this Consent Decree that is not specific to the purchased or transferred Doe Run

Facilities, including the obligations set forth in Sections XV (Environmen tal Mitigation

Projects) and IV (Civil Penalty) . Defendants may propose and the Plaintiffs may agree to

restrict the scope of joint and several liability of any transferee for any obligations of this

Consent Decree that are not specific to the transferr ed or purchased Doe Run Facilities , to

the extent such obligation may be adequately separated in an enforceable matter.

f. The Plaintiffs may refuse to approve the substitution o f the transferee for

Defendants if they determine that the proposed transferee does not possess the requisiteDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 8

- technical and financial ability to assume the obligations and liabilities of the Consent

Decree . The Plaintiffs’ decision to refuse to approve th e substitution of the transferee for

the Defendants shall not be subject to judicial review.

III.

9. Terms used in this Consent Decree that are defined in the CAA, CWA, RCRA,

EPCRA, CERCLA, or state law, or in federa l and state regulations promulgated thereunder shall

have the meanings assigned to them in the applicable CAA, CWA, RCRA, EPCRA, CERCLA,

or state law or such regulations, unless otherwise provided in this Decree. Whenever the terms

set forth below are use d in this Consent Decree, the following definitions shall apply: DEFINITIONS

a. “12

- Month Rolling Tonnage” means the sum of the tons of either Refined

L ead Metal Production

, S inter P roduction , or B last F urnace Sinter Consumption in the

most recent complete M onth and the previous eleven (11) M onths . A 12

- Month Rolling

Tonnage shall be calculated for each new complete M onth in accordance with the

provisions of this Consent Decree. Calculation of the first 12

- Month Rolling Tonnage

shall commence 12 M onths after the applic able production limit takes effect ;

b. “Air Conservation Law” shall mean the Missouri Air Conservation Law,

Chapter 643, RSMo ;

c. “Blast Furnace” shall mean any reduction furnace to which sinter is

charged and which forms separate layers of molten slag and lead bullion ;

d. “Blast Furnace Sinter Consumption ” shall mean the quantity of sinter

charged to the Blast Furnace;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 9

- e. “CERMS” or “Continuous Emissions Rate Monitoring System” shall

mean, for obligations involving SO 2 

### under this Consent Decree, the devices define d,

installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 60.13; 40

C.F.R. Appendix B, Performance Specifications 2 and 6, and 40 C.F.R. Part 60,

Appendix F ;

f. “Clean Air Act” or “CAA” shall mean the federal Clean Air Act,

42 U.S.C. § 7401

- 7671q, a nd its implementing regulations;

g. “Clean Water Act” or “CWA” shall mean the federal Clean Water Act,

33 U.S.C. § 1251

- 1387, and its implementing regulations;

h. “Complaint” shall mean the Complaint filed by the United States and the

State Plain tiff in this action ;

i. “Consent Decree” or “Decree” shall mean this Consent Decree and all

appendices attached hereto, but in the event of any conflict between the text of this

Consent Decree and any appendix, the text of this Consent Decree shall control;

j. “ CWA Facilities” shall mean the Buick Resource Recycling Facility, the

Glover Facility, the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility, the Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

Facility, the Buick Mine/Mill Facility, the Fletcher Mine/Mill Facility, the Sweetwater

Mine/Mill Facil ity, the Viburnum Mine /Mill Facility, the Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel)

Facility, and the West Fork Unit Facility;

k. “ Day ” shall mean a calendar day unless expressly stated to be a business

day. In computing any period of time under this Consent Decree for su bmission of aDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 10

- report, plan, or other deliverable pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements:

Approval of Deliverables) , where the last day would fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or

federal or state holiday, the period shall run until the close of business of the next

business day;

l. “Defendants” shall mean The Doe Run Resources Corporation; the Doe

Run Resources Corporation d/b/a “The Doe Run Company”; and the Buick Resource

Recycling Facility, LLC;

m. “Demonstration Plant” shall mean the lead technology demon stration p lant

Doe Run operates at the West Fork Unit Facility located in Bunker, Missouri to

demonstrate a hydro

- metallurgical

- electrochemical process for produc ing lead metal from

concentrate s and is governed by the terms of the Missouri Department of Na tural

Resources, Missouri Air Conservation Commission Permit to Construct 012007

- 019.

Pursuant to the Permit to Construct, t h e plant shall not process more than eight (8) tons of

lead concentrate per day nor emit more than 0.6 tons per year of lead. The lead produced

from this plant is not subject to the Refined Lead Metal Production limit in Paragraph 19

as long as it is sent to the Buick Resource Recycling Facility located in Boss, Missouri for

further processing ;

n. “Doe Run” shall mean The Doe Run Resou rces Corporation and the Doe

Run Resources Corporation d/b/a “The Doe Run Company”;

o. “Doe Run Facilities” shall mean th e following facilities : the Buick

Resource Recycling Facility located in Boss, Missouri; the Glover Facility located inDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 11

- Annapolis, Missour i; the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility located in Herculaneum,

Missouri; the Brushy Creek Mine/Mill Facility located in Bunker, Missouri; the Buick

Mine/Mill Facility located in Boss, Missouri; the Fletcher Mine/Mill Facility located in

Bunker, Missouri; the Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility located in Ellington, Missouri; the

Viburnum Mine Facility located in Viburnum, Missouri; the Viburnum Mine #35

(Casteel) Facility located in Bixby, Missou r i; and, the West Fork Unit Facility located in

Bunker, Missouri ;

p. “ EPA ” shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency

and any of its successor departments or agencies;

q. “ Effective Date ” shall have the definition provided in Section XXIV ;

r. “Financial Assurance” shall mean financial assurance for the benefit of

EPA and MDNR as set forth in Appendi ces E, F, G , and L of the Consent Decree;

s. “Flow Rate Sensor” shall mean the portion of the CERMS that senses the

volumetric flow rate and generates an output proportional to that flow rate;

t. “Herculaneum Lead Smelter” shall mean the P rimary L ead S melter owned

and operated by Defendants located at 881 Main Street, Herculaneum, Missouri, and

includes the Sintering Machine, Sinter Bed, Sintering Machine Discharge End, Blast

Furnace s , and Sulfuric Acid Plant;

u. “Lead

- Bearin g Materials” shall mean all granular or semi

- granular product

or waste material which contains more than 400 milligrams per kilogram ( “ mg/kg ” ) ofDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 12

- lead. The Parties do not interpret this definition to include contaminated soils excavated

from residential y ards, road edges, churches , vacant lots, or high child impact areas ;

v. “Lodging Date” shall mean the date on which the United States initially

files the Consent Decree with the Court prior to commencement of the public comment

period required by Section XXVI II (Public Participation) of this Consent Decree ;

w. “Malfunction” shall mean any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably

preventable failure of air pollution control equipment, process equipment, or a process to

operate in a normal or usual manner. Failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance

or careless operation are not Malfunctions;

x. “MDNR” shall mean the Missouri Department of Natural Resources ;

y. “Missouri State Operating Permit” or “MSOP” shall mean MSOP No.

MO

- 0000337 for the Buick Resource Recy cling Facility, MSOP No. MO

- 0001121 for the

Glover Facility, MSOP No. MO

- 0000281 for the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility,

MSOP No. MO

- 0001848 for the Brushy Creek Mine/Mill Facility, MSOP No. MO

0002003 for the Buick Mine/Mill Facility, MSOP No. MO

- 00018 56 for the Fletcher

Mine/Mill Facility, MSOP No. MO

- 0001881 for the Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility,

MSOP No. MO

- 0000086 for the Viburnum Mine Facility, MSOP No. MO

- 0100226 for

the Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel) Facility, and MSOP No. MO

- 0100218 for the West

Fo rk Unit Facility ;

z. “Month” shall mean calendar month;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 13

- aa. “National Ambient Air Quality Standards” or “NAAQS” shall mean

national ambient air quality standards that are promulgated pursuant to Section 109 of the

CAA , 42 U.S.C. § 7409;

bb. “Nonattainment NSR” or “NNSR” shall mean the nonattainment New

Source Review program under Part D of Subchapter I of the CAA , 42 U.S.C. §§ 7501

-
7515, and the federal regulations codified at 40 C.F.R. Part 51, and the federally approved

provisions of the Missouri SIP, 10 CSR 10

- 6.060(7);

cc. “NSPS” shall mean New Source Performance Standards within the

meaning of Part A of Subchapter I of the CAA. General NSPS requirements are codified

at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart A. NSPS requirements specifically for Primary Lead

Smelters are c odified at 40 C.F.R. Part 60, Subpart R;

dd. “ Paragraph ” shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by an arabic

numeral;

ee. “Parties” shall mean Defendants, the State, and the United States of

America, and “Party” means any one of the named “Parties;”

ff. “Plai ntiffs” shall mean the United States of America and the State of

Missouri;

gg. “Pollutant Analyzer” shall mean that portion of the CE R MS that senses

the pollutant gas and generates an output proportional to the gas concentration;

hh. “Primary Lead” shall mean lea d metal produced from the processing of

lead ore concentrates ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 14

- ii. “Primary Lead Smelter” shall mean any installation or intermediate

process engaged in the production of lead from lead sulfide ore concentrates through the

use of pyrometallurgical techniques;

jj. “Project Dollars” means Defendants’ expenditures and payments incurred

or made in carrying out the Environmental Mitigation Projects identified in Section XV

(Environmental Mitigation Projects) of this Consent Decree to the extent that such

expenditures or payments both: (a) comply with the requirements set forth in Section XV

(Environmental Mitigation Projects) and Appendix J of this Consent Decree, and (b)

constitute Defendants’ direct payments for such projects, or Defendants’ external costs

for contr actors, vendors, and equipment ;

kk. “PSD” shall mean Prevention of Significant Deterioration within the

meaning of Part C of Subchapter I of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7470

- 7492, the

federal regulations codified at 40 C.F.R. Part 51.166, and the federally approved

provisions of the Missouri State Implementation Plan ( “ SIP ” ), 10 CSR 10

- 6.060;

ll. “RCRA” shall mean the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,

42 U.S.C. § 6901, et seq., and its implementing regulations ;

mm. “Refined Lead Metal Production” shall mean t he quantity of pure Primary

Lead produced and contained in corroding grade and alloy products ;

nn. “ Section ” shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by a roman

numeral;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 15

- oo. “Shutdown” shall mean the cessation of operation of the Sulfuric Acid

Plant or the Sintering Machine for any purpose;

pp. “Sinter bed” shall mean the lead sulfide ore concentrate charge within a

Sintering Machine;

qq. “Sinter Production” shall mean the quantity of agglomerated product from

the up

- drafted Sintering Machine that is not fed back into the Sintering Machine ;

rr. “Sintering Machine” shall mean any furnace in which a lead sulfide ore

concentrate charge or any other lead bearing materials are heated in the presence of air to

eliminate sulfur contained in the charge and to agglomerate the charge into a hard porous

mass called sinter;

ss. “Sintering Machine Discharge End” shall mean any apparatus which

receives sinter as it is discharged from the conveying grate of a Sintering Machine;

tt. “SO 2 

### ” shall mean the pollutant sulfur dioxide;

uu. “SO 2 

### Mass Cap” shall mean the maximum amount of SO 2 

### emissions from

the Herculaneum Lead Smelter expressed in tons of SO 2 

### emitted during the most recent

complete M onth and the previous eleven (11) M onths . Compliance with the SO 2 

### Mass

Cap shall be calculated for each new complete M onth. In determining compliance with

the SO 2 

### Mass Cap, in accordance with the Emissions Monitoring requirements of

Paragraph 20 .d of this Decree, all SO 2 

### emissions from normal operations, Startup,

Shutdown, and Malfunction of the Sintering Machine and Sulfuric Acid Plant shall beDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 16

- included. Calculation of the SO 2 

### Mass Cap shall commence 12 M onths after the

emission limit takes effect;

vv. “SO 2 

### Short

- term Limit” shall mean a daily SO 2 

### emission limit at the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter expressed as p ounds of SO 2 

### emitted per Day. Compliance

with the SO 2 

### Short

- term Limit shall be calculated in accordance with the Emissions

Monitoring provisions of Paragraph 20 .d of this Decree by calculating the sum of mass

SO 2 

### hourly emissions from 12am to 12am on eac h Day. In determining compliance with

the SO 2 

### Short

- term Limit, all SO 2 

### emissions from normal operations, Startup, Shutdown,

and Malfunction of the Sintering Machine and Sulfuric Acid Plant shall be included.

ww. “State Plaintiff” or “State” shall mean the S tate of Missouri;

xx. “Startup” shall mean setting in operation of the Sintering Machine or

Sulfuric Acid Plant for any purpose;

yy. “Sulfuric Acid Plant” shall mean a process unit engaged in the production

of sulfuric acid and related process es using the contact process at the Herculaneum Lead

Smelter;

zz. “Title V Permit” shall mean a permit required or issued pursuant to the

requirements of Subchapter V of the CAA , 42 U.S.C. § 7661

- 7661f; 10 CSR 10

- 6.065;

and Section 643.078, RSMo;

aaa. “Ton” or “Tons” shall mean sho rt ton or short tons;

bbb. “Unit” shall mean a piece of equipment or an emissions source that is

subject to a requirement within this Consent Decree;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 17

- ccc. “United States” shall mean the United States of America, acting on behalf

of the Environmental Protection Ag ency ( “ EPA ” ).

IV. CIVIL PENALTY

10. Within thirty ( 30 ) Days after the Effective Date of this Consent Decree,

Defendant s shall pay the sum of $ 3. 5 million to the United States as a civil penalty

. One million

dollars of this penal ty amount is for violations of the Administrative Order on Consent, In the

Matter of The Doe Run Transportation and Haul Routes

11. Defendant s shall pay the sum of $ 3.5 million required by Paragraph 10 to the

United States by FedWire Electronic Funds Transfer ( “ EFT ” ) to the U.S. Department of Justice

in accordance with written inst ructions to be provided to Defendant s , following the Lodging Date

of the Consent Decree, by the Financial Litigation Unit of the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office for the

Eastern District of Missouri

, Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse, 111 South 10th Street, Room

20 .333, St. Louis, Missouri 63102, phone: (314) 539

- 2200 . At the time of payment, Defendant s

shall send a copy of the EFT authorization form and the EFT transaction record, together with a

transmittal letter, which shall state that the payment is for the ci vil penalty owed pursuant to the

Consent Decree in , Southeastern Missouri, Docket No.

RCRA

- 07

- 2007

- 0008. Failure to timely pay the civil penalty required herein shall subject the

Defendants to interest accruing from the date payment is due until the date payment is ma de at

the rate prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and shall render Defendants liable for all charges, costs,

fees, and penalties established by law for the benefit of a creditor or of the United States in

securing payment.

United States, et al. v. The Doe Run Resources Corporation, et al. , and shallDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 18

- reference the civil action number and DOJ case number DJ# 90

- 5

- 2

- 1

- 0 7390/1

, to the United

States in accordance with Section XXI II (Notices) of this Decree; by email to

acctsreceivable.CINWD@epa.gov;

EPA Cincinnati Finance Office and by mail to:

26 Martin Luther King Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45268

12. Defendant s shall not deduct any penalties paid under this Decree pursuant to this

Se ction or Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties) in calculating its federal

, State

, or local income

tax.

13. Defendant s shall pay to the State as a civil penalty the principal sum of $3.5

million. Payment to the State shall be made in three installments. The fir st payment of $1.5

million shall be due within thirty ( 30 ) D ays after the Effective Date of this Consent Decree.

Failure to timely pay the civil penalty required herein shall subject the Defendants to interest

accruing from the date payment is due until t he date payment is made at the rate prescribed by

28 U.S.C. § 1961, and shall render Defendants liable for all charges, costs, fees, and penalties

established by law for the benefit of a creditor or of the State in securing payment. Subsequent

payments of $ 1 million shall be due one year thereafter until all payments have been made. Each

installment payment of $1 million shall include the principle amount due plus an additional sum

for accrued interest on the declining principle balance calculated from th e Effective Da te at the

rate prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Defendant s may accelerate these pay ments, and i nterest due

on the accelerated payments shall be reduced accordingly. Each installment payment shall be

divided among the counties of Iron, Reynol ds, Jefferson and Washington as follows: f ifty (50)DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 19

- percent to Iron County; t hirty (30) percent to Reynolds County; f ifteen (15) percent to Jefferson

County; and f ive (5) percent to Washington County. The check s for the civil p enalty shall be in

the form of certified check s or cashier’s check s made payable to the : (1) “State of Missouri (Iron

County School Fund)” ; (2) “ State of Missouri (Reynolds County School Fund) ” ; (3) “ State of

Missouri (Jefferson County School Fund)”; and (4) “ State of Missouri (Washi ngton County

School Fund) ” . The checks shall be mailed to:

Collections Specialist Office of the Attorney General P.O. Box 899 Jefferson City, MO 65102

- 0899

.

V.

A. Sulfur Dioxid e and Lead Emissions Compliance Schedule and Interim Limits at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : CLEAN AIR ACT

14. Rather than comply with required SO 2 

### best available control technology

( “ BACT ” ) and lead lowest achievable emissions reduct ion ( “ LAER ” ) emission limits through the

installation of emission control technologies, and because Doe Run is pursuing alternative

technology for processing lead concentrate
, Doe Run has , for independent business reasons,

elected to permanent ly cease smel ting operation s of the Herculaneum Lead Smelter in

accordance with the schedule set forth in this Paragraph

. Doe Run shall: Election to Cease Smelting Operation

a. retire and permanently cease delivery to and processing of all lead sulfide

ore concentrates at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter and a ll associated handling equipment

by no later than December 31, 2013 ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 20

- b. retire and permanently cease operation of the Sintering Machine and

ancillary equipment by no later than December 31, 2013 ;

c. retire and permanently cease operation of the Sulfuric Acid Pl ant by no

later than December 31, 2013; and

d. retire and permanently cease operation of the Blast Furnaces by no later

than April 30, 2014

.

15. Upon the cessation of operation of the emissions units at Herculaneum Lead

Smelter listed in Paragraph 14 of this Con sent Decree , D oe Run shall surrender all portions of

their air pollution permits related to the emissions units listed in Paragraph 14 of this Consent

Decree through a written request to the MDNR within thirty ( 30 ) Days after cessation of

operation, reques ting removal of all such units from D oe Run ’ s Title V Operating Permit. D o e

Run shall provide written notice of such surrender to the Plaintiff s as set forth in Section XXIII

(Notices).

16. By no later than February 28, 2012

, D o e Run shall provide the Sta te with

documentation necessary to support an amendment to the Missouri State Implementation Plan

that reflects the cessation of operation described in Paragraph 14 of this Consent Decree

.

17. In conjunction with and in a timeframe consistent with the 2008 Le ad NAAQS

rule (7 3 F ed. R eg. 66 ,964 (Nov. 12, 2008)) , the State of Missouri shall submit to EPA a revision

to the Missouri State Implementation Plan to include the cessation of operation described in

Paragraph 14 of this Consent Decree

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 21

- 18. In any permitting ac tion involving the H erculaneum Lead Smelter, after the

timeframes prescribed in Paragraph 14 of the Consent Decree, all emission units described in

Paragraph 14 of the Consent Decree shall have baseline actual emissions (as defined in 40 C.F.R.

§ 52.21 (b) (48) and 10 CSR 10

- 6.060(1)(A)) of zero (0) tons per year

.

19. From the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree, Doe Run shall achieve, maintain

and comply with the following production limit a cross all of its operations in the United States of

America , with the exception of the Demonstration Plant at the West Fork Unit Facility

, until

cessation of operation of the Herculaneum Lead Smelter occurs in accordance with Paragraph 14 :

From the first Day of the Month following the Lodging Date, Refined Lead Metal Production

shall not exceed a 12

- Month Rolling Tonnage of 130,000. To demonstrate compliance with this

limit, Doe Run shall provide monthly logs that track refined lead met al produced on a da ily basis,

using the spreadsheet attached hereto as Appendix A , unless and until an alternative spreadsheet

is approved by Plaintiffs , as well as monthly logs that track refined lead metal produced on a

daily basis across Doe Run ’s operations in the United States of America

, with the exception of

the Demonstration Plant at the West Fork Unit Facility

, as a part of the semi

- annual status report

required in Section XVI (Reporting Requirements)

. Interim Compliance Milestones Before Cessation of Smelting Operation

20. From the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree, Doe Run shall ach ieve, maintain

and comply w ith the following emission and production l imits at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter

until cessation of operation occurs in accordance with Paragraph 14 :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 22

- a. Sinter Production and Blast Furnace Sinter Consumption

i. Sinter P roduction shall not exceed a 12

- Month Rolling Tonnage of

326,370 tons; and : From the first

Day of the Month following the Lodging Date , the S inter P roduction and B last F urnace

S inter C onsumption at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter shall not exceed the production

limits set forth in Subparagraphs 20 .a.i through 20 .a.ii below. To demonstrate

compliance with these limits, Doe Run shall provide monthly logs that track sinter

throughput and blast furnace sinter throughput on a daily basis, using the spreadsheet

attached hereto as Appendix A , unless and until an alternative spreadsheet is approved by

Plainti ffs

, as part of the semi

- annual status report required in Section XVI (Reporting

Requirements )

.

ii. Blast F urnace S inter C onsumption shall not exceed a 12

- Month

Rolling Tonnage of 326,370 tons.

b. Lead Emission Limits

i. No later than January 15 , 2011, Doe Run shall submit a test ing

plan to EP A and MDNR in accordance with Section XXIII (Notices) of this

Consent Decree for review and approval by Plaintiffs pursuant to Section XII

(Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables). The test ing plan shall be

in accordance with the test methods s et forth in 40 C.F.R. § 63.1546 and will : Emissions of lead from the Herculaneum Lead

Smelter shall comply with the 1.0 pound per ton of lead limit set forth in 40 C.F.R.

§ 63.1543.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 23

- specify the tests that will be performed, the test methods that will be utilized, and

the emission points that will be sampled. Doe Run shall make any modifications

to the test methods or procedures requested by EP A or MDNR , subject to Doe

Run’s right to invoke Dispute Resolution

.

ii. Doe Run shall conduct performance testing in accordance with

40 C.F.R. § 63.1546 within thirty (30) Days after Plaintiffs’ approval of the

test ing plan

.

iii. Within sixty ( 6 0 ) Days following completion of the performance

test(s) specif i ed in Paragraph 20

. b

. i

. of this Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall submit

the results of the test in accordance with Section XX III (Notices) of this Consent

Decree.

c. SO 2 

### Emission Limits at the Herculaneum Lead Smel ter :

i. SO 2 

### Short

- term Limit : 223,700 pounds of SO 2 

### ; and By no later than

the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree, Doe Run shall comply with the following SO 2



### emissions limits at all times :

ii. SO 2 

### Mass Cap : 18,501 tons of SO 2


### .

d

. Emissions Monitoring

i. CERMS Operation : By no later than the Lodging Date of this

Consent De cree, Doe Run shall maintain and operate a CERMS on the main stack

of the Herculaneum Lead Smelter capable of measuring the hourly mass rate of

SO 2 

### emissions. Except during CERMS breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks,DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 24

- and zero span adjustments, the CERMS shall be in continuous operation and shall

be used at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter to demonstrate compliance with the

SO 2 

### emission limits established in Paragraph 20

. c

. of this Consent Decr ee.

ii. CERMS Specifications:

iii. The CERMS shall be installed, calibrated,

operated, maintained, certified, and audited in accordance with the provisions of

40 C.F.R Part 60, Appendix B, Performance Specifications 2 and 6 and 40 C.F.R

Part 60, Appendix F.

CERMS Breakdown

iv. : Doe Run shall take all reasonable steps to

avoid CERMS breakdowns and minimize CERMS downtime. This shall include,

but is not limited to, operating and maintaining the CERMS in accordance with

best practices and maintaining an on

- site inventor y of spare parts or other supplies

necessary to make rapid repairs to the equipment.

Use of Substitute Data in the Event of CERMS Breakdown:

(a) For any failure or out

- of

- control period of the SO 2 

### pollutant

analyzer less than 24 hours, Doe Run shall substitute the previous Day’s

hourly average SO 2 

### emission rate for each one

- hour period of missing data

resulting from the outage. For

the purposes of determining compliance with the SO 2 

### e mission l imits established

in Paragraph 20 of this Conse nt Decree in the event of CERMS Breakdown, Doe

Run shall use the following substitute data procedures:

(b) For any failure or out

- of

- control period of the SO 2 

### pollutantDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 25

- analyzer greater than 24 hours, Doe Run shall provide substitute data by:

(1) developing an emission factor in units of pounds of SO 2 

### per ton of lead

sinter production by dividing the pounds of SO 2 

### emissions measured

during the most recent full Day of CERMS operation prior to the outage

and the lead sinter produced that same Day and (2) tracking hourly lead

sinter production during the outage.

(c) For any failure or out

- of

- control period of the flow rate sensor,

Doe Run shall provide substitute data using engineering calculations of the

hourly mass SO 2 

### emission rate based on the SO 2 

### concentration measured

by the SO 2 

### po llutant analyzer and estimated stack flow rates.

21. For the purpose of establishing whether or not Doe Run has violated or is in

violation of any requirement under this Consent Decree, nothing in this Consent Decree shall

preclude the use, including the exclu sive use, of any credible evidence or information, relevant to

whether the Herculaneum Lead Smelter would have been in compliance with requirements of

this Consent Decree if the appropriate compliance procedure had been performed.

22. At all times, including periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction, Doe Run

shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and operate the Herculaneum Lead Smelter in a manner

consistent with good air pollution control practice s for minimizing emissions.

B. Prohibition o n Netting Credits o r Offsets From Required Controls

23. Emission reductions generated by Defendants to comply with the requirements of

this Consent Decree shall not be considered as a creditable contemporaneous emission decreaseDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 26

- for the purpose of obtaining a netting c redit under the CAA’s Nonattainment NSR and/or PSD

programs.

24. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended to preclude the emission reductions

generated under this Consent Decree from being considered by MDNR or EPA as creditable

contemporaneous emissions de creases for the purpose of attainment demonstrations submitted

pursuant to CAA § 110, 42 U.S.C. § 7410, or in determining impacts on NAAQS, PSD

increment

, or air quality related values, including visibility in a Class I area.

C. Installation of Pressure Dr op Monitor at the Buick Mine/Mill

25. Buick Mine/Mill is a lead, zinc, and copper mining and milling operation located

at HC 1, Box 1390, Missouri Highway Route KK, Boss, Missouri 65440. Buick Mine/Mill i s

subject to the requirements of Part 70 Operating P ermit No. OP2003

- 011 which was issued on

March 7, 2003, and was scheduled to expire on March 4, 2008 (“Permit No. OP2003

- 011”)

.

26. In addition to other requirements, Permit No. OP2 003

- 011 contains e mission u nit

s pecific e mission l imitations for the various em ission units at the Buick Mine/Mill. Permit No.

OP2003

- 011 identifies Underground Concrete Batch Plant #1 as emission unit EU0020 at the

Buick Mine/Mill

. Permit Condition EU0020

- 001 contains a number of conditions for emission

unit EU0020, one of which i s a requirement to install instruments to monitor the operating

pressure drop across the baghouse.

27. Within sixty (60) D ays of the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree D o e Run shall

install and operate a pressure drop monitor in accordance with the requiremen ts of Permit

Condition EU0020

- 001.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 27

- 28. Following installation of the pressure drop monitor, with the next semi

- annual

status report required by Paragraph 17 6

, D oe Run shall submit a r eport to EPA and MDNR that

provides documentation that a pressure drop monit or has been installed and is operational in

accordance with the requirements of Permit Condition EU0020

- 001. The report shall contain the

certification statement signed by a responsible corporate official pursuant to Paragraph 181 of

Section XVI (Reportin g Requirements) of this Consent Decree.

VI.

A. Overview of CWA Requirements COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : CLEAN WATER ACT

29. This Consent Decree requires injunctive relief and compliance with Missouri

State Operating Permit effluent limits and permit condition s at ten facilities ( “ the CWA

Facilities ” ) as follows:

a. Buick Resource Recycling Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0000337, re

- issued

August 23, 2002, and modified February 23, 2007) is a secondary lead smelter and battery

recycling plant located at 18594 HWY KK, B oss, Missouri 65440. The facility

discharges from three permitted outfalls to an unnamed tributary of Crooked Creek, then

to Crooked Creek. The sources of permitted discharges at the facility include industrial

process wastewater, process stormwater, lea chate from a slag landfill, purge water from

groundwater well sampling, and employee

- generated domestic wastewater.

b. Glover Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0001121 , re

- issued March 23, 2007) is

an inactive P rimary L ead S melter that is currently used as a storage and transportation

hub for hauling activities. The Glover Lead Smelter Facility is located at 42850 HighwayDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 28

- 49, Route 1, Box 60, Annapolis, Missouri 63620. The facility is authorized to discharge

from four permitted outfalls , three of which discharge dir ectly to Scoggins Branch, which

flows to Big Creek. The sources of discharges at the facility include stormwater from the

smelter grounds and slag piles, employee generated domestic wastewater, and non

contact cooling water.

c. Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0000281, re

issued February 28, 2003) is a P rimary L ead S melter facility located at 881 Main Street,

Herculaneum, Missouri 63048. The facility is authorized to discharge to the Mississippi

River from five permitted outfalls. The sour ces of the permitted discharges include

industrial process wastewater, process stormwater, acid plant non

- contact cooling water,

no treatment/non

- contact cooling water, stormwater runoff from slag storage areas, and

stormwater runoff from the facility rail road track and staging area. A draft permit placed

on public notice on November 20, 2009, eliminates the stormwater emergency overflow

point at Outfall 002 and identifies the receiving stream for Outfall 004 as Joachim Creek

.

d. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill F acility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0001848, re

- issued

February 26, 2010) is a lead, zinc

, and copper mining and milling operation located on

Missouri Highway Route KK, Bunker, Missouri 63629. The facility discharges from

three permitted outfalls to Bill’s Creek, which flows to the West Fork of the Black River.

The sources of permitted discharges include mine dewatering, stormwater runoff from

mining and milling facilities, seep wastewater from the toe drain at the base of the tailingsDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 29

- impoundment, and process wastewate r from mining and milling activities. The facility

includes a 227

- acre tailings impoundment

.

e. Buick Mine/Mill Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 00 0 2003 , re

- issued September

25, 2009) is a lead, zinc, and copper mining and milling operation located at HC 1, Box

1390 , Missouri Highway Route KK, Boss, Missouri 65440. The facility discharges from

two permitted outfalls to an unnamed tributary of Strother Creek and to Strother Creek.

The sources of permitted discharges include process wastewater, including stormwater,

from mining, milling and mine dewatering, and employee

- generated domestic

wastewater. The facility includes a 627

- acre tailings impoundment

.

f. Fletcher Mine/Mill Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0001856, re

- issued

November 13, 2009) is a lead, zinc, and copper mi ning and milling operation located on

Missouri Highway TT, Bunker, Missouri 63629. The facility discharges from three

permitted outfalls to an unnamed tributary of Bee Fork, which flows to Bee Fork. The

sources of permitted discharges from the facility i nclude mine dewatering, stormwater

runoff from mining and milling facilities, and process wastewater from mining and

milling operations. The facility includes a 390

- acre tailings impoundment

.

g. Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0001881, re

- iss ued July

10, 2009) is a lead, zinc, and copper mining and milling operation located at Route 1,

Box 416, Ellington, Missouri 63638. The facility discharges from three permitted

outfalls to an unnamed tributary to Adair Creek and Adair Creek, which flow to Logan

Creek, and to an unnamed tributary to Sweetwater Creek, which flows to SweetwaterDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 30

- Creek. The sources of permitted discharges from the facility include employee

- generated

domestic wastewater, process wastewater from mining and milling activities, an d

industrial stormwater from mining and milling activities. The facility includes a 592

- acre

tailings impoundment

.

h. Viburnum Mine/Mill Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0000086, re

- issued

December 4, 2009) is a lead, zinc

, and copper mining and milling operation lo cated at

P.O. Box 500, Viburnum

, Missouri 65566. The facility discharges from five permitted

outfalls to an unnamed tributary of Indian Creek and to Indian Creek. The sources of

permitted discharges from the facility include stormwater runoff from the mi ning and

milling facility, mine dewatering, and process wastewater from mining operations. The

facility includes a series of tailings impoundments covering approximately 812 acres.

i. Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel) Facility ( MSOP No. M O

- 0100226 , re

issued Ma rch 19, 2010 ) is a lead

, zinc

, and copper mining operation located at Missouri

State Highway 32, Bixby, Missouri 65439. The facility discharges from three permitted

outfalls to an unnamed tributary of Crooked Creek, which flows to Crooked Creek. The

sour ces of permitted discharges from the facility include mine dewatering, stormwater

runoff from mining facilities, and employee

- generated domestic wastewater. The facility

includes two mine dewatering basins

.
j. West Fork Unit Facility ( MSOP No. MO

- 0100218, re

- issued March 12

,
2010) is a lead, zinc, and copper mining operation located at 6854 Missouri State

Highway KK, Bunker, Missouri 63629. The facility discharges from four permittedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 31

- outfalls to the West Fork of the Black River. The sources of permitted discharges from

the facility include mine dewatering, employee

- generated domestic wastewater, and

process wastewater and stormwater from mining and milling facilities. The facility

includes a 515

- acre tailings impoundment

.

30. Summary of Relief

B. Compliance Measures f or a ll CWA Facilities

. To further t he objectives of this Consent Decree, Defendants

shall perform the measures set forth in S ubs ection B , below. Defendants, in consultation and

coordination with the EPA and MDNR, shall implement the plans that are required by

Subsection B, below, of this C onsent Decree, including requirements pertaining to data

collection, development of Underground Water Management Plan s , and development of Surface

Water Management Plan s , the latter of which Defendants shall submit for approval pursuant to

Section XII (Com pliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables) of this Consent Decree, with

the goal of improving water quality in Defendants’ mine water and surface water to aid in

achieving full compliance with current and future MSOP s. Defendants will also work with

MDNR , in consultation with EPA, to resolve outstanding issues in appeals of certain terms and

conditions of MSOP s at the CWA Facilities by implementing the measures set forth in Section

VII (Clean Water Act Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating P ermit Appeals and

Compliance Deadlines) below and will comply with the MSOP s for the CWA Facilities pursuant

to the terms of this Consent Decree, the CWA, and the Missouri Clean Water Law

.

31. Defendants shall achiev e and maintain full compliance with the terms and

conditions of its MSOP s for its CWA Facilities, and any amendments or modifications thereto,DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 32

- subject to the provisions of Section VII , Subsection I , establishing the Schedule for Compliance

W ith the Missour i State Operating Permit s . Defendants shall comply with the provisions of the

CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq., the Missouri Clean Water Law, Chapter 644, RSMo, the

implementing regulations thereof, and the Compliance Measures set forth below in this

S ubs ect ion.

1. Underground Water Sampling and Analysis Plan

32. In order to provide mine water quality data need ed to prepare plans to reduce

metals loading s associated with Defendants’ CWA Facilities and to improve overall compliance

with its MSOP s, Defendants shall p repare and implement an Underground Water Sampling and

Analysis Plan (“ UW SAP”) at the Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Buick Mine/Mill, Fletcher Mine/Mill,

Sweetwater Mine/Mill, Viburnum Mine/Mill, Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel), and West Fork Unit

Facilities (collect ively the “Mine and Mine/Mill Facilities”)

.

33. Submittal of UWSAP

. Within ten (10) Days of the Lodging Date, Defendants

shall submit to Plaintiffs for review and comment a UW SAP for all of the Mine and Mine/Mill

Facilities. Plaintiffs may provide comments, if any, within thirty (30) Days of receipt of the

UWSAP. Defendants may revise the UWSAP in response to any comments provided by

Plaintiffs. Defendants shall implement the UW SAP within the time frame set forth in Paragraph

3 6

. The purpose of the UW SAP is to collect water quality and flow data from subsurface

locations at the Mine and Mine/Mill Facilities to evaluate water quality and assist with water

management. The data will be used to characterize the quality and quantity of subsurface water

at the Mine and Mine/Mill Facilities , assist with mine water management and evaluate waterDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 33

- chemistry. The analysis of mine water will enable Defendants to determine the efficacy and

efficiency of underground metals loading reduction activities . The UW SAP shall include, but is

not limited to, the following activities as appropriate for each Mine and Mine/Mill Facility :

a. Sampling of major groundwater inflows, including, but not limited to

shafts and borings ;

b. Sampling of underground sumps ;

c. Sampling of flooded mine workings;

d. Sampling in underground drainage channels flowing to pumping

equipment;

e. Sampling of mine de

- watering flows to surface facilities; and

f. Development of a data set for use in evaluating underground mine and

surface water management programs to reduce metals loadings in water at the Mine and

Mine/Mill Facilities prior to discharge.

2. Surface Water Sampling and Analysis Plan

34. In order to provide surface water quality data needed to prepare plans to reduce

metals loadings associated with Defendants’ CWA Fac ilities and to improve overall compliance

with its MSOPs, Defendants shall prepare and implement a Surface Water Sampling and

Analysis Plan (“SWSAP”) at the CWA Facilities.

35. Submittal of SWSAP

. Within ten (10) Days of the Lodging Date, Defendants

shall sub mit to Plaintiffs for review and comment a SWSAP for the CWA Facilities. Plaintiffs

may provide comments, if any, within thirty (30) Days of receipt of the SWSAP. DefendantsDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 34

- may revise the SWSAP in response to any comments provided by Plaintiffs. Defend ants shall

implement the SWSAP within the time frame described in Paragraph 36 . The purpose of the

SWSAP is to collect water quality and flow data from surface locations at all CWA Facilities to

evaluate water quality and assist with water management. Th e data will be used to characterize

the quality and quantity of surface water at all CWA Facilities, assist with surface water

management, and evaluate water chemistry compared to current and new MSOPs. The analysis

of surface water will enable Defendants to determine potential options (if required) to improve

water quality and meet applicable MSOPs at the permitted outfalls. The SWSAP shall include,

but is not limited to, the following activities as appropriate at all CWA Facilities:

a. Sampling of inflows to and outflows from surface facilities, including, but

not limited to, tailing impoundments, clear water basins, and meander systems;

b. Sampling of receiving streams;

c. Sampling of stormwater discharges in accordance with EPA Industrial

Stormwater Monitoring and Sampling Guide (EPA 832

- B

- 09

- 003, March 2009) set forth

at http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp_monitoring_guide.pdf;

d. Sampling of inflows to and outflows from man

- made surface water

features, including, but not limited to, surface water conveyance chan nels, retention

basins, and detention basins, and which may include storage units, such as tanks, as well

as inflows to and outflows from treatment plants; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 35

- e. Development of a data set for use in evaluating underground mine and

surface water management p rograms to reduce metals loading in water at CWA Facilities

prior to discharge.

3. Completion of UWSAP and SWSAP

36. Defendants shall complete the first iteration of sampling and analysis under the

UWSAP and SWSAP within two hundred ten (210) Days after the Lodgi ng Date, unless

Defendants choose to revise the UWSAP or SWSAP based on comments from the Plaintiffs.

Defendants shall submit revisions to Plaintiffs, if any, within forty

- five (45) Days after receipt of

Plaintiffs ’ comments and shall complete the first i teration of sampling and analysis under the

UWSAP and/or SWSAP within one hundred eighty (180) Days thereafter.

4. Quality Assurance Program P roject

37. Quality Assurance Pro ject Plan (“QAPP”) for data validation and verification

.

Defendant will include in the U W SAP and SWSAP a QAPP that conforms to “EPA

Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations” (EPA

QA/R5. EPA/240/B

- 01/003 (March, 2001)) and “Guidance for Quality Assurance Plans” (EPA

QA/G5. EPA/240/R

- 02/009 (December, 2 002)). For analysis of samples pursuant to Section s VI

and VII of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall use laboratories that participate in a QA/QC

program compliant with these requirements and guidance. Within ten (10) Days of the Lodging

Date, Defenda nts shall notify Plaintiffs of the laboratories selected by Defendants. Defendants

shall retain a third

- party independent contractor to audit all laboratories that Defendants will use

for analysis of samples pursuant to Sections VI (Compliance Requirement s: Clean Water Act)DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 36

- and VII (Clean Water Act Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and

Compliance Deadlines) of this Consent Decree prior to the initiation of any such sampling

activities under this Consent Decree. Defendants shal l provide to EPA and MDNR a copy of

reports of such laboratory audits within fourteen (14) Days after Defendants’ receipt of each such

audit report.

38. Laboratory Audits . Upon EPA’s request, Defendants shall notify a selected

laboratory that EPA or an indepe ndent third

- party contractor chosen by EPA will conduct a

performance and /or QA/QC audit of the laboratories chosen by Defendants, whether before,

during, or after sample analyses. Upon EPA’s request, Defendants shall have each of their

laboratories perfo rm analyses of up to 3 0 samples per calendar quarter provided by EPA or the

third

- party contractor to demonstrate laboratory QA/QC and performance. If the audit reveals

deficiencies in a laboratory’s performance or QA/QC, Plaintiffs may require resampling and /or

additional analysis, and Defendants shall submit a plan to address the deficiencies within ninety

(90) Days of receipt of the results of the audit. Unless Plaintiffs provide comments within thirty

(30) Days of receipt thereof, Defendants shall imp lement the remedial plan in accordance with

the schedule set forth therein. If Plaintiffs provide comments requiring revision of the remedial

plan , Defendants shall

, subject to Defendants’ right to invoke Dispute Resolution, within thirty

(30) Days of rec eipt of Plaintiffs’ comments, revise the remedial plan to address the comments

and implement the revised remedial plan in accordance with the schedule set forth therein

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 37

- 5. UWSAP Report and SWSAP Report

39. Defendants shall submit a UW SAP Report and a SWSAP Repo rt with the results

of the data from the first iteration of sampling and Defendants’ analysis thereof to EPA and

MDNR for review and comment within nin e ty (90) Days of completion of the first iteration of

sampling and analysis under the UW SAP and the SWSAP

. The UWSAP Report and the

SWSAP Report will each be reviewed by Plaintiffs based on completeness and presentation of

information demonstrating full implementation of the UWSAP and the SWSAP, respectively

.
Any deficiencies in gathering information or acc urate analysis of data collected pursuant to the

UW SAP and/or SWSAP will be borne by Defendants and shall not be used as a basis for

modification of any schedule to meet an interim or final compliance deadline for CWA Facilities

under this Consent Decree

. The UW SAP Report and the SWSAP Report shall provide:

a. Summaries of the data collected at each sampling location;

b. Descriptions of all substantive deviations from the UWSAP or SW SAP,

including any changed, deleted or additional sampling locations;

c. A QAPP data validation report ; and

d. A discussion of whether the collected data is sufficient to satisfy all of the

requirements to achieve the objectives of the UWSAP and the SWSAP

.

40. Until the date that Defendants submit the UW SAP Report and the SWSAP

Repo rt , if, after consultation with Plaintiffs, Defendants conclude that the data collected are not

sufficient in quantity, quality, or scope to satisfy the requirements of or to achieve the objectives

of the UW SAP and/or the SWSAP or the QAPP, then Defendants shall include in the UW SAPDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 38

- Report and/or the SWSAP Report and submit for Plaintiffs’ review and comment a plan and

schedule for additional proposed sampling that will achieve those objectives and/or satisfy the

requirements as expeditiously as possible. Unless Plaintiffs provide comments they identify as

significant regarding the plan and schedule for additional sampling within thirty (30) Days of

submission

, Defendants shall implement the plan and schedule for additional sampling as

submitted

. If Plaint iffs provide significant comments regarding the plan and schedule for

additional sampling , Defendants shall , subject to Defendants’ right to invoke Dispute Resolution,

revise the plan and schedule for additional monitoring to address such comments and resu bmit it

to Plaintiffs , and shall thereafter implement the revised plan and schedule. Extension of the

UW SAP and/or SWSAP sampling schedule pursuant to this Paragraph shall not be used as a

basis for modification of any schedule to meet an interim or final compliance deadline for CWA

Facilities under this Consent Decree.

6. Underground Water Management Plan

41. Master Underground Water Management Plan . Within thirty (30) D ays after the

Lodging Date, Doe Run shall prepare and submit to EPA and MDNR for review a nd comment a

Master Underground Water Management Plan (“UWMP”). The Master UWMP shall provide a

framework to evaluate the feasibility, practicality, and effectiveness of procedures and

methodologies to reduce metals loadings in mine water and underground process water at Doe

Run’s Mine and Mine/Mill Facilities. If EPA and/or MDNR provide comments on the Master

UWMP within thirty (30) Days of Doe Run’s submittal of the Master UMWP, Doe Run may ,
within forty

- five (45) days after receipt of such comments, re vise the Master UWMP to addressDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 39

- the comments and submit the revised Master UWMP to EPA and MDNR

. The Master UWMP

shall, include, but not be limited to :

a. Source identification;

b. Identification and evaluation of potential source controls;

c. Development of Stan dard Operating Procedures ( “ SOPs ” ) for source

control measure implementation;

d. Regularly scheduled personnel training for implementation of SOPs;

e. Performance assessment to evaluate the effectiveness of measures taken;

and

f. Implementation schedule.

42. Site

- Spec ific UWMP s and Schedule

. Doe Run shall develop a Site

- Specific

UWMP for each Mine and Mine/Mill Facility based on the Master UWMP and the results of

UW SAP implementation for that particular Facility as presented in the UW SAP Report

. Doe

Run shall w ithin ninety (90) Days of finalization of the UWSAP Report pursuant to Paragraph 39

and finalization of the Master UWMP pursuant to Paragraph 4 1 , whichever is later

, submit to

EPA and MDNR for review and comment a Site

- Specific UWMP for one Mine or Mine/Mill

Fac ility, and shall submit an additional Site

- Specific UWMP every thirty ( 30 ) Days thereafter

until a Site

- Specific UWMP has been submitted for each of the Mine and Mine/Mill Facilities

.

Doe Run shall implement each Site

- Specific UWMP according to the schedu le set forth therein

,

but implementation as to each Site

- Specific UWMP shall in no case be completed later than three

( 3 ) years from the date it is submitted to EPA and MDNR

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 40

- 43. UWMP Reporting

44. . As part of the semi

- annual status report required pursuant to

Pa ragraph 17 6

, Doe Run shall provide a semi

- annual report summar izing the progress of

implementation of all the Site

- Specific UWMP s pursuant to Section XXIII (Notices) of this

Consent Decree. Within thirty (30) Days after a request by Plaintiffs, Doe Run sh all provide

additional information and data regarding Site

- Specific UWMP implementation , including but

not limited to, the information and data that formed the basis for the annual report

.

UWMP Modification

45. Completion of measures subject to Implementation Schedule s in the Site

- Specific

UWMPs shall be enforceable under this Consent Decree. Any failure to complete measures set

forth i n an Implementation Schedule by the scheduled deadline shall be subject t o stipulated

penalties as provided in Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this Consent Decree unless

Plaintiffs and Doe Run both agree in writing to the amendment of or deletion of measures on an

Implementation Schedule. Except for completion of measur es set forth in the Implementation

Schedule, the detailed requirements of the UWMPs are not specifically enforceable under this

Consent Decree; however, a substantial failure to implement control measures or conduct . If Doe Run believe s that new information or da ta gained

through implementation of the UWMP and the SAP supports modification of the Master UWMP

or any Site

- Specific UWMP, Doe Run may modify the Master UWMP or any Site

- Specific

UWMP. Any modifications will be noted in the semi

- annual report required p ursuant to

Paragraph 4 3 , and shall be subject to review and comment by Plaintiffs. Any modifications to

the Master UWMP or a Site

- Specific UWMP shall not be considered “material modifications”

within the meaning of Section XXVI (Modification) of the Decre e.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 41

- performance assessments described in the UWMPs shall be subject to enforcement under this

Consent Decree.

7. Surface Water Management Plan

46. Surface Water Management Plan s

a. . Defendants shall carry out assessments and

engineering analyses necessary to identify all measures needed to ensure that Defend ants’ surface

water discharge s compl y with the requirements of the Clean Water Act, the regulations

promulgated thereunder, the Missouri Clean Water Law, the regulations p romulgated there under,

MSOP s for all CWA Facilities , and the terms of this Consent De cree , and then shall implement

all such measures in a timely manner.

Master Surface Water Management Plan

i. Water inventory , including but not limited to, an evaluation, with

sampling

, of inflows and outflows from surface water impoundments

, . Within sixty (60) D ays of the

Lodging Date , Defendants shall submit for review and approval by Plaintiffs pursuant to

Section XII ( Compliance Requ irements: Approval of Deliverables ) a Master Surface

Water Management Plan ( “ SWMP ” ) to serve as the framework for Site

- Specific SWMPs

developed pursuant to Paragraph 46

. b . The objectives of the SWMPs are to evaluate for

all CWA Facilities the technical fe asibility, practicality, and effectiveness of procedures

and methodologies for management of process wastewater and stormwater , including, but

not limited to, mine water pumped to the surface at the Mine and Mine/Mill Facilit ies.

The Master SWMP shall inc lude, but may not be limited to :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 42

- including but not limited to discharges, seepage, drainage and

evaporation ;

ii. Source identi fication;

iii. Fate and transport evaluation;

iv. Sampling of Stormwater in accordance with EPA Industrial Stormwater

Monitoring and Sampling Guide (EPA 832

- B

- 09

- 003) set forth at

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp_monitoring_guide.pdf;

v. Preparation of Storm Water P ollution Prevention Plans (“SWPPP”) in

accordance with Guidance set forth in Appendix C ;

vi. Identification of short and long

- term control meas ures, including Best

Management Practices (“BMPs”) and capital improvements;

vii. Personnel training for implementation o f control measures and SWPPPs;

viii. Performance assessment to evaluate the effectiveness of measures

taken ; and

ix. Implementation Schedule. Notwithstanding the schedule that will be

presented for any Site

- Specific SWMP, the SWPPP for each CWA

Facility will be co mpleted no later than the deadline set forth in

Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance

Deadlines ) for each CWA Facility

.

b. Site

- Specific Surface Water Management Plan s . Defendants shall develop

a Site

- Specific SWMP for each CWA Facility to address the criteria in Appendix CDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 43

- (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans Guidance)

, the Master SWMP, and the results

of SW SAP implementation as presented in the SW SAP Report

. Defendants shall also

review and revise, as needed, the SWPPP for each CWA Facility as a component of Site

Specific SWMP development. Within ninety (90) Days after the SWSAP Report is

finalized pursuant to Paragraph 39 and the Master SWMP is approved or otherwise

finalized pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirement s: Approval of Deliverables )

,
whichever is later, Defendants shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review and approval

pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ) a Site

Specific SWMP for one CWA Facilit y, and shall submit an add itional Site

- Specific

SWMP every thirty ( 30 ) Days thereafter until a Site

- Specific SWMP has been prepared

for each of the CWA Facilities. As to each Site

- Specific SWMP submitted, unless EPA

or MDNR provide notice of disapproval to Defendants within forty

- five ( 45 ) Days of

submittal of e ach Site

- Specific SWMP , such Site

- Specific SWMP shall be deemed

approved

. After each Site

- Specific SWMP is approved , deemed approved, or otherwise

finalized pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deli verables )

of the Decree , whichever is later, Defendants shall implement the approved Site

- Specific

SWMP according to the schedule set forth therein , but implementation of each Site

Specific SWMP shall in no case be completed later than three ( 3 ) years from the date it is

deemed approved, as provided above, or the date that it is finalized pursuant to Section

XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ) , with the exception that

Defendants may seek approval from Plaintiffs for a longer compliance s chedule, not toDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 44

- exceed five ( 5 ) years from the date of approval, for those portions of a Site

- Specific

SWMP that involve capital improvements which require more than three ( 3 ) years to

implement.

47. SWMP Reporting

48. . As a part of the semi

- annual status report required pursuant to

Paragraph 17 6

, Defendants shall provide a semi

- annual report summar izing the progress of

implementation of all the Site

- Specific SWMP s pursuant to Section XXIII (Notices) of this

Consent Decree. Within thirty ( 30 ) Days of a request by Plaintiffs, Defendants shall provide

additional information and data regarding Site

- Specific S WMP implementation , including, but

not limited to, the information and data that formed the basis for the semi

- annual report

.

SWMP Modification

. If Defendants believe that new information or data gained

through implementation of the SWMP and the SAP supports modification of the Master SWMP

or any site

- specific SWMP, Defendants may modify the Master SWMP or any Site

- Specific

SWMP , with the exception of capital i mprovements or control measures subject to an

Implementation Schedule, without prior approval by Plaintiffs, provided Defendants specifically

describe any such modifications in the semi

- annual reports required pursuant to Paragraph 4 7

.
Plaintiffs may, wit hin sixty (60) Days of receipt of a semi

- annual report describing an eligible

modification to the Master SWMP or a Site

- Specific SWMP, disapprove such modification.

Such disapproval shall be subject to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Del iverables ). Any modifications to the Master SWMP or Site

- Specific SWMP shall not be

considered “material modifications” within the meaning of Section XXVI (Mod ification) of this

Consent Decree. Any proposed modifications to a SWMP Implementation Schedule or requiredDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 45

- control measures must be submitted to Plaintiffs for review and prior approval pursuant to

Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables )

. Defendants shall submit all

proposed modification s to an Implementation Schedule or co ntrol measures at least sixty (60)

Days prior to the due date of the milestone for which the extension is sought and shall be deemed

approve d unless Plaintiffs request additional information from Defendants regarding the

proposed modification or disapprove the proposed modification within forty

- five (45) Days of

Plaintiffs’ receipt thereof

. Modification of the Master SWMP or a Site

- Specific SWMP,

including an I mplementation S chedule or control measure

, shall not automatically extend any

schedule to meet an interim or final compliance deadline for CWA Facilities under this Consent

Decree.

49. The training requirements and the requirements to implement control measures,

conduct performance assessments, and compl y with Implementation Schedule s in the Site

Specific SWMPs shall be enforceable under this Consent Decree. Any failure to implement

control measures , conduct performance assessments, or to comply with a training requirement or

an Implementation Schedule shall also be subject to stipulated penalties as prov ided in Section

XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this Consent Decree unless an amendment to a control measure or

Implementation Schedule has been approved, as provided in Paragraph 48 , above. Except as set

forth above, the detailed requirements of the Site

- Specific SWMPs are not specifically

enforceable under this Consent Decree or subject to stipulated penalties as provided in Section

XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this Consent Decree

. Nothing in this provision shall prohibit the

Plaintiffs from enforcemen t of a SWPPP incorporated into a CWA Facility’s MSOP.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 46

- 8. Site

- Specific Injunctive Relief

50. In order to enhance pH consistency of water delivered to the Herculaneum

wastewater treatment plant, by no later than August 1, 2010, De fendants shall install and

continuously operate a second lime slurry tank at the headworks of the Herculaneum wastewater

treatment plant pursuant to the April 12, 2010 Construction Permit Waiver issued by MDNR

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

51. By no later than July 1, 2010 , Defendants sha ll submit a report for Plaintiffs’

review and approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Deliverables ) of this Consent Decree evaluating the effectiveness of flocculating agents in the

Herculaneum wastewater clarifier. Upon app roval or finalization pursuant to Section XII

( Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ) , the findings of the report shall be

implemented according to the schedule set forth in the approved report. The report shall include,

at a minimum:

a. The perf ormance of each flocculent considered for use in the Herculaneum

wastewater treatment system;

b. The flocculent chosen for the wastewater treatment system and

justification therefor;

c. An evaluation of projected compliance using the chosen flocculent;

d. An analy sis of the sludge generated by the chosen flocculent and any

potential impacts on sludge disposal; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 47

- e. An implementation schedule, if determined necessary to achieve

compliance

.

52. A Slag Storage Area Water Management Plan (“SS A WMP”) shall be submitted

f

or Pl aintiffs’ review and approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval

of Deliverables ) by no later than January 31, 20 1 1 . The SSAWMP shall be consistent with any

applicable requirements set forth in Administr ati ve Order on Consent

– Doc ket No. RCRA

- 07

-

2000

- 0018; CERCLA

- 07

- 2000

- 0029 , and shall include:

a. An assessment of the characteristics of water entering the slag water

collection system;

b. An evaluation of potential effective end uses and/or treatment of the

collected water; and

c. A schedul e for implementation.

53. Defendants shall implement the SSAWMP according to the schedule set forth

therein upon approval of the SSAWMP by Plaintiffs pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance

Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ).

54. In order to reduce hydraulic load ing to the Herculaneum wastewater treatment

plant, Defendants shall install a truck wash water recycling system. By no later than fifteen (15)

Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree, Defendants shall submit a plan to Plaintiffs

for review and approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Deliverables ) of this Consent Decree for recycling truck wash water. Unless disapproved by

Plaintiffs within forty

- five (45) Days of submission, the plan shall be deemed approved. By noDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 48

- later than ninety (90) Days from receipt of a Missouri Clean Water Law Construction Permit or

waiver thereof, or two hundred forty (240) Days from the Lodging Date, whichever is earlier

,
Defendants shall install and commence continuous operation of a tr uck wash water recycling

system at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

.

55. By no later than June 1, 2010 , Defendants shall submit a report to Plaintiffs for

review and approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements: Approval of

D eliverables ) evaluating the effectiveness of reagents used in the Glover Facility wastewater

treatment plant. The report shall include a description of the evaluation steps, presentation of any

data generated during the evaluation, conclusions reached, a description of any recommended

changes in the chemicals used or the usage thereof in the wastewater treatment system , and an

implementation schedule

. Unless Plaintiffs provide notice of disapproval within thirty (30) Days

of submittal, Defendants will imp lement the report according to the plan and schedule

. If

Plaintiffs provide notice of disapproval

, Defendants shall implement the report according to the

plan and schedule after finalization of the report pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance

Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ). Glover Facility

56. Within thirty (30) Days after the Lodging Date, Defendants shall remove and

place in the Doe Run slag storage area any slag that has washed out of the slag storage area

containment berm. Defendants shall immediately implement actions to stabilize and re

- vegetate

the containment berm around the Doe Run slag storage area at the Glover Facility , and complete

re

- vegetation by no later than October 31, 2010

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 49

- 57. Within thirty ( 30 ) Days after the Lodging Date, Defendants shall submit to

Plaintiffs for review and approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance Requirements:

Approval of Deliverables ) a report on the use of sodium sulfide to reduce thallium in the Glover

Facility wastewater treatment system
, and if changes are recommended, sha ll propose a

schedule for implementation. Unless Plaintiffs provide notice of disapproval within thirty (30)

Days of submittal, Defendants shall implement the report according to the plan and schedule

. If

Plaintiffs provide notice of disapproval

, Defenda nts shall implement the report, according to the

plan and schedule after finalization o f the report pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance

Requirements: Approval of Deliverables ).

58. Within ninety (90) Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree, at the

Glover Facility domestic sewage extended aeration wastewater treatment unit Defendants shall

place and maintain a lock on the gate and shall secure and install warning signs on each side of

the fence surrounding that unit that at a minimum have letters th at are two inches tall and that

state, “Wastewater Treatment Facility, Keep Out

. ”

59. In order to enhance hydraulic capacity

, consistency of hydraulic throughput

, and

ensure continuing compliance with its MSOP at the Buick R esource Recycling Facility

wastewater treatment plant, Defendants shall install and commence operation of a fourth sand

vertical gravity filter at the wastewater treatment plant pursuant to the March 24, 2010

Construction Permit Waiver issued by MDNR . Dur ing any period of maintenance, Defendants

shall ensure back

- up systems provide full treatment capacity and permit compliance

. Defendants Buick Resource Recycling FacilityDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 50

- shall install and commence operation of the equipment by no later than June 24, 2010 . The filter

will serve as a back up or may be used to assist the existing three sand vertical gravity filters and

shall have a maximum design capacity of no less than 235 gallons per minute (“ GPM ”)

.

60. In order to reduce hydraulic and metals loading to the Buick Resource Recycling

F a cility, Defendants shall:

a. Install equipment for recycling non

- contact cooling water in the battery

desulfurization and crystallization areas and commence its operation by no later than

October 1, 2010 ;

b. Install return pumps for the blast furnace cooling water to a llow reuse and

recycling of non

- contact cooling water by no later than November 1, 2010; and

c. Submit to EPA and MDNR by no later than thirty (30) Days after the

Effective Date of the Consent Decree, an evaluation for review and approval of a filter to

captu re metals from the dross and refinery granulation wastewater

, and if a filter is

determined feasible, a schedule for installation . Unless disapproved by Plaintiffs within

thirty (30) Days after submission, the evaluation shall be deemed approved . I f filt er

installation is feasible, Defendants shall within ninety (90) Days after MDNR’s issuance

of a Missouri Clean Water Law Construction Permit or waiver thereof, or two hundred

seventy (270) Days after the Lodging Date, whichever is earlier, complete instal lation of

the filter and commence its operation.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 51

- 61. Defendants shall remove and replace the substrate in the north biocell of the West

Fork Unit Facility wastewater treatment plant with the type of material, determined by

Defendants th rough previous study, which supports the greatest treatment capabilities of the

biocell pursuant to the March 24, 2010 Construction Permit Waiver issued by MDNR.

Defendants shall install the substrate by August 30, 2010, and commence continuous operation

thereof by no later than February 28, 2011. No later than the Lodging Date of this Consent

Decree and continuing thereafter with respect to all work performed pursuant to this Paragraph,

Defendants shall ensure all materials removed from the biocell are p roperly handled and/or

disposed of in compliance with all applicable federal, State and local requirements, including but

not limited to stormwater, solid waste and hazardous waste requirements

. West Fork Unit Facility

62. No later than July 1, 2010 , Defendants shall eliminate th e discharge from Outfall

002 at the West Fork Unit Facility, the domestic wastewater treatment unit, until and unless the

treatment unit is upgraded to ensure consistent compliance with all applicable effluent

limitations. Any action taken by Defendants t o eliminate the discharge from Outfall 002 at the

West Fork Unit Facility, such as pumping and hauling the wastewater, shall be in compliance

with all applicable local, State and federal requirements.

63. Within ninety (90) Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree,

Defendants shall secure and install signage at the West Fork Unit Facility domestic wastewater

treatment unit, including but not limited to constructing a fence and locked gate around the

facility and erecting warning signs. The warning sig ns shall at a minimum state, “WastewaterDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 52

- Treatment Facility, Keep Out,” and be written in at least 2 inch tall letters and placed on all sides

of the fence surrounding the treatment unit.

VII

. CLEAN WATER ACT PERM IT S : RESOLUTION OF MISS OURI STATE OPERATIN G PERMIT APPEALS AND C OMPLIANCE DEADLINES

A. CWA Permitting Obligations

64. Operating Permits.

65. Defendants shall comply with applicable federal and/or State

permitting requirements for the CWA Facilities including, without limitation, submission of

timely MSOP applications to MDNR in accordance with this Section . The installation of

pollution control equipment and measures required by Section VI, Subsection B (Compliance

Measures for all CWA Facilities ) is injunctive relief required to achieve compliance with current

and future MSOP s , including MSOP modifications made pursuant to this Consent Decree . This

Consent Decree is not and shall not be construed to be a permit or a ruling on a permit issued

pursuant to any federal or State statute or regulation, nor do es compliance with its terms

guarantee compliance with any applicable law or regulation. Except as specifically provided in

Section VII, Subsection I ( Schedule for Compliance With Missouri State Operating Permits )

,
below, and Section XXI ( Effect of Settle ment /Reservation of Rights ) , this Consent Decree does

not affect or relieve Defendants of their responsibility to comply with any applicable federal,

State, or local law, regulation or permit.

Construction. Defendants shall timely apply for and obtain f rom MDNR all

permits necessary pursuant to State law to construct or modify any controls, processes, structures,

or facilities to implement the requirements of this Consent Decree. If Defendants choose to

request a waiver of a Missouri Clean Water Law C on struction P ermit, such waiver request shallDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 53

- not delay completion of required injunctive relief under this Consent Decree. Delay in receipt of

a Missouri Clean Water Law Construction Permit or waiver due to Defendants’ failure to submit

an adequate, timely and complete application or waiver request to MDNR will not constitute a

Force Majeure event under Section XV III (Force Majeure) of this Consent Decree

.

66. Permit Renewals and Modifications

.

B. Resolution of Pending MSOP Appeals As required by State and federal law,

Defendants shall apply for renewal of any MSOP s for CWA Facilities at least one hundred eighty

(180) Days prior to their expiration. Defendants shall apply for any necessary modification of a n

MSOP for a CWA Facility at least one hundred twenty (120) Days prior to the expiration d ate of

any construction permit obtained to perform work required under this Consent Decree. If

Defendants seek s ite

- s pecific water quality based limitations or permit

- specific limitations in any

MSOP for a CWA Facility Defendants shall timely submit infor mation in support of such request

pursuant to Section VII

, Subsection D ( Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations ).

67. The purpose of this Subsection is to set forth the mechanism for expedited

resolution of pending a nd anticipated appeals of conditions of CWA Facilities’ MSOPs (the

issues under appeal and anticipated to be the subject of future appeals are referred to herein as

“ Permit Appeal Issues ” ). Defendants and Plaintiffs have agreed upon a mechanism for expedi ted

resolution of the P ermit A ppeal I ssues.

68. Appealed Missouri State Operating Permits. Certain provisions of the following

CWA Facility MSOPs are under appeal before the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission

( “ Appealed MSOPs ”) :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 54

- a. Buick Mine/Mill

– MSOP No. MO

- 0002003, re

- issued September 25,

2009, appeal filed October 23, 2009 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ;

b. Glover Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0001121 , re

- issued March 23, 2007,

appeal filed April 20, 2007

, a mended n otice of a ppeal filed April 1 3 , 2010 ;

c. Sweetw ater Mine/Mill Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0001881, re

- issued July

10, 2009, appeal filed August 7, 2009 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ;

d. Fletcher Mine/Mill Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0001856, re

- issued

November 13, 2009, appeal filed December 11, 2009

, amended noti ce of appeal filed

April 23, 2010 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ;

e. Viburnum Mine/Mill Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0000086, re

- issued

December 4, 2009, appeal filed January 4, 2010 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ;

f. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 00 01848, re

- issued

February 26, 2010, appeal filed March 26, 2010 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ;

g. Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel) Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0100226 , re

issued March 19, 2010, appeal filed April 16 , 2010 , supplement filed May 19, 2010 ; and

h. West Fork Unit Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0100218, re

- issued March 12,

2010, appeal filed April 9 , 2010.

69. Future Missouri State Operating Permit s

a. Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0000281, re

- issued

February 28, 2003, comments dated January 6, 2010; and . The following CWA Facility MSOPs

are expected to be reissued (“ Future MSOPs ” ) :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 55

- b. Buick Resource Recycling Facility

– MSOP No. MO

- 0000337, re

- issued

August 23, 2002, and modified February 23, 2007, comments dated March 15 , 2010.

Defendants anticipate that p ermit conditions and other issues similar to those raised in the

appeals listed in Paragraph 6 8 above will be included in the Future MSOPs. To the extent that

Defendants can identify these conditions and issues, such conditions and issues will be deemed

P ermit Appeal Issues and will be subject to this Section VII (Clean Water Act Permits:

Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and Compliance Deadlines)

.

70. Stipulation for Waiver in Part and Abeyance in Part of Permit Appeals

a. In consideration o f the agreements of Plaintiffs and Defendants set forth

below, Defendants hereby specifically : .

i. A gree that the provisions set forth in this Section VII (Clean Water

Act Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and

Compliance Deadlines) of the Consent Decree are the exclusive provisions for

resolution of Permit Appeal Issues and a ll additional challenges to any MSOP

provision contained in any CWA Facility permit issued by MDNR and in effect as

of the Lodging D ate of this Consent Decree, or in any Future MSOP s as identified

in Paragraph 69 , or in any permit modification issued by MDNR after the Lodging

Date of this Consent D ecree and prior to the t ermination of this Consent Decree

pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination) intended to resolve a Permit Appeal

Issue , and waive their right under federal, State, or local law to otherwise appeal

or challenge any provision of such CWA Facility MSOPs; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 56

- ii. Agree that the procedures in Paragraph 82 apply to MSOP

modifications issued by MDNR after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree

that are not intended to resolve a Permit Appeal Issue and, except for issuance of

Future MSOPs identified in Paragraph 69 , to reissuance of CWA Facility MSOPs

by MDNR after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree and pr ior to the

termination of this Consent Decree pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination); and

iii. R eserve their right under federal, State and local law to appeal or

challenge any provision of a ny CWA Facility MSOP or MSOP modification

issued by MDNR during the term of this Consent Decree that differs significantly

and/or materially from the terms of settlement of such permit conditions as

resolved pursuant to Subsections D, F, G, or H of this Section (e.g., if, based on

public comments or pursuant to direction f rom the Missouri Clean Water

Commission, the final MSOP issued by MDNR differs significantly and/or

materially from the terms of the permit agreed upon by the State and Defendants

or from the recommended decision of the Special Master, as applicable) , and to

appeal or challenge any provision of any CWA Facility MSOP or MSOP

modification issued after termination of this Consent Decree pursuant to Section

XXVII (Termination)

.

b. Permit Appeal Issues and other challenges to provisions of any CWA

Facility MSOP iss ued by MDNR and in effect as of the Lodging Date of this ConsentDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 57

- Decree, or in any Future MSOPs as identified in Paragraph 69

, shall be resolved as

follows:

i. The State and Defendants have agreed to settlement of certain

CWA Facility MSOP terms and conditio ns appealed by Defendants o r anticipated

to be appealed , including dismiss ing some Permit Appeal Issues and modif ying

some MSOPs to address Permit Appeal Issues, as specifically set forth in

Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Ac t Facility

MSOPs) , Table s 1 and 2 ;

ii. Plaintiffs and Defendants have agreed to schedules of compliance

to meet effluent limitations and conditions as set forth in the Schedule for

Compliance with Missouri State Operating Permits pursuant to Subsection I

(Sch edule for Compliance With M issouri S tate O perating P ermit s) hereunder and

the provisions set forth in Section XXI (Effect of Settlement/Reservation of

Rights) of this Consent Decree;

iii. The State and Defendants have agreed to engage in resolution

processes , as set forth in Subsection D hereunder (Site

- Specific and Permit

Specific Limitations ), regarding site

- specific and permit

- specific effluent

limitations and conditions specifically identified in Appendix D (Resolution of

Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Wate r Act Facility MSOPs), Tables 3 and 5, and

as may be identified pursuant to Subsection C (Identification of Remaining Permit

Appeal Issues), below

, and as identified in Appendix D (Resolution of PermitDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 58

- Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs), Tab le 6, including

monitoring requirements and numeric effluent limitations or the methodology

used for calculating the numeric limits for metals, including, but not limited to

arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, thallium, and zinc , and

for other pollutant parameters, including BOD, COD, TSS, ammonia, bacteria and

WET ; and

iv. Plaintiffs and Defendants have agreed to processes , as set forth in

Subsection E hereunder (WET Sampling and Testing Procedures) and the

provisions set forth in Secti on XXI (Effect of Settlement/Reservation of Rights)

of this Consent Decree, for Defendants to seek alternative Whole Effluent

Toxicity ( “ WET ” ) testing methodologies as specifically identified in Appendix D

(Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Wate r Act Facility MSOPs), Table

4, and as may be identified pursuant to Subsection C (Identification of Remaining

Permit Appeal Issues), below , for Future MSOPs.

c. Within thirty ( 30 ) Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree or

within thirty (30) Da ys after issuance of all CWA Facilities permit modifications to

reflect resolved appeal provisions pursuant to Subp aragraph 70

. b .i ., whichever is later

,

Defendants and MDNR through the Attorney General of Missouri shall, consistent with

the provisions of S ubparagraph 70

. b

. above, file with the Missouri Administrative

Hearing Commission a Joint Stipulation to Dismiss in Part and Hold in Abeyance in Part

Permit Appeal s for all Appealed MSOPs identified in Paragraph 6 8 and all FutureDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 59

- MSOPs identified in Paragr aph 6 9 for which appeals have been filed within thirty ( 30 )

Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree . Those appeal provisions identified

in Subparagraph 70

. b .i. above that are resolved shall be identified as dismissed in the

Joint Stipulation

. The Joint Stipulation to Dismiss in Part and Hold in Abeyance in Part

Permit Appeals shall stipulate abeyance of the permit appeal proceedings not otherwise

dismissed under this Paragraph until the final decision of the Missouri Clean Water

Commission as t o each CWA Facility MSOP pursuant to Section VII , Subsection H

(Procedure for Finality of Permit Appeal Resolution)

. If a Future MSOP is not issued

within the time necessary for the appeal period for such MSOP to fall within the time

period identified abo ve, then Defendants shall file an appeal of such Future MSOP

, and

together with that filing

, the State and Defendants shall file a Joint Stipulation to Hold in

Abeyance any such permit appeal in accordance with Paragraph 7 2

.

d. An appeal , a request for a perm it modification, or any other challenge by

Defendants of any condition in any MSOP for any CWA Facility required to comply with

this Consent Decree shall not relieve Defendants of their obligation to comply with the

compliance dates set forth in Section VI , Subsection B ( Compliance Measures for all

CWA Facilities )

, above, or be cause for extension of the deadlines for compliance

established pursuant to Section VII, Subsection I (Schedule for Compliance W ith

Missouri State Operating Permits) of this Consent Decree and Appendix B ( MSOP

Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines)

, and will not constitute a

Force Majeure event under Section XV III (Force Majeure) of the Consent Decree

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 60

- C. Identification of Remaining Permit Appeal Issues

71. Within forty

- f ive ( 45 ) Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree

,
Defendants shall provide to MDNR a comprehensive list confirming the Permit Appeal Issues for

all of the CWA Facilities that remain to be resolved . The identification of Permit Appeal Issues

sha ll only include issues that Defendants have raised in the MSOP appeals , as amended and/or

supplemented, specifically identified in Paragraph 6 8 above and issues regarding Future MSOP

permits identified in Paragraph 6 9 that are included in appeals filed as of the thirty ( 30 ) Day

period after the Lodging Date

. However, Defendant s shall not include as a Permit Appeal Issue

any permit

- specific or global issue identified as resolved in Paragraph 70

. b .i and Appendix D

(Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clea n Water Act Facility MSOPs), Table 2

.

a. Each Permit Appeal Issue identified by Defendants shall include a brief

statement of the basis for appeal, the desired alternative permit condition or limitation,

and the anticipated date by which Defendants will submi t information in support of the

same, not to exceed the time frame s set forth in Subsections D (Site

- Specific and Permit

Specific Limitations) and E (WET Sampling and Testing Procedures) , below, as

applicable

.

b. To the extent that Permit Appeal Issues across the various MSOPs are

similar in, for example, the application of science, regulatory interpretation, or methods

of calculation

, such similar bases may be referenced in articulating the Permit Appeal

Issues for the purpose of streamlining the identificati on process.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 61

- 72. With the exclusion of any issue that has been determined resolved pursuant to

Paragraph 70

. b .i and Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act

Facility MSOPs), Table 2

, Defendants ’ identification of issues that reasonably can be anticipated

to arise with respect to Future MSOPs based upon the draft permits for public notice for each of

the Future MSOPs does not preclude Defendants from identifying further issues within thirty

( 30 ) Days after public notice by the MDNR of a n other draft permit or a final permit for

reissuance in accordance with 10 CSR 20

- 6.020(1)(B) where such draft or final permit is

materially changed from the earlier draft permit (s)

.

a. In such case(s) where MDNR issues a final permit

, Defendant s shall file a

permit appeal with the Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission within thirty (30)

Days after the public notice date, and Defendants shall simultaneously submit to MDNR

a copy of the appeal, a revised version of the comprehensive list of Permit Appeal Issues

required by Paragraph 71 to incorporate such new Permit Appeal Issues, and a draft Joint

Stipulation to Hold in Abeyance Permit Appeals addressing such new Permit Appeal

Issues. Defendants and MDNR shall finalize the Joint Stipulation and file it w ith the

Missouri Administrative Hearing Commission within twenty

- one (21) Days of the

Defendants’ submission of the draft Joint Stipulation to MDNR ; and

b. In such case(s) where MDNR issues an additional public notice of a draft

permit that is materially chan ged from the original draft permit, Defendants shall submit

comments to MDNR on such changes, if any, within thirty (30) Days of the date of the

public notice of the draft permit . When MDNR issues the final permit, if DefendantsDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 62

- wish to appeal such change d terms or permit appeal issues previously identified in Table

6 of Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility

MSOPs)

, Defendants shall file a permit appeal with the Missouri Administrative Hearing

Commission within thirty (30) Days after the permit issuance date, and Defendants shall

simultaneously submit to MDNR a copy of the appeal and a revised version of the

comprehensive list of Permit Appeal Issues required by Paragraph 71 to incorporate such

new Permit Appeal Issues

, and a draft Joint Stipulation to Hold in Abeyance Permit

Appeals addressing such new Permit Appeal Issues. Defendants and MDNR shall

finalize the Joint Stipulation and file it with the Missouri Administrative Hearing

Commission within twenty

- one (21) Day s of the Defendants’ submission of the draft

Joint Stipulation to MDNR

.

D

. Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations

73. Time Limitations for Good Faith Negotiations

a. Defendants and MDNR shall engage in an initia l period of good faith

negotiations until A ugust 1, 2011, for resolution of Permit Appeal Issues , specifically

including but not limited to provisions identified in Appendix D (Resolution of Permit

Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs), Table 3 , and as specified in

Subparagraph 79 .a.i

. ; . Defendants shall engage in good

faith negotiations to resolve site

- specific and permit

- specific Permit Appeal Issues identified in

Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs) , Tables

3, 5 and 6, as may be amended pursuant to Subsection C, above, as follows:DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 63

- b. If Defendants present an application for a permit modification to MDNR

pursuant to Subparagraph 7 9 .a.ii., regarding a site

- specific water quality based

limitation Permit Appeal Issue for a Future MSOP identifi ed in Appendix D (Resolution

of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs), Table 6, or pursuant to

Paragraph 71, above, Defendants and MDNR shall engage in an initial period of good

faith negotiations until February 1, 2012;

c. If Defendants pr esent an application for a permit modification to MDNR

pursuant to Subparagraph 79 .a.ii.

, regarding Permit Appeal Issues identified in

Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs)

,
Tables 5 and 6, other than the site

- s pecific water quality

- based permit limit Permit

Appeal Issues addressed in Subparagraph 73. b, above, Defendants and MDNR shall

engage in an initial period of good faith negotiations for resolution of the Permit Appeal

Issues for ninety (90) Days following MDNR’s receipt of such application ;

d. I f MDNR requires additional time to make an initial determination

regarding the disposition of one or more Permit Appeal Issue s or requests Defendants to

provide additional information and data regarding one or more Perm it Appeal Issue s

under review

, the period for good faith negotiation set forth in Subparagraphs a , b

, or c ,
above may be extended upon a joint request by MDNR and Defendants and ratification

by ruling of the Special Master appointed pursuant to Subsection F , below

. A total

extension of ninety ( 90 ) Days or less of the good faith negotiation period shall not beDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 64

- considered a “ material modification ” within the meaning of Section XXVI

(Modification) of the Decree.

74. Defendants shall utilize the procedural framewo rk for resolution of Permit Appeal

Issues set forth in Paragraphs 78 th r ough 81 , below

.

75. Throughout the period of good faith negotiations, including any approved period

of extension, MDNR shall keep EPA informed of the status of negotiations and the issue s under

review. At a minimum, the MDNR shall invite EPA to participate in a joint phone conference

with Defendants to discuss the specific matters under review, beginning within the first fifteen

(15) Days of the period of good faith negotiations and recu rring at least every sixty (60) Days

thereafter until every Permit Appeal Issue is either resolved pursuant to Paragraph 7 6 below or

referred to the Special Master pursuant to Paragraph 7 7 , below.

76. Permit Appeal Issues under this Subsection D that are reso lved during the period

of good faith negotiation shall be stipulated as agreed to by the MDNR and Defendants in a Joint

Stipulation of Agreement to the Missouri Administration Hearing Commission

. Any

modification to a CWA Facility MSOP as agreed to by MDNR and Defendants is subject to

Section VII, Subsection H (Procedures for Finality of Permit Appeal Resolution ).

77. Permit Appeal Issues that are not resolved during the period of good faith

negotiation shall be referred by the Defendants and MDNR for review b y the Special Master

appointed pursuant to Subsection G (Procedures for Permit Appeal Issues Before the Special

Master) , below

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 65

- 78. Information Required and Time Limitations Regarding Site

- Specific and Permit

Specific Limitations

79. Any information in support of a request for a site

- specific or permit

- specific

limitation or conditions in a MSOP must be submitted by Defendants to MDNR by the times set

forth in Subparagraphs 79

. a through b , below. Failure by Defendants to comply with the time

limits set forth below shall be deemed a waiver by Defendants of their option to seek site

- specific

and/or permit

- specific limitations or conditions for that permit. MDNR may, after consultation

with EPA, extend the time period for Defendant s to submit information under this Paragraph for

up to sixty (60) additional Days. Such extension of sixty (60) Days or less shall not be

considered a “ material modification ” within the meaning of Section XXVI (Modification) of the

Decree. Denial of a re quest for an extension shall not be subject to Dispute Resolution pursuant

to Section XIX of this Consent Decree. . Defendants shall , consistent with the provisions set forth in this Paragraph

through Paragraph 81 below, submit information in support of Permit Appeal Issues where

Defendants seek site

- specific water quality based limitations and/or permit

- specific limitations or

conditions

. Such i nformation submitted by Defendants shall be in the form of an application to

MDNR for modification of the MSOP for a CWA Facility to establish site

- specific and/or

permit

- specific limitations and conditions, which may include , but are not limited to, monit oring

requirements and numeric effluent limitations for metals, including, but not limited to arsenic,

cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, thallium, and zinc, and for other pollutant

parameters, including BOD, COD, TSS, ammonia, bacteria , and WET

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 66

- a. For any CWA Facility MSOP in effect as of the Effective Date of this

Consent Decree or any Future MSOP for which Defendants seek a modificat ion of a site

specific or permit

- specific limitation

, consistent with the identified remaining Permit

Appeal Issues, such application shall be submitted :

i. F or dissolved metals limitations, and permit mixing zone

allowances identified in Appendix D (Resoluti on of Permit Appeal Issues for

Clean Water Act Facility MSOPs) , Table 3

, no later than January 15 , 2011; and

ii. For all other remaining Permit Appeal Issues identified in

Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility

MSOPs) , Tabl es 5 and 6, as may be amended pursuant to Subsection C, above , at

such time as the application for a permit modification is complete

.

b. For any CWA Facility MSOP for which Defendants believe completion of

work required pursuant to Section VI, Subsection B of this Consent Decree ( Compliance

Measures f or a ll CWA Facilities ) has or will result in a material and/or substantial change

in the nature of the discharge, the pollutant characteristics, or the pollution control

processes such that a modification to the t erms and conditions of the applicable MSOP

are necessary and appropriate, Defendants shall submit an application for a permit

modification within ninety (90) Days after completing such Permanent Injunction and

Compliance Measures or within sixty (60) Days of completing analysis of discharge

information collected following completing such Permanent Injunction and ComplianceDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 67

- Measures , whichever is later, but in no instance later than one hundred eighty (180) Days

after completing such Permanent Injunction and Compliance Measures

.

80. Each submission in support of a site

- specific or permit

- specific limitation or

condition submitted by Defendants to MDNR pursuant to this Subsection D ( Site

- Specific and

Permit

- Specific Limitations ) , shall be submitted as an applicati on for, or an application for a

modification of, a n MSOP

, consistent with the requirements of 10 CSR 20

- 6 and 7

.

a. With respect to each request for site

- specific metals limits

, Defendants ’

submittal shall include , at a minimum, the following information:

i. Site

- Specific Dissolved Metals Translator Studies prepared

consistent with The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating A Total

Recoverable Permit Limit From A Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823

- B

- 96

- 007, June

1996);

ii. Site

- specific stream hardness data; and

iii. A ll raw data for samples collected or measurements taken in

preparation of the application for site

- specific permit limitations or permit

specific limitations, including, at a minimum, all data for samples collected or

measurements taken from January 1, 200 8

, to thirty days prior to the date of

submittal of the application.

b. With respect to each request for site

- specific or permit

- specific limitation

or conditions other than metals limits, Defendants ’ submittal shall include site

- specific

information to supp ort the request, including, as appropriate, the following information :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 68

- i. If an alternative WET sampling or testing methodology is approved

pursuant to the provisions of Subsection E (WET Sampling and Testing

Procedures), below

, information justif ying use of such approved alternative

methodology;

ii. Biological assessments of receiving and reference waters;

iii. If flow

- tiered or flow

- variable limitations are sought, hydrologic

investigations to support such flow

- tiered or flow

- variable effluent limitations;

and

iv. All r aw data for samples collected or measurements taken in

preparation of the application for site

- specific permit limitations or permit

specific limitations, including, at a minimum, all data for samples collected or

measurements taken from January 1, 2006

, t o thirty days prior to the date of

submittal of the application

.

81. The process for review of and action on an application by Defendants to MDNR

under this Subsection D ( Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations ) is as follows:

a. Upon receipt of an applicat ion for site

- specific permit limitations

submitted by Defendants under this Subsection , MDNR shall evaluate the application and

information contained therein for completeness.

b. If MDNR determines the information is not complete, MDNR shall notify

Defendan ts in writing of the information missing from the application. Defendants shallDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 69

- have forty

- five ( 45 ) Days from receipt of MDNR’s written notice of incompleteness to

submit to MDNR additional information.

c. Within sixty (60) Days of notifying Defendants th at an application for site

specific permit limits by Defendants is complete or notifying Defendants that their

application was incomplete, MDNR shall, in consultation with EPA, complete its review

of the application and either:

i. provide to Defendants a dr aft MSOP or permit modification, as

appropriate, and a draft fact sheet (including a water quality analysis and an anti

degradation analysis ) incorporating all limitations, conditions and requirements

MDNR determines appropriate to address the issues raise d and information

provided in Defendants’ application; or

ii. provide to Defendants a written determination, i.e., draft permit

denial, that no change is warranted and include therein specific information

regarding the basis for that determination.

d. Except a s provided in P aragraph 8 2

, below, r eceipt by Defendants of the

draft MSOP and fact sheet or draft permit denial or expiration of the period for good faith

negotiations set forth in this Subsection D (Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations)

triggers an event subject to review by a Special Master pursuant to the provisions of

Subsection G (Procedures for Permit Appeal Issues Before the Special Master) , below

.
Defendants shall within fifteen (15) Days of receipt of the draft MSOP and fact sheet or

dra ft permit denial, or within fifteen (15) Days of the expiration of the period for goodDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 70

- faith negotiations set forth in Subsection D (Site

- Specific and Permit

- Specific

Limitations) , submit a written request to the Special Master initiating review by the

Spe cial Master pursuant to Subsection G (Procedures for Permit Appeal Issues Before the

Special Master) , below, together with all pertinent documentation, including but not

limited to, Defendants ’ application(s) and all supporting information regarding the Pe rmit

Appeal Issue, any subsequent data provided to MDNR regarding the Permit Appeal Issue,

and the decision, if any, by MDNR in response to Defendants’ application. Defendants

expressly agree that , except as provided in Subparagraph f, below, their only m eans of

contesting the site

- specific or permit

- specific limit ation or condition in any CWA Facility

MSOP or denial thereof shall be through invocation of review by a Special Master

pursuant to Subsection G (Procedures for Permit Appeal Issues Before the Sp ecial

Master) of this Consent Decree.

e. Upon: ( 1 ) MDNR’s receipt of notification from Defendants that MDNR’s

draft action on the site

- specific permit limit application submitted pursuant to this

Subsection is acceptable, or ( 2 ) the lapse of the time period for invoking review by the

Special Master without action by Defendants , MDNR shall either:

i. place on public notice and proceed with the permit issuance

process, consistent with the provisions and requirements of the Missouri Clean

Water Law and implementing regulations; or

ii. take no action, if the permit application is denied.

Either course of action by MDNR under this Subparagraph 81

. e

. shall reflect the outcomeDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 71

- of any Dispute Resolution completed pursuant to this Consent Decree.

f. No provision of this Conse nt Decree precludes informal communications

between MDNR and Defendants prior to a determination by MDNR regarding any

application for site

- specific permit limits by Defendants under this Subsection. All

communications with MDNR regarding a permitting mat ter, however, are subject to

Chapter 610, RSMo

, and are considered part of the administrative record for the permit or

permit denial.

g. No provision of this Consent Decree shall be construed to prevent

Defendants from petitioning the Missouri Clean Water Co mmission for site

- specific

water quality criteria pursuant to 10 C.S.R. 20

- 7.031(4).

82. MSOP Reissuance or Application for Permit Modifications Not Related to

Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues

a. Defendants’ application for renewal of each MSOP shall include the

information identified in Paragraph 80 and be submitted as part of the complete permit

application package at least one hundred and eighty (180) Days prior to expiration of the

permit ; . The following shall apply until termination of the Consent

Decr ee pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination ) to any application made after the Lodging Date

of this Consent Decree for reissuance of a CWA Facility MSOP and for modification of any

CWA Facility MSOP , except that this Parag ra ph shall not apply to a Permit App eal Issue in any

permit reissuance or modification of a CWA Facility MSOP to implement resolution of a Permit

Appeal Issue under this Consent Decree :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 72

- b. Defendants’ application for a permit modification that seeks to change a

site

- specific or permit

- specific lim itation or condition shall include the information

identified in Paragraph 80 ;

c. With regard to a request by Defendants for site

- specific or permit

- specific

limitations or conditions within an application for renewal of a CWA Facility MSOP,

MDNR shall provid e Defendants the draft MSOP and fact sheet or draft permit denial and

will thereafter process the permit renewal application in accordance with Sections

621.250, 640.013 and 644.051, RSMo; and

d. Defendants reserve their right under federal, State and local law to appeal

or challenge any provision of any reissued MSOP or MSOP modification or denial of a

permit modification request for any CWA Facility covered by this Paragraph, except that

Defendants agree that for MSOPs reissued during the relevant period of this Consent

Decree, Defendants shall not raise as an appeal issue any of the issues set forth in Table 2

of Appendix D (Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility

MSOPs), unless a change in circumstances at the CWA Facility or a chan ge in the

applicable law, regulations and/or guidance warrants such an appeal, in which case

Defendants shall bear the burden to clearly and specifically demonstrate that such a

change has occurred.

E. WET Sampling and Testing Procedures

83. Defendants may, at t heir option, and consistent with the provisions set forth in this

Subsection E ( WET Sampling and Testing Procedures ) , submit information in support of PermitDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 73

- Appeal Issues where Defendants seek alternative WET sampling or testing procedures as

identified i n Appendix D ( Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility

MSOPs )

, Table 4, as confirmed pursuant to Subsection C (Identification of Remaining Permit

Appeal Issues)

.

84. If such alternative procedures are testing methodologies required pursu ant to 40

C.F.R. Part 136, Defendants shall submit an application to the Director of MDNR pursuant to the

requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 136.4, Application for Alternative Test Procedures for approval of

an alternate test methodologies. An application under this provision will be evaluated and acted

upon by the State and EPA according to the provisions of 40 C.F.R. §§ 136.4 and 136.5

.

85. Any request for alternative WET sampling or testing procedures must be

submitted by Defendants to MDNR together with all raw data for samples collected or

measurements taken in preparation of the request for alternative WET sampling or testing

procedures, including, at a minimum, all data for samples collected or measurements taken from

January 1, 200 6

, to thirty days prior to the date of submittal of the request. The process for

review of and action on a request by Defendants to MDNR under this Subsection D (Site

Specific and Permit

- Specific Limitations) is as follows:

a. Upon receipt of an application for alternative WET samplin g or testing

procedures submitted by Defendants under this Subsection , MDNR shall , in consultation

with EPA, evaluate the request and information contained therein for completeness and

also to determine whether the issue raised in Defendants’ request may b e resolved byDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 74

- MDNR or must be forwarded to EPA for action pursuant to the requirements of the CWA

and its implementing regulations

.

b. If MDNR and/or EPA determine the information is not complete,

Defendants shall be notified in writing by the appropriate a gency of the information

missing from the application. Defendants shall have forty

- five (45) Days from receipt of

the written notice of incompleteness to submit the a dditional information.

c. The appropriate a gency shall complete its review of the applicat ion and

provide to Defendants a written determination that such request for alternative WET

sampling or testing procedures is granted, is granted in part and denied in part, or is

denied.

86. Defendants may include in an application for a s ite

- s pecific or pe rmit

- specific

l imitation or condition under Subsection D , above, information supporting the use of any

alternative WET sampling or testing procedures approved pursuant to this Subsection E

.

87. Denial of Defendants’ application for alternative WET sampling o r testing

procedures by EPA pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 136 and/or under this Subsection E shall not be

subject to further review or dispute under this Consent Decree, including but not limited to,

review by a Special Master pursuant to the provisions of Su bsection F, below, or Dispute

Resolution pursuant to Section XIX

.

F. Special Master and Consultant to the Special Master Appointment and Decision

Making Process

88. Within sixty ( 60 ) Days after the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree

, the MDNR

and Defendants eac h shall submit to the other three candidates for appointment as SpecialDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 75

- Master. Each party shall include with its submittal of the list of candidates a signed statement

verifying that the party submitting the list of candidates has performed a due diligen ce

investigation to assess actual and potential conflicts, biases

, and personal affiliations as well as

past, present
, and potential future business affiliations between that party and each candidate or

against the other party, and that no such actual or p otential conflicts are known or such conflicts

are clearly articulated. The submittal shall include the curriculum vitae of each candidate and a

clear articulation for each such candidate explaining the appropriate training, exper ience, and

exper tise to c onduct the proceedings to resolve the Permit Appeal Issues and that each such

candidate will be available for the duration of the proceedings

.

a. MDNR and Defendants each shall select from the other party’s list of

candidates the one candidate that the sele cting party will agree should be appointed Special

Master . The selection must be made within thirty ( 30 ) Days after the candidates are

submitted for consideration. If one party does not make its selection within such thirty ( 30 )

Day period

, the other par ty may select its own candidate and a candidate from the other

party’s list

.

b. MDNR and Defendants shall make every effort to come to consensus on a

single candidate to serve as the Special Master within ninety (90) Days after the Lodging

Date of this Consen t Decree. If MDNR and Defendants are unable to agree upon selection of

a Special Master within that ninety (90) Day period, MDNR and Defendants shall submit a

joint list of the remaining candidates (without indication of the nominating party) to theDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 76

- Judge appointed to this case who will be asked to select the Special Master from the joint list

as expeditiously as possible

.

c. The Special Master shall be engaged under the form of engagement letter

issued jointly by MDNR and Defendants consistent with the app licable terms of this Consent

Decree.

89. Appointment of a Consultant to the Special Master

a. MDNR and Defendants each shall select from the other party’s list of

candidates the one candidate that the selecting party will agree should be appointed . Within sixty ( 60 ) Days after

the Lodging Date of this Consent Decree

, the MDNR and Defendants each shall submit to the

other three candidates for Consultant to the Sp ecial Master. The Consultant shall be qualified in

the science and regulations regarding the development of wastewater and stormwater discharge

permits and implementation of water quality standards pursuant to federal and state regulations.

Each party sh all include with its submittal of the list of candidates a signed statement verifying

that the party submitting the list of candidates has performed a due diligence investigation to

assess actual and potential conflicts, biases

, and personal affiliations a s well as past, present

, and

potential future business affiliations between that party and each candidate or against the other

party, and that no such actual or potential conflicts are known or such conflicts are clearly

articulated. The submittal shall i nclude the curriculum vitae of each candidate and a clear

articulation for each such candidate explaining the appropriate training, experience, and expertise

regarding the matters raised by the Permit Appeal Issues and that each such candidate will be

avai lable for th e duration of the proceedings.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 77

- Consultant to the Special Master . The selection must be made within thirty ( 30 ) Days after

the candidates are submitted for consideration. If one party does not make its selection

within thirty ( 30 ) Days, the other party may select its own candidate and a candidate from the

other party’s list. The two selecte d candidates shall be jointly presented to the S pecial

Master by the MDNR and the Defendants without identification as to the nominating party.

b. The Special Master shall select the Consultant from the two Consultant

candidates identified as above.

90. Decisions regarding Permit Appeals Issues shall be made by the Special Master in

consultation with t he Consultant , except that p rocedural and legal decisions are vested in the

Special Master alone

.

G. Procedure for Permit Appeal Issues Before the Special Master

91. The Special Master shall apply the procedures in 1 CSR Division 15, Chapter 3,

Procedures for Contested Cases

, to hear the Permit Appeal Issues that are referred by the

Defendants or MDNR for resolution following the period of good faith negotiation

. The bur den

of proof in the hearing before the Special Master shall be shared equally by the MDNR and

Defendants.

92. Defendants agree to pay all fees and expenses for the Special Master and the

Consultant to the Special Master associated with resolution of Permit A ppeal Issues under this

Consent Decree.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 78

- 93. Upon receipt of a written request by Defendants to initiate the Special Master

review process for a Permit Appeal Issue, the Special Master shall issue scheduling orders and

other orders , as appropriate, directed t o expeditiously decide Permit Appeal Issues.

94. The MDNR and Defendants agree that the Special Master may

, at any time during

the period of review by the Special Master

, require the parties to engage in good faith negotiation

of any Permit Appeal Issue for no longer than sixty (60) Days and report to the Special Master

regarding the outcome of such negotiations.

95. Ex parte contact with the Consultant to the Special Master is strictly forbidden. If

the MDNR or Defendants wish to have discussion with the Consulta nt to the Special Master

, a

request for the same may be made of the Special Master. The Special Master in his or her

discretion may allow such discussion provided that both the MDNR and Defendants are present

for the discussion. The Special Master shall set forth the time and purpose for such discussion at

times convenient for each party.

96. The MDNR and Defendants agree that nothing in this Consent Decree or in

1 CSR Division 15, Chapter 3 shall be argued to prevent the Special Master from requesting

additi onal information from the MDNR or Defendants or from requesting MDNR and

Defendants to engage in settlement negotiations at any time.

97. Within one hundred twenty (120) Days of concluding proceedings before the

Special Master regarding Permit Appeal Issues pe rtaining to a particular CWA Facility, the

Special Master shall provide a recommendation to the Administrative Hearing Commission,

which will forward the recommendation along with its files to the Clean Water Commission onDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 79

- all Permit Appeal Issues for that CWA Facility

. The recommendations of the Special Master as

to each Permit Appeal Issue, may include, but are not limited to interim effluent limitations, final

effluent limitations, interim permit conditions, final permit conditions, requirements for

dev elopment of additional data and information, and other terms and conditions as determined by

the Special Master. Excluded from review by the Special Master are matters related to schedules

and deadlines for compliance with the terms and limitations of CWA Facility MSOPs, which

shall be exclusively addressed under the provisions set forth in Subsection I (Schedule for

Compliance W ith Missouri State Operating Permits), below.

98. The State and Defendants agree that each party may make good faith arguments

suppor ted by evidence before the Special Master regarding matters before the Special Master,

including injunctive measures necessary to achieve compliance with MSOPs and the time

necessary to implement them. The MDNR and Defendants agree that the recommended

de cisions of the Special Master shall not be contested by either party in proceedings before the

Missouri Clean Water Commission and shall have the same force and effect that a recommended

decision from the Administrative Hearing Commission would have pursua nt to RSMo 621.250

and will form the basis for the decision of the Clean Water Commission pursuant to 10 CSR 20

-

1.020

.

H. Procedures for Finality of Permit Appeal Resolution

99. The decision of the Missouri Clean Water Commission shall have the force and

effect as provided by 10 CSR 20

- 1.020 , however, Defendant s agree pursuant to this Consent

Decree to not appeal a decision of the Missouri Clean Water Commission regarding an y PermitDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 80

- Appeal Issue pursuant to RSMo 644.051.7 , which does not significantly and materi ally deviate

from the recommendations of the Special Master

.

100. Defendants further agree pursuant to this Consent Decree to not appeal a final

MSOP issued by MDNR after notice and public comment, which does not significantly and

materially deviate from the dr aft permit placed on public notice addressing Permit Appeal Issues

resolved and stipulated to by MDNR and Defendants or incorporating the recommendation of the

Special Master

.

101. With regard to any final permit decisions , including decisions of the Clean Wat er

Commission

, the EPA shall have oversight authority as provided by 40 C

. F

. R . § 123.44. No

provision of this Consent Decree affects the rights or responsibilities of Defendants in any

proceedings pursuant to 40 C

. F

. R

. § 123.44.

I. Schedule for Compliance W i th Missouri State Operating Permits

102. Except to the extent that alternative limits are specifically provided in this

Subsection and as established in Appendix B (MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and

Compliance Deadlines )

, or are established pursuant to any revision of such limits pursuant to this

Consent Decree, Defendants shall comply with all terms, conditions and interim and final

limitations for each CWA Facility as set forth in the MSOP for such f acility. Commencing from

the Lodging Date of this C onsent Decree and continuing until deadlines established for

compliance with final limits in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations and

Compliance Deadlines)

, or deadlines revised pursuant to the terms of this Consent Decree for

each CWA Facilit y, Defendants shall comply with the respective alternative limits established forDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 81

- each CWA Facility in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations and Compliance

Deadlines)

, or any revision of such limit pursuant to this Consent Decree . For each pol lutant for

which an alternative limit is established in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations

and Compliance Deadlines)

, or for which any revisions of such limits are made pursuant to this

Consent Decree, Defendants shall comply with the measur ement frequency and sample type as

specified for that pollutant at that respective CWA Facility in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e

Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines)

. Defendants shall submit the results of each

sample on the Discharge Monitoring Report ( “ DMR ” ) submitted for each CWA Facility in

accordance with its respective MSOP

.

103. Total Recoverable Cadmium

a. This provision is limited to the following outfalls at the specified CWA

Facilities: Outfall 001 at Brushy Creek Mine/Mill Facility; Outfall 002 at Buick

Mine/Mill Facility; Outfall 002 at Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility; Outfall 004 at

Viburnum Mine/Mill Facility; Outfall s 001 and 003 at Viburnum M ine #35 (Casteel)

Facility; and Outfall 001 at West Fork Unit Facility; . Defendants may, no later than one hundred eighty

(180) Days prior to the end of the applicable CWA Facility MSOP i nterim e ffluent l imitation

period, request that Plaintiffs authorize an a lternative l imit for the discharge of total recoverable

cadmium for one or more of the CWA Facility MSOP outfalls identified in Subparagraph 103. a,

below, as follows:

b. Defendants must

, for a minimum of twelve (12) M onths, sample, analyze

,
and report on the appropriate CWA Facility MSOP monthly DMR s total dissolvedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 82

- cadmium using an approved 40 C.F.R. Part 136 method with an analytical detection limit

sensitive enough to determine compliance with the final effluent limitations in the

MSOPs for each respective outfall;

c. Any proposed a lternative l imit shall : ( i) be supported by all data and

calculations us ed to derive the requested Monthly Average and Daily Maximum

Limitations, which shall be included with the request ; (ii) extend no longer than the

permit compliance deadlines identified for other pollutant parameters at the same outfall

in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) ; (i ii)

not exceed a Daily Maximum Limitation that is 2.13 times the average sampling data

collected for that outfall in accordance with Subparagraph 103. b, above ; and ( i v ) not

exceed a Monthly Ave rage Limitation that is 1.38 times the average sampling data

collected for that outfall in accordance with Subparagraph 103. b, above ; and

d. Plaintiffs will, in their sole unreviewable discretion, determine whether to

grant Defendants ’ request for each outfa ll and

, if granted, will amend the appropriate

table in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines)

with the approved a lternative l imit for total recoverable cadmium. Any revision made to

Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e Efflue nt Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) in

accordance with this Paragraph 10 3 shall be a non

- material modification to the Consent

Decree agreed to in writing by the Parties

.

104. Upon expiration of the deadlines for alternative limits set forth in Appendix B

( MSOP Alternat iv e Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines)

, or alternative limits revisedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 83

- pursuant to the terms of this Consent Decree, or at such time that any MSOP is modified or

reissued with limits different from an interim limit, whichever is l ater, Defendants must comply

with all terms, conditions and limitations set forth in the MSOP as issued or modified pursuant to

the terms of this Consent Decree by negotiation, decision of the Special Master, or the Clean

Water Commission . However, Defend ants may, no later than ninety (90) Days prior to the

expiration date of an alternative limit, request from EPA and the State an extension of the

alternative limit or limits for a CWA Facility set forth in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternat iv e

Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) if Defendants demonstrate that they ha ve :

a. Complied with all relevant requirements in Section VI, Subsection B

( Compliance Measures f or a ll CWA Facilities ) of this Consent Decree ;

b. Submitted necessary information required by this Co nsent Decree and by

the reporting requirements of all MSOP s for the CWA Facilities;

c. Submitted timely and complete applications to MDNR, pursuant to

Section VI I

, Subsection B (Resolution of Pending MSOP Appeals) above, for issuance of

or modification, as ap plicable, of each MSOP for which they intend to seek such

modification;

d. Completed all necessary analysis and planning, including development of

complete plans and specifications and a schedule for compliance to implement all

necessary work to achieve compl iance with the final MSOP terms, conditions, and

limitations for each CWA Facility for which Defendants seek an extension; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 84

- e. Included with the request for extension a description of: ( i ) the steps

Defendants have taken to comply with each final MSOP , inc luding final MSOP

conditions established pursuant to this Consent Decree, for which an extension of interim

limits is requested, ( ii ) the additional work to be performed to meet the final MSOP

limitations, and ( iii ) the amount of time needed for the extens ion of the interim limits.

105. The determination by EPA and the State regarding whether or not to grant

Defendants ’ request, pursuant to Paragraph 104 above , to extend the interim limits shall not be

subject to the provisions of Section XIX (Dispute Resoluti on)

.

V I II.

A. Buick Mine/Mill Facility COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS : RCRA

106. SPCC Plan

107. . Within sixty ( 60 ) Days of the Effective D ate of the Consent Decree

,

D oe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review an updated and certified Spill Prevention

Control and Count ermeasures (“SPCC”) Plan for the Buick Mine/Mill Facility that complies with

all applicable federal requirements.

Hazardous Waste Training Materials

108. . Within fi fteen ( 1 5) Days of the Effective

Date of the Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR RCRA generator training

materials for employees at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility that comply with all applicable federal

and state requirements.

Hazardous Waste Training. Within fifteen (15) Days of the Effective Date of the

Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall commence implementation of a RCRA generator training

program that complies with all applicable federal and state requirements for all personnelDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 85

- responsible for RCRA regulated waste materials at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility

, and is

consistent with the training materials submitted pursuant to Paragraph 10 7

.

109. Hazardous Waste Determination SOPs

110. . Pursuant to RCRA and the Missouri

Hazardous Waste Management Law and their implementing regulations, Doe Run is responsible,

as the generator, for determining whe ther the waste streams it generate s constitute hazardous

waste. Within forty

- five (45) Days of the Lodging Date of the Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall

submit to EPA and MDNR SOPs for making and documenting hazardous waste determinations

pursuant to 40 C.F.R . § 262.11 and managing hazardous waste in accordance with 40 C.F.R.

§ 262.34, both incorporated by reference in 10 CSR 25

- 7.262(1) for waste generated at the Buick

Mine/Mill Facility.

Hazardous Waste Determinations

111. . Within sixty (60) Days of the Effect ive Date of

the Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR a report describing all hazardous

waste streams generated at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility and the storage, handling

, and disposal

practices for each hazardous waste stream.

General House keeping

. Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of the

Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review and comment general

housekeeping practices for the surface operations at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility to reduce track

out of Lead

- Bearing Materials and hazardous wastes outside of the Doe Run property boundary

.
Unless EPA and/or MDNR provide comments within thirty (30) Days, Doe Run shall commence

implementation of those procedures within one hundred and twenty ( 12 0 ) Days of the Eff ective

Date of the Consent Decree. If EPA and/or MDNR provide comments that require revision ofDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 86

- the procedures then D o e Run shall, subject to the provisions of Section XIX (Dispute Resolution)

of this Decree, revise the procedures accordingly and commence implementation thereof within

ninety (90) Days of the receipt of EPA’s and/or MDNR ’ s comments. For purposes of this

Paragraph 1 11 , the Buick Mine/Mill Facility shall not include the tailings piles or tailings

impoundment areas.

112. Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan

113. The Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan shall include a Field Sampling Plan,

QAPP, and Health and Safety Plan ( “ HASP ” ) to assess on

- site contam ination. . Within thirty ( 30 ) Days of the Effective

Date of the Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall provide a w ork p lan ( “ Buick Used Oil Storage Tank

Work Plan ” ) to the EPA and MDNR for approval pursuant to Section XII ( Compliance

Requirements: Approval of Deliverables) . The Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan shall

include provisions for the removal and proper disposal of the partially underground containment

structure, and any material contained therein, that is used for the temporary storage of used oi l

collected and stored adjacent to the surface maintenance shop at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility in

accordance with all applicable federal and state laws. The Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work

Plan shall also include provisions to investigate any used oil i mpacts in soil and gravel around

the containment structure and around the used oil temporary storage area located adjacent to the

surface maintenance shop at the Buick Mine/Mill Facility, and provide for the removal and

proper disposal of all gravel and so il that has been contaminated by used oil releases in

accordance with all applicable federal and state laws.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 87

- a. The QAPP must conform to “EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance

Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations” (EPA QA/R5. EPA/240/B

- 01/003

(March, 2001)) and “Guidance for Quality Assurance Plans” (EPA QA/G5. EPA/240/R

02/009 (December, 2002 )). D o e Run shall use laboratories that participate in a QA/QC

program compliant with these requirements and guidance. D o e Run shall notify EPA and

MDNR of the laboratories chosen by D o e Run . Upon Plaintiffs ’ request, D o e Run shall

have the laboratories analyze samples provided by Plaintiffs to demonstrate laboratory

QA/QC and performance. If the audit reveals deficiencies in a laboratory’s performance

or QA/QC, Plaintiffs may require re

- sampling and additional analysis and D o e Run shall

submit and begi n implementation of a plan to address the deficiencies within ninety (90)

Days of receipt of the results of the audit

.

b. The Field Sampling Plan and QAPP shall describe the sampling

procedures that will be used, the proposed sampling locations, and shall ensure that

samples collected are analyzed using EPA and MDNR

- approved protocols. In addition,

the QAPP shall describe the number of samples and type of samples to be collected, the

method(s) of collection and analyses, and the criteria for determining sa mpling locations

.

c. The Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan shall include a schedule for

completion of activities. Within thirty (30) Days of approval of the Buick Used Oil

Storage Tank Work Plan, Doe Run shall begin implementation of the activities in t he

Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan in accordance with the approved schedule.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 88

- Upon request by EPA or MDNR, Doe Run shall allow EPA, MDNR or their authorized

representatives to take split and/or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Doe

Run wh ile performing work under this Section. Doe Run shall notify EPA and MDNR

not less than thirty (30) Days in advance of any sample collection activity. In addition,

EPA or MDNR shall have the right to take any additional samples that they deem

necessary

.

114. Within sixty ( 6 0 ) Days of the Effective Date, unless a later deadline is specified in

Paragraphs 106 through 11 3 herein, Doe Run shall correct the RCRA a reas of n oncompliance

No s

. 1 through 6 and 8 , and provide information in response to the RCRA area s of concern A

through H, that were identified in the inspection report compiled by EPA following RCRA

inspections conducted in February 2006 at the Buick Mine/Mine. The Parties agree that the

obligations in Paragraphs 112 and 113 (Buick Used Oil Storage Tank Work Plan) will address

the RCRA area of noncompliance referenced as No. 7 in the inspection report. The Parties also

agree that the obligations in Paragraphs 107 through 111 will address the RCRA areas of

noncompliance referenced as Nos. 1 and 2 in the inspection report. After completion of the

actions required by Paragraphs 106 through 11 3

, a s part of the next semi

- annual status report

required pursuant to Paragraph 17 6

, Doe Run shall submit a Compliance Report to EPA and

MDNR for review and approv al pursuant to Section XII (Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Deliverables) that demonstrates compliance with this Paragraph

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 89

- 115. The Compliance Report shall include the following:

a. A description of the actions that have been taken to comply with the

RCRA areas of noncompliance No s

. 1 through 6 and 8, and information provided in

response to the RCRA areas of concern A through H as identified in the inspection report

compiled by EPA following RCRA inspections conducted in February 2006;

b. Copies of all result s of any chemical or physical analyses conducted

pursuant to Paragraph 1 10 or actions taken to comp l y with RCRA areas of

noncompliance No s

. 1 through 6 and 8, and , if applicable, in connection with information

provided in response to RCRA areas of concern A through H as identified in the

inspection report compiled by EPA following RCRA inspections conducted in February

2006, including any waste profiles, the results of any field screening or other analyses,

and analyses of any samples; and

c. Copies of all haz ardous waste manifests, certificates of disposal or other

appropriate disposal shipping papers (i.e., Land Disposal Restriction Notifications) from

the previous twelve ( 12 ) Months that describe the origin and destination, dates, amount,

and description of any hazardous or universal waste , Lead

- Bearing Materials, or used oil

being transported off

- site

.

116. The Compliance Report shall be certified by a responsible corporate official as

provided in Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 90

- B. Bui ck Resource Recycling Facility

117. Defendants shall comply with all applicable requirements of RCRA and the

Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law and their implementing regulations and Missouri

Hazardous Waste Management Facility Permit Number MOD059200089 w ith respect to the

Buick Resource Recycling Facility.

118. Within sixty (60) Days of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree

, Defendants

shall correct all violations identified (1) in the Notice of Violation provided as Attachment 6 to

the inspection report following a RCRA inspection conducted in March 2009; (2) in the Notice

of Violation attached to the inspection report following the RCRA inspection conducted in

September 2009; (3) as Unsatisfactory Features in February 2, 2010 correspondence following a

RCRA inspection conducted in November 2009; and (4) in the Notice of Violation attached to

the inspection report following a RCRA inspection conducted in December 2009 and that relate

to the following hazardous waste laws and regulations and Permit Conditi ons and Compliance

Provisions of Permit Number MOD059200089 at the Buick Resource Recycling Facility :

a. Condition III.C.8.a (40 CFR § 264.1101);

b. Condition III.C.6.a (40 CFR § 264.1101);

c. Condition I.G.1 (40 CFR § 264.175);

d. Condition III.C .1 (40 CFR § 264.1101);

e. Schedule of C ompliance P rovision I.F and Special Permit Condition III.C.9;

f. Condition III.C.8.c (40 CFR § 2 64.1101 ) ;

g. Condition VI.C.10 ( 10 CSR 25

- 7.264(2)(N )) ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 91

- h. Condition III.C.12 (40 CFR § 264.1101 ) ;

i. Condit ion VI.A. (40 CFR Part 268

, Land Disposal Restrictions) ;

j. Condition III.B.3 and III.C.5;

k

. 260.390.1(1) RSMo

– Storage of hazardous waste;

l. 10 CSR 25

- 5.262(1) incorporating by reference 40 CFR § 26 2 .11

– Hazardous

waste determin ations ; and

m. Req uirement to construct and operate the facility in accordance with s ection

F.3.5 (Leak Detection Liquid Collection and Removal System) of the final permit

application

.

119. As part of the next semi

- annual status report required pursuant to Paragraph 176,

Doe Run shall submit a Compliance Report to EPA and MDNR for review and approval

pursuant to Section XII (Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables) that demonstrates

compliance with the preceding Paragraph 118. The Compliance Report shall include the

fo llowing:

a. A description of the actions that have been taken to comply with each of

the Permit Conditions and Compliance Provisions referenced in Paragraph 11 8 and that

were identified as violations or unsatisfactory features as referenced in Paragraph 1 18 ;

b. Copies of all results of any chemical or physical analyses conducted

pursuant to actions to comply with Paragraph 11 8 , including any waste profiles, the

results of any field screening or other analyses conducted on

- site or off

- site, and analyses

of any samples ; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 92

- c. Copies of all hazardous waste manifests, certificates of disposal or other

appropriate disposal shipping papers (i.e., Land Disposal Restriction Notifications) from

the previous twelve ( 12 ) Months that describe the origin and destinat ion, dates, amount,

and description of any hazardous or universal wastes , Lead

- Bearing Materials, or used oil

being transported off

- site

.

120. The Compliance Report shall be certified by a responsible corporate official as

provided in Section XVI (Reporting Re quirements) of this Consent Decree.

C. Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

121. SPCC Plan and Contingency Plan

122. . Within six ty ( 60 ) Days of the Effective D ate

of the Consent Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review an updated and

certified SPCC Plan and Contingency Plan for the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility that

complies with all applicable requirements.

Training Plan

123. . Within fifteen (15) Days of the Effective D ate of the Consent

Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review and begin i mplementation of a

revised training plan that complies with all applicable requirements of 40 C.F.R. § 265.16 and

10 CSR 25

- 5.265(1)

.
Housekeeping

. Within sixty days (60) Days of the Effective Date of the Consent

Decree

, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR for review and comment revised general

housekeeping practices for the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility to reduce track out of Lead

Bearing Materials and hazardous wastes from the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility property

boundary

. Unless EPA and/or MDNR provide comments within thirty (30) Days of submission,DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 93

- Doe Run shall commence implement ation of th o se procedures within one hundred twenty ( 12 0 )

Days of the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. If EPA and/or MDNR provide comments that

require revi sion of the procedures then Doe Run shall, subject to the provisions of Section XIX

(Dispute Resolution) of this Decree, revise the procedures accordingly and commence

implementation thereof within ninety (90) Days of the receipt of EPA’s and/or MDNR’s

com ments.

124. Within sixty (60) Days of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree, Doe Run

shall correct all violations identified in the Notice of Violation provided as Attachment 8 to the

RCRA inspection report compiled by EPA and MDNR following RCRA inspectio ns conducted

at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility in June 2005 . As part of the next semi

- annual status

report required pursuant to Paragraph 176, Doe Run shall submit a Compliance Report to EPA

and MDNR for review and approval pursuant to Section XII (Compliance Requirements:

Approval of Deliverables) that demonstrat es compliance with this Paragraph

.

125. The Compliance Report shall include :

a. A description of the actions that have been taken to comply with each of

the violations that were identified in t he Notice of Violation provided as Attachment 8 to

the RCRA inspection report compiled by EPA and MDNR following RCRA inspections

conducted at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility in June of 2005;

b. Copies of all results of chemical or physical analyses con ducted pursuant

to Paragraph 12 4 , including any waste profiles, the results of any field screening or other

analyses, and analyses of any samples;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 94

- c. Copies of all hazardous waste manifests, certificates of disposal or other

appropriate disposal shipping pape rs (i.e., Land Disposal Restriction Notifications) from

the previous twelve (12) Months that describe the origin and destination, dates, amount,

and description of any hazardous or universal waste , Lead

- Bearing Materials, or used oil

being transported off

- site; and

d. A description of the actions taken to remediate the sulfuric acid release

and used oil release observed and documented in the RCRA inspections conducted in

June 2005

.

126. The Compliance Report shall be certified by a responsible corporate official a s

provided in Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree.

IX.

127. SITE REMEDIATION

– HERCULANEUM

Remediating Site Contamination

. For purposes of this Section IX (Site

Remediation

– Herculaneum) of the Consent Decree, “Herculaneum Lead Smelte r Facility” and

“Remedial Action” shall have the definition s provided in Appendix E (Financial Assurance for

Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ). Doe Run has agreed to cease the smelting of lead

concentrates at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility and all ow redevelopment of the property.

An ongoing re

- purposing study may assist Doe Run in determin ing the future use of the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility. Doe Run may continue to use a portion of the property for

lead refining , casting, and alloying purp oses. The actions to address the contamination at the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility

, will be affected by the determination of the future use of the

property. In accordance with this Paragraph and Appendix E (Financial Assurance forDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 95

- Herculaneum Lead S melter Facility ) of this Consent Decree, Doe Run agree s to implement and

complete a Remedial Action , similar to RCRA corrective action, to address all site contamination

at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility , including any slag located at the north end of the

Herculaneum facility, prior to the redevelopment or reuse of any of the property at the facility.

The remediation process will be implemented and completed after cessation of the smelting

operations pursuant to Paragraph 14 and prior to the redevel opment or reuse of the property at

Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility. For purposes of this Consent Decree

, the south slag storage

area is not part of the Herculaneum L ead Smelter Facility , as defined in Appendix E (Financial

Assurance for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ) and is being addressed under Administrative

Order on Consent, Docket No. RCRA

- 7

- 2000

- 0018/CERCLA

- 7

- 2000

- 0029.

128. Doe Run agree s to remediate all site contamination at the Herculaneum Lead

Smelter Facility to health

- based cleanup levels appr opriate for the future use of the property. To

initiate the Remedial Action Doe Run shall develop a work plan for approval by EPA and the

State by January 1, 2013, unless this deadline is extended by EPA, to investigate all sources of

site contamination. This work plan shall address the identification of all sources of site

contamination ; provide recommendations for the appropriate Remedial Action to address site

contamination, similar to a RCRA Facility Investigation and Corrective Measures Study

( “ RFI/C MS ” ) ; and provide a schedule for completion of the investigation work and study, and

completion of the RFI/CMS

- type documents, which completion shall be no later than

December 31, 2013 , unless this deadline is extended pursuant to the terms of this Consent

Decree

. After submittal of the RFI/CMS

- type documents in accordance with the EPA

- approvedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 96

- work plan and schedules therein, EPA, after consultation with the State , will develop a Remedial

Action proposal to address site contamination. After public commen t, EPA, after consultation

with the State , will complete a decision document describing the selected Remedial Action

. Doe

Run shall develop a work plan to implement the final Remedial Action at the Herculaneum Lead

Smelter F acility . EPA and the State wil l coordinate with Doe Run to develop an appropriate

schedule for completion of these activities. The development of documents for planning,

scheduling and implementing the Remedial Action at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility

shall be non

- material modi fications to the Consent Decree agreed to in writing by the Parties.

129. Following the cessation of operations required by Paragraph 14 of this Consent

Decree, Doe Run shall not transport lead concentrate to the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

unless and u ntil the Remedial Action required by this Section and Appendix E (Financial

Assurance for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility) of this Consent Decree is deemed complete

by EPA and the State. This restrictive timeframe does not include post

- remedial care and

maintenance that may be required after the Remedial Action is complete d at the Herculaneum

Lead Smelter Facility.

X.

130. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES

Herculaneum

. For purposes of this Section X (Financial Assurances) of the

Consent Decree, “Herculaneum Lead Smel ter Facility” shall have the definition as provided in

Appendix E (Financial Assurance for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ). Doe Run shall secure

and maintain Financial Assurance for the benefit of the Plaintiffs pursuant to the requirements of

Appendix E (Financial Assurance for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ) and Appendix FDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 97

- (Trust Agreement for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ) of this Consent Decree, in order to

ensure coverage for the remediation of the Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility , includin g any

slag located at the north end of the facility . Doe Run’s inability to secure and/or maintain

adequate Financial Assurance shall in no way excuse performance of the remediation of the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter F acility as set forth in Section IX (Site Remediation

– Herculaneum)

or any other requirement of this Consent Decree

.

131. In addition to the Financial A ssurance information included in the reports

provided in Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree, within thirty ( 30 )

D ays of any request by EPA or the State, Doe Run shall provide requested information or reports

regarding the financial status of Doe Run, the trust provided by Doe Run to meet its obligation

for Financial Assurance pursuant to Appendix E (Financial Assurance for Herculaneum Lead

Smelter Facility ) and Appendix F (Trust Agreement for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ) of

this Consent Decree , and the financial institution providing the trust to secure Doe Run’s

obligation

.

132. Work Takeover Provisions for Herculaneum

.

a. In the event that EPA or the State determines that Doe Run (i) has ceased

implementation of any portion of the R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E ), (ii) is

significantly or repeatedly deficient or late in its performance of the R emedial A ction (as

defined in Appendix E ), or (iii) is implementing the R emedial A ction (as defined in

Appendix E ) in a manner that may cause an endangerment to human health or the

environment, EPA, after consultation with the State may issue a written noticeDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 98

- (“Performance F ailure Notice”) to both Doe Run and the Financial Assurance provider of

Doe Run’s failure to perform. The Performance Failure Notice will specify the grounds

upon which such a notice was issued and will provide Doe Run with a period of thirty

(30) Days wi thin which to remedy the circumstances giving rise to the issuance of such

notice.

b. Failure by Doe Run to remedy the relevant Performance Failure to EPA’s

and the State’s satisfaction before the expiration of the thirty (30)

- day notice period

specified in Paragraph 132 .a shall trigger EPA’s and the State’s right to have immediate

access to and benefit of the Financial Assurance provided by the trust fund. EPA may,

after consultation with the State, at any time thereafter direct the Financial Assurance

prov ider to immediately arrange for payment to other parties for performance of the

R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E )

.

c. If EPA or the State has determined that any of the circumstances described

in clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of Paragraph 132 .a have occurred, and if EPA and the State are

nevertheless unable after reasonable efforts to secure the payment of funds or

performance of the R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E ) from the Financial

Assurance provider pursuant to this Consent Decree, then , upon receiving written notice

from EPA, after consultation with the State, Doe Run shall within ten (10) Days

thereafter, deposit into a newly created trust fund approved by EPA, after consultation

with the State, immediately available funds and, without setoff, counterclaim, or

condition of any kind, a cash amount equal to the estimated cost of the remainingDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 99

- R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E ) as of such date, as determined by EPA, after

consultation with the State.

d. Doe Run may invoke the procedur es set forth in Section XIX (Dispute

Resolution), to dispute EPA’s and the State’s determination that any of the circumstances

described in clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of Paragraph 132 .a have occurred. Invoking the

dispute resolution provisions shall not excuse, toll or suspend the obligation of the

Financial Assurance provider, under Paragraph 132

. b of this Section, to fund the trust

fund or perform the R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E ) . Furthermore,

notwithstanding Doe Run’s invocation of such dispute resolution procedures, and during

the pendency of any such dispute, EPA, after consultation with the State, may in its sole

discretion direct the trustee of such trust fund to make payments from the trust fund to

any person that has performed the R emedial A ction (as defined in Appendix E ) until the

earlier of (i) the date that Doe Run remedies, to EPA’s and the State’s satisfaction, the

circumstances giving rise to the issuance of the relevant Performance Failure Notice or

(ii) the date that a final decision is rendered in accordance with Section XIX (Dispute

Resolution), that Doe Run has not failed to perform the R emedial A ction (as defined in

Appendix E ) in accordance with this Consent Decree.

133. Mine/Mills . Doe Run shall secure and maintain Financi al Assurance for the

benefit of the EPA and the State pursuant to the requirements of Appendix G (Financial

Assurance for Mine/Mill Facilities ) and Appendix L (Trust Agreement for Mine/Mill Facilities )

o f this Consent Decree, in order to ensure coverage fo r R emedial A ctions (as defined inDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 100

- Appendix G) for the Sweetwater Mine/Mill, Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Buick Mine/Mill, Fletcher

Mine/Mill , Viburnum Mine/Mill (Mine #28 and 29), and the West Fork Mine. Doe Run’s

inability to secure and/or maintain adequate F inancial Assurance shall in no way excuse

performance of R emedial A ctions (as defined in Appendix G) required at the Mine/Mills by

applicable federal, state, or local law or any other requirement of this Consent Decree.

134. In addition to the financial assura nce information included in the reports provided

in Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree, within thirty ( 30 ) D ays of any

request by EPA or the State, Doe Run shall provide requested information or reports regarding

the financial stat us of Doe Run, the trust provided by Doe Run to meet its obligation for

Financial Assurance pursuant to Appendix G (Financial Assurance

– Mine/Mill Facilities ) and

Appendix L (Trust Agreement for Mine/Mill Facilities ) o f this Consent Decree , and the financ ial

institution providing the trust to secure Doe Run’s obligation.

135. Work Takeover Provisions for Mine/Mills

.

a. In the event that EPA or the State determines that Doe Run (i) has ceased

implementation of any portion of the R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G) , (ii) is

significantly or repeatedly deficient or late in its performance of the R emedial A ction s (as

defined in Appendix G) , or (iii) is implementing the R emedial A ction s (as defined in

Appendix G) in a manner that may cause an endangerment to human health or the

environment, EPA, after consultation with the State may issue a written notice

(“Performance Failure Notice”) to both Doe Run and t he F inancial A ssurance provider of

D o e Run ’s failure to perform. The Performance Failure Notice will sp ecify the groundsDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 101

- upon which such a notice was issued and will provide Doe Run with a period of thirty

( 3 0) D ays within which to remedy the circumstances giving rise to the issuance of such

notice.

b. Failure by Doe Run to remedy the relevant Performance Fai lure to EPA’s

and the State’s satisfaction before the expiration of the thirty (30)

- day notice period

specified in Paragraph 135 .a shall trigger EPA’s and the State’s right to have immediat e

access to and benefit of the F inancial A ssurance provided by the trust fund (s) established

for the specific Mine/Mill Facilities (as defined in Appendix G) at issue in the

Performance Failure Notice . EPA may, after consultation with the State, at any time

thereafter direct the F inancial A ssurance provider to immediatel y arrange for payment to

other parties for performance of the R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G)

.

c. If EPA or the State has determined that any of the circumstances described

in clauses (i), (ii), or (iii) of Paragraph 135 .a have occurred, and if EPA and the State are

nevertheless unable after reasonable efforts to secure the payment of funds or

performance of the R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G) from the Financial

A ssurance provider pursuant to this Consent Decree, then, upon receiving written notice

from EPA, after consultation with the State, Doe Run shall within ten (10) Days

thereafter

, deposit into a newly created trust fund approved by EPA, after consultation

with the State, immediately available funds and

, without setoff, counter claim, or

condition of any kind, a cash amount equal to the estimated cost of the remaining

R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G) as of such date for the specific Mine/MillDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 102

- Facilities (as defined in Appendix G) at issue in the Performance Failure Not ice , as

determined by EPA, after consultation with the State.

d. D oe Run may invoke the procedures set forth in Section XIX (Dispute

Resolution) to dispute EPA’s and the State’s determination that any of the circumstances

described in clauses (i), (ii), or (i ii) of Paragraph 135 .a have occurred. Invoking the

dispute resolution provisions shall not excuse, toll or suspend the obligation of the

F inancial A ssurance provider, under Paragraph 135

. b of this Section, to fund the trust

fund s or perform the R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G) . Furthermore,

notwithstanding Doe Run ’s invocation of such dispute resolution procedures, and during

the pendency of any such dispute, EPA, after consultation with the State, may in its sole

discretion direct the trustee of such trust fund to make payments from the trust fund to

any person that has performed the R emedial A ction s (as defined in Appendix G) until the

earlier of (i) the date that Doe Run remedies, to EPA’s and the State’s satisfaction, the

circumstances givin g rise to the issuance of the relevant Performance Failure Notice or

(ii) the date that a final decision is rendered in accordance with Section XIX (Dispute

Resolution), that Doe Run has not failed to perform the R emedial A ction s (as defined in

Appendix G) in accordance with this Consent Decree.

XI.

136. There is currently in effect an Administrative Order on Consent, TRANSPORTATION ORDER

In the Matter of

The Doe Run Transportation and Haul Routes, Southeastern Missouri , Docket No. RCRA

- 07

-

2007

- 0008, entered i nto by Doe Run and the EPA pursuant to Section 7003 of RCRA and filedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 103

- on May 9, 2007 (“Transportation AOC”). Contemporaneous with the execution of this Consent

Decree, the parties have completed negotiations of modifications to the Transportation AOC and

will file a First Modification to the Transportation AOC with the EPA Region 7 Regional Docket

Clerk (“Modified Transportation AOC”) , following public notice and comment

. The

Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified Transportation AOC, is herein inc orporated by

reference into this Consent Decree. Incorporation of the Transportation AOC into this Consent

Decree does not modify the terms of the Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified

Transportation AOC. Except for disputes regarding the assess ment of stipulated penalties, the

d ispute resolution procedures of the Transportation AOC shall continue to be the exclusive

mechanism to resolve disputes arising under or with respect to the Transportation AOC, as

amended by the Modified Transportation AO C . Disputes regarding the assessment of stipulated

penalties for violations of the Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified Transportation

AOC, shall be resolved pursuant to Section XIX (D ispute R esolution ) of this Consent Decree

,

with the except ion that the State shall not be a party to any such disputes

. All deliverables

required by the Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified Transportation AOC, shall be

provided pursuant to the terms therein

.

137. Doe Run shall comply with all terms of the Transportation AOC, as amended by

the Modified Transportation AOC, as part of their obligations under this Consent Decree. In any

action by the United States or EPA to enforce the terms of this Paragraph or to otherwise require

compliance with the Transpo rtation AOC, as amended by the Modified Transportation AOC,

Doe Run agree s not to contest the United States’ or EPA’s jurisdiction and/or authority to bringDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 104

- such action

. The United States reserves all legal and equitable remedies available to enforce the

terms of this Paragraph of this Consent Decree. Nothing in the Transportation AOC shall be

construed to limit the United States’ right to seek judicial enforce ment of the terms of the

Transportation AOC , as amended by the Modified Transportation AOC, purs uant to this

Paragraph

. Doe Run reserves all other legal and equitable defenses available in response to any

action by the United States to enforce the terms of this Paragraph or the terms of the

Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified Transportati on AOC.

138. Violations of the terms of the Transportation AOC, as amended by the Modified

Transportation AOC, shall be the basis for Stipulated Penalties under this Consent Decree, in

accordance with the provisions of Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties)

.

139. Th e Parties agree that any future modifications to the Transportation AOC, as

amended by the Modified Transportation AOC

, will be made in accordance with the provisions

of the Transportation Order and are non

- material modifications of this Consent Decree, no t

subject to the provisions of Section XXVI (Modification)

.

XII

. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS: APPROVAL OF DELIVERABLES

140. Approval of Deliverables . After review of any plan, report, or other item that is

required to be submitted for approval pursuant to this Consent Decree, EPA, after consultation

with MDNR , shall in writing: a) approve the submission; b) approve the submission upon

specified conditions; c) approve part of the submission and disapprove the remainder; or d)

disapprove the submission.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 105

- 141. If the s ubmission is approved pursuant to Paragraph 140 .a , Defendants shall take

all actions required by the plan, report, or other document, in accordance with the schedules and

requirements of the plan, report, or other document, as approved. If the submission is

conditionally approved or approved only in part, pursuant to Paragraph 140 .b or .c , Defendants

shall, upon written direction from EPA, after consultation with MDNR , take all actions required

by the approved plan, report, or other item that EPA, after co nsultation with MDNR , determines

are technically severable from any disapproved portions, subject to Defendants’ right to dispute

only the specified conditions or the disapproved portions or whether the work is technically

severable , under Section XIX (Dis pute Resolution) of this Decree.

142. If the submission is disapproved in whole or in part pursuant to Paragraph 1 40 .c

or .d, Defendant s shall, within thirty ( 30 ) Days or such other time as the Parties agree to in

writing, correct all deficiencies and resubmi t the plan, report, or other item, or disapproved

portion thereof, for approval, in accordance with the preceding Paragraphs. If the resubmission

is approved in whole or in part, Defendants shall proceed in accordance with the preceding

Paragraph.

143. Any st ipulated penalties applicable to the original submission, as provided in

Section X VII ( Stipulated Penalties) of this Decree, shall accrue during the thirty ( 30 )

- Day period

or other specified period, but shall not be payable unless the resubmission is untim ely or is

disapproved in whole or in part; provided that if the original submission was so deficient as to

constitute a material breach of Defendants’ obligations under this Decree, the stipulated penaltiesDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 106

- applicable to the original submission shall be du e and payable notwithstanding any subsequent

resubmission.

144. If a resubmitted plan, report, or other item, or portion thereof, is disapproved in

whole or in part, EPA, after consultation with the MDNR , may again require Defendants to

correct any deficiencies , in accordance with the preceding Paragraphs, or may itself/themselves

correct any deficiencies, subject to Defendants’ right to invoke Dispute Resolution and the right

of the United States and the State to seek stipulated penalties as provided in the pre ceding

Paragraphs.

145. Any portion of a submission that is not specifically disapproved by EPA, in

consultation with MDNR, in a notice of disapproval shall be considered approved

, and

Defendants shall proceed to implement the approved portion of the submissio n, provided that

implementation of the approved portion of the report, plan, or other item is technically severable

from the disapproved portion.

146. For purposes of deliverables submitted pursuant to Appendix I (Statement of

Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigati on), EPA has delegated approval authority to MDNR.

Therefore

, with respect to Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation), the

phrase “EPA, after consultation with MDNR” or “EPA, in consultation with MDNR” in

Paragraphs 1 40 through 1 45 ab ove, sh all be read as “MDNR, after consultation with EPA.”

147. Upon approval, approval upon conditions, or modification by EPA or MDNR

under Paragraph 1 40 or 1 44 of any plan, report, or other deliverable, or any portion thereof, suchDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 107

- plan, report, or other de liverable, or portion thereof, shall be incorporated into and enforceable

under this Consent Decree.

X III

. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS: PERMITS

148. Permits

149. When permits are required as described in Paragraph 14 8 , Defendants shall

complete and submit such permit applications to MDNR and any other appropriate authorities to

allow sufficient time for all legally required processing and review of the permit request,

including requests for additional information by the permitting authorities. Any failure by

Defendants to submit a timely permit application shall bar any use by Defendants of Section

XVIII (Force Majeure) of this Consent De cree, where a Force Majeure claim is based on

permitting delays. . Unless expressly stated otherwise in this Consent Decree, where any

compliance obligation under this C onsent Decree or otherwise applicable law requires

Defendants to obtain a federal, state, or local permit or approval, including, but not limited to, a

permit to authorize construction, reconstruction, or operation of any device, Defendants shall

submit ti mely and complete applications and take all other actions necessary to obtain all such

permits or approvals. Defendants may seek relief under the provisions of Section XVIII (Force

Majeure) of this Consent Decree for any delay in the performance of any su ch obligation

resulting from a failure to obtain, or a delay in obtaining, any permit or approval required to

fulfill such obligation, if Defendants have submitted timely and complete applications and ha ve

taken all other actions necessary to obtain all su ch permits or approvals.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 108

- 150. Using the procedures set forth in Section XXIII (Notices), Defendants shall

provide the EPA with a copy of each application for a federally enforceable permit necessary to

implement the req uirements of this Consent Decree that is filed after the Effective Date, as well

as a copy of any permit proposed as a result of such application, to allow for timely participation

in any public comment opportunity. If, as of the Effective Date, Defendant s have received any

permit necessary to implement the requirements of this Consent Decree, then no later than thirty

( 30 ) Days after the Effective Date, Defendants shall submit copies of such permits to EPA and

the State using the procedure set forth in Se ction XXIII (Notices). EPA, in consultation with the

State

, may excuse in writing all or part of the latter submission if copies of such permits have

already been submitted to EPA and the State before the Effective Date.

151. If Defendants sell or transfer par t or all of their ownership interest in any of the

Doe Run Facilit ies covered under this Consent Decree, Defendants shall comply with the

requirements of Paragraph 8 (Transfer of Ownership or Operation) with regard to that Doe Run

Facility before any such sale or transfer unless, following any such sale or transfer, Defendants

remain the holder of the Title V or other federally

- enforceable permit for such Doe Run Facility.

152. Notwithstanding the reference to Title V permits in this Consent Decree, the

enforcem ent of such permits shall be in accordance with their own terms and the Clean Air Act

and its implementing regulations, including the federally approved Missouri Title V permit

program. The Title V permit shall not be enforceable under this Consent Decree , although any

term or limit established by or under this Consent Decree shall be enforceable under this ConsentDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 109

- Decree regardless of whether such term has or will become part of a Title V permit, subject to the

terms of Section XXVII (Termination).

153. Withi n one hundred and eighty (180) Days after the Effective Date of this Consent

Decree, Defendants shall amend any applicable Title V permit application, or apply for

amendments of its Title V permits to include a schedule for all Unit

- specific and Facility

- s pecific

performance, operational, maintenance, and control technology requirements established by this

Consent Decree including, but not limited to: emission rates, tonnage limitation, emission

monitoring, and production limits.

XI V

. ADDITIONAL INJUNCTIV E RELIEF

154. Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling

155. . Doe Run shall install and

operate a building enclosure/ventilation system at the lead concentrate handling, storage and

loading areas at each of the follo wing mill facilities owned and operated by Doe Run: Buick

Mine/Mill, Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Sweetwater Mine/Mill, and Fletcher Mine/Mill in

accordance with all provisions of Appendix H (Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and

Handling) and other terms o f this Consent Decree . The enclosure/ventilation systems installed

pursuant to this Paragraph shall be installed and begin operation in accordance with the schedule

set forth in Appendix H (Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling)

.

Stream Miti gation

. Doe Run shall implement a stream mitigation project for 8.5

miles of Bee Fork Creek in Reynolds County, Missouri , in accordance with all provisions of

Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation) and other terms of this Consent

Dec ree. The stream mitigation project implemented pursuant to this Paragraph shall beDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 110

- completed in accordance with the schedules set forth in and developed pursuant to Appendix I

(Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation).

156. Doe Run is responsible fo r the satisfactory completion of the Additional

Injunctive Relief under this Section in accordance with the requirements of this Consent Decree

and Appendices H (Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling) and I (Statement of

Work for Bee Fork Cree k Mitigation)

. Doe Run may use contractors or consultants in planning

and implementing the Additional Injunctive Relief.

157. For all requirements under this Section, Doe Run certif ies the truth and accuracy

of each of the following:

a. that, as of the date of executing this Consent Decree, Doe Run is not

required to perform or develop any portion of this Additional Injunctive Relief by any

federal, state, or local law or regulation and are not required to perform or develop this

Additional Injunctive Relief by agreement, grant, or as injunctive relief awarded in any

other action in any forum;

b. that Doe Run w as not planning or intending to perform this Additional

Injunctive Relief other than in settlement of the claims resolved in this Consent Decree;

and

c

. that Doe Run ha s not received and shall not receive credit for any portion

of this Additional Injunctive Relief in any other enforcement action.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 111

- 158. Defendants shall comply with the reporting requirements of Appendix H

(Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling), Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee

Fork Creek Mitigation)

, and this Consent Decree.

159. Completion Report: Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling Project

a. a detailed description of the p roject as implemented; .
Following completion of the Enclosure of Lea d Concentrate Storage and Handling p roject

pursuant to Appendix H

, Doe Run shall submit an Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and

Handling Project Completion Report to the Plaintiffs with the next semi

- annual status report

required pursuant to Paragraph 17 6 , in accordance with Section XXIII (Notices) of this Consent

Decree . The Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling Project Completion Report

shall contain the following information:

b. a detailed description of any material changes in the project from what was

proposed in the original plans and specifications;

c. certification that the p roject has been fully implemented pursuant to the

provisions of this Consent Decree and Appendi x H (Enclosure of Lead Concentrate

Storage and Handling) ; and

d. a description of the environmental and public health benefits resulting

from implementation of the p roject (with a quantification of the benefits and pollutant

reductions, if feasible).

160. EPA may, in its sole discretion, upon written request require Doe Run to submit

information in addition to that described in Paragraph 15 9 , in order to evaluate Doe Run’sDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 112

- Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling Project Completion Report. After

rec eiving the Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling Project Completion Report,

the EPA shall notify Doe Run whether or not Doe Run has satisfactorily completed the Enclosure

of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling p roject . If Doe Run has not co mpleted the Enclosure

of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling p roject in accordance with this Consent Decree,

stipulated penalties may be assessed under Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this Consent

Decree.

161. Completion Report: Stream Mitigation Proj ect

a. a detailed description of the project as implemented; . In accordance with the

requirements and schedule set forth in Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek

Mitigation), Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR a copy of the final progress report for the

Stream Mitigation Project (“Stream Mitigation Project Completion Report”) , in accordance with

Section XXIII (Notices) of this Consent Decree. The r eport shall contain all information required

pursuant to Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation) and the following

information:

b

. certification that the project has been fully implemented pursuant to the

provisions of this Consent Decree and Appendix I (Statement of Work for Bee Fork

Creek Mitigation); and

c

. a description of the environmental and public health benefits resulting

from implementation of the project (with a quantification of the benefits and pollutant

reductions, if feasible).DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 113

- 162. MDNR may, in its sole discretion, upon written request require Doe Run to

submit information in addition to that described in the Paragraph 1 61 , in order to evaluate Doe

Run’s Stream Mitigation Completion Report. After receiving the Stream Mitigation Project

Completion Report, MDNR shall notify Doe Run wheth er or not Doe Run ha s satisfactorily

completed the Stream Mitigation Project. If Doe Run ha s not completed the Stream Mitigation

Project in accordance with this Consent Decree, stipulated penalties may be assessed under

Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this Consent Decree.

163. Each submission required under this Section shall be signed by an official with

knowledge of the p roject and shall bear the certification language set forth in Paragraph 1 81

.

164. Disputes concerning the satisfactory performance of t he Enclosure of Lead

Concentrate Storage and Handling Project and the Stream Mitigation Project may be resolved

under Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of this Decree. Subject to Doe Run’s right to invoke

Dispute Resolution regarding the approval of delive rables required pursuant to Appendix H

(Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling) and Appendix I (Statement of Work for

Bee Fork Creek Mitigation) as provided in Section XII (Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Deliverables) , n o other disputes a rising under Paragraphs 154 through 16 3 of this Section shall

be subject to Dispute Resolution.

165. New Facilities

a. Upon the Date of Lodging, in the event that Defendants elect to build or

operate a new lead concentrate unloading facility at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter

Facility (as defined in Appendix E) following the Remedial Action required pursuant to .DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 114

- Section IX (Site Remediation

– Herculaneum) of this Consent Decree, or any new Doe

Run owned and/or operated lead concentrate unloading facility in Missour i, Defendants

shall:

i. Notify EPA and the State of such plans as soon as practicable;

ii. Obtain all required federal, State and local environmental

construction and operating permits;

iii. Install and operate an enclosure/ventilation system for all lead

concentra te handling (including conveyance systems), loading, unloading and

storage area at such facility that is equivalent to the system requirements set forth

in Appendix H of this Consent Decree or as may be required by federal, State or

local requirements, whi chever is more stringent. Any loading or unloading of lead

concentrate from vehicles shall only occur within buildings meeting the

requirements herein; and,

iv. If not subject to the Transportation AOC by the terms of that o rder,

Defendants shall request a m odification to include the facility as a “ Doe Run

facility ” as that term is defined in the Transportation AOC.

b. Upon the Date of Lodging, in the event that Defendants elect to build or

operate a new facility in Missouri using a hydrometallurgical

- electroche mical process for

producing lead metal from concentrates, Defendants shall:

i. Notify EPA and the State of such plans as soon as practicable;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 115

- ii. Obtain all required federal, State and local environmental

construction and operating permits;

iii. Install and operate an enclosure/ventilation system for all lead

concentrate handling (including conveyance systems), loading, unloading and

storage area at such facility that is equivalent to the system requirements set forth

in Appendix H of this Consent Decree or as may be required by federal, State or

local requirements, whichever is more stringent. Any loading or unloading of lead

concentrate from vehicles shall only occur within buildings meeting the

requirements herein; and,

iv. If not subject to the Transportation AOC by the terms of that o rder,

Defendants shall request a modification to include the facility as a “ Doe Run

facility ” as that term is defined in the Transportation AOC.

XV

. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION PROJECTS

166. D efendants shall implement the Environmental Mitigation Projects (“Projects”)

described in Appendix J to this Consent Decree in compliance with the approved plans and

schedules for such Projects and other terms of this Consent Decree. Defendants shall spen d no

less than $2 million in Project Dollars implementing the Projects identified in Appendix J in

accordance with the schedules provided in Appendix J . Defendants shall implement such

Projects over a period of no later than four (4) years from the Effect ive Date of this Consent

Decree.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 116

- 167. Defendants shall maintain, and present to EPA and MDNR upon request, all

documents to substantiate the Project Dollars expended to implement the Projects described in

Appendix J , and shall provide these documents to EPA a nd MDNR within thirty (30) days of a

request for the documents.

168. All plans and reports prepared by Defendants pursuant to the requirements of this

Section of the Consent Decree and required to be submitted to EPA shall be made publicly

available from Defend ants without charge.

169. Defendants are responsible for the satisfactory completion of the Projects in

accordance with the requirements of this Decree. Defendant s may use contractors or consultants

in planning and implementing the Projects

.

170. Defendants shal l certify, as part of each plan submitted to EPA pursuant to

Appendix J for any of the Projects, the truth and accuracy of each of the following:

a. that all cost information provided to EPA in connection with EPA ’ s

approval of the Projects is complete and a ccurate and that Defendant s have estimate d the

costs of the Projects in good faith ;

b. that, as of the date of executing this Decree, Defendant s are not required to

perform or develop the Projects by any federal, state, or local law or regulation and are

not required to perform or develop the Projects by agreement, grant, or as injunctive relief

awarded in any other action in any forum;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 117

- c. that the Projects are not project s that Defendant s w ere planning or

intending to construct, perform, or implement other than in settlement of the claims

resolved in this Decree;

d. that Defendant s ha ve not received and will not receive credit for the

Projects in any other enforcement action; and

e. that Defendant s will not receive any reimbursement for any portion of the

Projects from any other person.

171. Environmental Mitigation Projects Completion Report

a. Following the date set for completion of the Projects pursuant to Appendix

J

, with the next semi

- annual status report required pursuant to Paragraph 17 6

, Defendant s shall

submit a n Environmental Mitigation Projects Completion Report to the Plaintiffs , in accordance

with Section XXIII (Notices) of this Consent Decree. The Environmental Mitigation Projects

Completion Report shall contain the following infor mation:

i. a detailed description of the Projects as implemented;

ii. a description of any material changes in the project from what was

proposed in the original plans and specifications ;

iii. an itemized list of all eligible Project costs expended;

iv. certification that the Project has been fully implemented pursuant

to the provisions of this Consent Decree and Appendix J ; andDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 118

- v. a description of the environmental and public health benefits

resulting from implementation of the Projects (with a quantification of the

benefits and pollutant reductions, if feasible).

172. EPA may, in its sole discretion, require information in addition to that described

in the preceding Paragraph, in order to evaluate Defendants ’ Completion Report

.

173. After receiving the Environmental Mitigation Projects Completion Report, the

United States shall notify Defendant s whether or not Defendant s ha ve satisfactorily completed

the Projects . If Defendant s ha ve not completed the Projects in accordance with this Consent

Decree, stip ulated penalties may be assessed under Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties) of this

Consent Decree.

174. Disputes concerning the satisfactory performance of the Projects and the amount

of eligible Project costs may be resolved under Section XIX (Dispute Resolut ion) of this Decree.

EPA’s decision regarding whether to approve an a dditional project Defendants choose to submit

pursuant to p aragraph A

. in s ection I

. of Appendix J (Environmental Mitigation Projects) is not

subject to D ispute R esolution. Subject to D oe Run’s right to invoke Dispute Resolution

regarding the approval of deliverables required pursuant to Appendix J (Environmental

Mitigation Projects) as provided in Section XII (Compliance Requirements: Approval of

Deliverables) , n o other disputes arising under Paragraphs 166 through 173 of this Section shall

be subject to Dispute Resolution.

175. Each submission required under this Section shall be signed by an official with

knowledge of the Projects and shall bear the certification language set forth in P aragraph 1 81

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 119

- XV I

.

176. In addition to any other express reporting requirement in this Consent Decree, on

each April 30 and Octo ber 31 following the Effective Date of this Consent Decree until

termination of this Decree pursuant to Secti on XXVII (Termination), Defendants shall submit to

EPA and MDNR a status report that shall describe the Defendants’ actions taken and to be taken

to comply with this Consent Decree. The status report due April 30 shall provide information for

the precedin g period from October 1 through March 31. The status report due October 31 shall

provide information for the preceding period fr o m April 1 through September 30. If Defendants

indicate in a status report that an obligation under this Consent Decree has be en completed and

EPA, after consultation with MDNR, agrees that the obligation has been completed

, Defendants

are no t required to include the completed obligation in future status report s

. Each status report

shall include: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

a. a progress report on the imple mentation of Sections V through X, XIV,

and XV above (all injunctive relief sections except Section XI (Transportation Order) );

b. the status of and likely target date of cessation of operation required by

Section V (Compliance Requirements : Clean Air Act);

c. any significant problems encountered in complying with Sections V

through X, XIV, and XV (all injunctive relief sections except Section XI (Transportation

Order) ) of this Consent Decree , together with implemented or proposed solutions;

d. a summary of the SO 2 

### emissions monitoring data collected pursuant to the

Consent Decree including the mass of SO 2 

### emitted;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 120

- e. a summary of the S inter P roduction data collected pursuant to the Consent

Decree;

f. a summary of the B last F urnace Sinter Consumption data collected

pur suant to the Consent Decree

g. a summary of all the Refined L ead M etal P roduction data collected

pursuant to the Consent Decree;

h. the date and time identifying each period during which the CERMS was

inoperative except for zero and span checks and the nature o f any system repairs or

adjustments ; and

i. all substitute data used to determine compliance with the SO 2 

### emission

limits established in Paragraph 20 .c. of this Consent Decree along with supporting

calculations.

177. Except for MSOP violations as addressed in Par agraph 17 8

, i n addition to the

report required by the preceding Paragraph 17 6 , if Defendants violate any requirement of this

Consent Decree, Defendants shall notify the United States and the State of such violation and its

duration or anticipated likel y du ration, in writing, within ten ( 1 0 ) business d ays of first becoming

aware of the violation, with an explanation of the cause or likely cause of the violation and any

measures taken, or to be taken, to prevent or minimize such violation. If the cause of a violation

cannot be fully explained at the time the report is due, Defendants shall so state in the report.

Defendants shall investigate the cause of the violation and shall then submit an amendment to the

report, including a full explanation of the cause of the violation, within fifteen ( 15 ) Days ofDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 121

- becoming aware of the cause of the violation. Nothing in this Paragraph or the following

Paragraph relieves Defendants of their obligation to provide the notice required by Section XVIII

(Force Majeure).

178. Defendants shall report exceedances of final and interim CWA Facility permit

limitations applicable at the time of reporting as a part of the facility monthly DMRs submitted to

MDNR . In addition to the information required to be submitted to MDNR in the D MRs,

Defendants shall include a supplemental statement regarding any exceedances of alternative

CWA permit limitations, as identified in Appendix B (MSOP Alternative Effluent Limit ation s

and Compliance Deadlines ) and an explanation of the cause or likely c ause of the exceedance

and any measures taken, or to be taken, to prevent or minimize such exceedance. At the same

time such information is submitted to MDNR, Defendants shall submit to EPA, in accordance

with the provisions of Section XXIII (Notices), an electronic copy of the DMRs and

supplemental statement of exceedances specified in this Paragraph. Upon written request,

Defendants shall also submit to EPA a hard copy of such information.

179. Whenever any violation of this Consent Decree or any applicable permit or any

other event related to Defendants’ performance under this Consent Decree pose s an immedia te

threat to the public health or welfare of the environment, Defendants shall notify EPA and the

State, orally or by electronic or facsimile transmissio n as soon as possible, but no later than 24

hours after Defendants first knew of, or should have known of, the violation or e vent. This

notification procedure is in addition to the requirements set forth in the preceding Paragraph.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 122

- 180. All reports shall be submitted to the persons designated in Section XXIII (Notices)

of this Consent Decree

.

181. Each report or notice submitted by Defendant s under this Section shall be signed

by an official of the submitting party and include the following certification:

I certify under penalty of law that I have examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that this document and its attachments were prepared either by me per sonally or under my direction or supervision in a manner designed to ensure that qualified and knowledgeable personnel properly gather, evaluate, and present the information contained therein. I further certify, b ased on my personal knowledge or on my inq uiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, that the information submitted is 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.

182. The reporting requirements of this Consent Decree do not relieve Defendants of

any reporting obligations required by the CAA, CWA, RCRA EPCRA, or CERCLA, or their

imp lementing regulations, or by any other federal, state or local law, regulation, permit, or other

requirement. The reporting requirements of this Section are in addition to any other reports,

plans

, or submissions required by other Sections of this Consent Decree.

183. Any information provided pursuant to this Consent Decree may be used by the

Plaintiff s in any proceeding to enforce the provisions of this Consent Decree and as otherwise

permitted by law. All information and documents submitted by Defendants to the United States

or to the State pursuant to this Consent Decree shall be subject to public inspection, unlessDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 123

- identified and supported as CBI by Defendants in accordance with 40 C.F.R. Part 2 and

applicable state law.

XV I I

.

184. Defendant shall be liable for stipulated penalties to the Plaintiffs for violations of

this Consent Decree as specified below, unless excused under Section XVIII (Force Majeure) of

this Decree, including any work plan or sche dule approved under this Consent Decree and

incorporated by reference into this Consent Decree, according to all applicable require ments of

this Decree and within the specified time schedules established by or approved under this Decree. STIPULATED PENALTIES

185. Late Payment of C ivil Penalty

If Defendant s fail to pay the civil penalty required to be paid under Section IV (Civil

Penalty) of this Decree when due, Defendant s shall pay a stipulated penalty of $ 10,00 0 per Day

for each Day that the payment is late.

186.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each Day

Defendants fail to comply with the requirements of Paragraph 14 (Election to Cease Smelting

Operation) : Cessation of Opera tions at Herculaneum

Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$ 1 5 ,000 1st through 14th Day Period of Non compliance

$ 2 5 ,000 15th through 30th Day

$ 3 7

, 5 00 31st Day and beyondDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 124

- 187.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation for each violation of a

requirement of Paragraph 20

. a . through 20

. c

. : Interim Production and Emissions Limits at Herculaneum

Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$ 2,250 For each Day the SO 2 

### Short

- term Limit is exceeded Measure of Noncompliance

$ 7

, 0 00 Per ton for each ton or fraction of a ton over the SO 2 

### Mass Cap up to 100 t ons above the limit

$ 12 ,000 Per ton for each ton or fraction of a ton over the SO 2 

### Mass Cap exceeding 100 tons above the limit

$1,000 Per Day for each violation of the lead limit at Paragraph 20 .b of this Consent Decree. This penalty shall ac crue until compliance is reestablished via the testing requirements of Paragraph 20 .b.

$15,000 Per ton for each ton or fraction of a ton over a 12

- Month Rolling Tonnage up to 100 tons above the limit

$20,000 Per ton for each ton or fraction of a to n over a 12

- Month Rolling Tonnage exceeding 100 tons above the limit.

188.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue for each Day for any failure to meet the

testing requirements in Paragraph 20 .b of this Consent Decree

, except that any deliverable

associated with these testing requirements is subject to the stipulated penalty provisions at

Paragraph 202 (Deliverable Requirements) : Emissions Testing at HerculaneumDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 125

- Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$1,500 1st through 14th Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 2 ,500 15th through 30th Day

$ 4 ,000 31st Day and beyond

189.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each violation of

any requirement identified in this Consent Decree regardi ng the installation and operation of a

CERMS by the dates outline d herein , except that any deliverable associated with these

requirements is subject to the stipulated penalty provisions at Paragraph 202 (Deliverable

Requirements) : Emissions Monitoring at Herculaneum

Penalty Per Violation P er Day

$ 1,5 00 1st through 14th Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 2 ,5 00 15th through 30th Day

$ 4

, 0 00 31st Day and beyond

190.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each viola tion of

a requirement of Section V , Subsection C ( Installation of Pressure Drop Monitor at Buick

Mine/Mill) , except that any deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the

stipulated penalty provisions at Paragraph 202 (Deliverable Requir ements) : Buick Mine/Mill CAA Injunctive Relief

Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$ 1,00 0 1st through 14th Day Period of NoncomplianceDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 126

- $ 2 ,00 0 15th through 30th Day

$ 4

, 0 0 0 31st Day and beyond

191.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per vi olation per Day for each violation of

a requirement of Section VI (Compliance Requirements: Clean Water Act) , except that any

deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the stipulated penalty provisions at

Paragraph 202 (Deliverable Requi rements) : CWA Injunctive Relief Provisions

Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$ 9 50 1st through 14th Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 2 ,00 0 15th through 30th Day

$ 4

, 0 00 31st Day and beyond

192.

a. CWA Interim or Alternative Effluent Limits

Monthly Average Violations

. The following s tipulated penalties shall

accrue per violation per Month for each violation of an interim Monthly Average effluent

limitation in effect in a CWA Facility MSOP or any Monthly Average effluent limitation

modified by Alternative Effluent Limitations pursuant to Subsection I (Schedule for

Compliance With Missouri State Operating Permit s ) of this Consent Decree and specified

in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) :

Penalty Per Monthly Degree of Exceeda nce Average Vio lation

$2,000 up to, but not including, 20% over the limitDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 127

- $ 4 ,000 from 20% over the limit, and up to, but not including, 50% over the limit

$ 7

, 5 00 from 50% over the limit, and up to, but not including, 100% over the limit

$1 1 ,000 100 % over limit or greater

b. Violations of a “No Discharge” Requirement in Appendix B

. The

following stipulated penalties shall accrue per outfall per Day of discharge for each

violation of that outfall’s “no discharge” Alternative Effluent Limitation establi shed

pursuant to Subsection I (Schedule for Compliance With Missouri State Operating

Permit s ) of this Consent Decree , as specified in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent

Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) :

Penalty Per Day of Discharge

$ 4 ,000 for the 1 st 

### and 2 nd 

### Days during a Month Duration of D ischarge

on which a discharge occurs

$ 7

, 5 00 for the 3 rd 

### and 4 th 

### Days during a Month on which a discharge occurs

$ 10 ,000 for the 5 th 

### Day and for each additional Day during a Month on wh ich a discharge occurs

193.

a. CWA Facility Final Effluent Limits

Monthly Average Violations . The following stipulated penalties shall

accrue per violation per Month for each violation of a final Monthly Average effluent

limitation in effect in a CWA Facility MS OP :DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 128

- Penalty Per Monthly Degree of Exceedance Average Violation

$4,000 up to, but not including, 20% over the limit

$7,000 from 20% over the limit, and up to, but not including, 50% over the limit

$10,000 from 50% over the limit, and u p to, but not including, 100% over the limit

$15,000 100% over limit or greater

b. Daily Maximum and Weekly Average Violations . The following

stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each violation of a final Daily

Maximum or Weekl y Average effluent limitation in effect in a CWA Facility MSOP :

Penalty Per Daily Maximum Degree of Exceedance or Weekly Average Violation

$2,000 up to, but not including, 20% over the limit

$5,000 from 20% over the limit, and up to, but not including, 50% over the limit

$8,000 from 50% over the limit, and up to, but not including, 100% over the limit

$12,000 100% over limit or greater

194. Acute and Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Limitations

Except as specified in the Alternativ e Effluent Limitations pursuant to Subsection I

(Schedule for Compliance With Missouri State Operating Permit s ) of this Consent Decree and

specified in Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines)

,
the following stipulated pe nalties shall accrue per violation for each violation of an acute or .DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 129

- chronic WET test limitation in a test series (i.e., the original annual, semiannual, quarterly or

monthly test, as applicable, and follow

- up tests required due to test failure) in effect in a CWA

Facility MSOP :

Penalty Per WET Number of Violations in Test Series Test Event

$4,000 first violation

$7,000 second violation

$10,000 third and subsequent violation

195. MSOP Violations other than Effluent Limitation and WET Lim itation Violations

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per Day for each violation of a

requirement of a CWA Facility MSOP other than an effluent discharge limitation

, an effluent

discharge prohibition , or WET limitation :

Penalty Per Violati on Per Day

$ 7 50 1st through 14th Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 1,5 00 15th through 30th Day

$ 3 ,000 31st Day and beyond

196. Modified Transportation AOC

. Stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per

Day for each violation of any requi rement of the Transportation AOC, as amended by all

modifications thereto, in accordance with the stipulated penalty provisions set forth in paragraph

114 of the Modified Transportation AOC

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 130

- 197.

The following stipulated penalties shall a ccrue per violation per Day for each Day

Defendants fail to comply with the requirements of Section VIII (Compliance Requirements:

RCRA) , except that any deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the

stipulated penalty provisions at Para graph 202 (Deliverable Requirements) : RCRA Injunctive Relief

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 1,00 0 1st through 14th Day

$ 3,00 0 15th through 30th Day

$ 5

, 0 00 31st Day and beyond

198.

The following stipulated penalties shal l accrue per violation per Day for each Day

Defendants fail to comply with the requirements of Section IX ( Site Remediation

-

Herculaneum ) , except that any deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the

stipulated penalty provisions at Pa ragraph 202 (Deliverable Requirements) : Site Remediation

- Herculaneum

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$1,000 1st through 14th Day

$ 2

, 5 00 15th through 30th Day

$5,000 31st Day and beyond

199.

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for each Day

Defendants fail to comply with the requirements of Section X ( Financial Assurances ) , except that Financial AssurancesDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 131

- any deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the stipulated penalty provisions

at Paragraph 202 (Delive rable Requirements) :

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$1,000 1st through 14th Day

$3,000 15th through 30th Day

$5,000 31st Day and beyond

200.

The following stipulated penalties shall a ccrue for each Day Defendant s fail to timely or

satisfactorily complete the Additional Injunctive Relief Project s by the deadline set forth in

Section X I V

, Appendix I ( Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek M itigation) and Appendix H

(Enclosure of Lead Conce ntrate Storage and Handling)

, or schedules approved pursuant to this

Consent Decree , except that any deliverable associated with these requirements is subject to the

stipulated penalty provisions at Paragraph 202 (Deliverable Requirements) : Additional Injunctive Relief Compliance

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 3

, 00 0 1st through 15th day

$ 6

, 0 00 15th day and beyond

201. Environmental Mitigation Projects Compliance

The following stipulated penalties shall accrue for each Day Defendants fail to timely or

satisfac torily complete the Environmental Mitigation Projects by the deadline set forth in Section

XV (Environmental Mitigation Projects)

, Appendix J (Environmental Mitigation Projects) , or

schedules approved pursuant to this Consent Decree , except that any delive rable associated withDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 132

- these requirements is subject to the stipulated penalty provisions at Paragraph 202 (Deliverable

Requirements) :

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 1,0 00 1st through 15th day

$ 5,0 00 15th day and be yond

202. Deliverable Requirements . The following stipulated penalties shall accrue per

violation per Day for each failure to timely submit, modify, or implement, as approved, the

reports plans, studies, analyses, protocols, or other deliverables required by this Consent Decree,

except as otherwise specified in Paragraphs 184 through 201 above :

Penalty Per Violation Per Day

$1,000 1st through 14th Day Period of Noncompliance

$2,000 15th through 30th Day

$3,000 31st Day and beyond

203. The following stipula ted penalties shall accrue per violation per Day for

Defendants’ failure to comp l y with any other requirement of this Consent Decree not specifically

referenced in Paragraphs 184 through 20 2 within the specified time established by or approved

under this C onsent Decree:

Penalty Per Violation Per Day Period of Noncompliance

$ 7 50 1st through 14th Day

$ 1, 500 15th through 30th Day

$3,000 31st Day and beyondDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 133

- 204. S tipulated penalties under this Section shall begin to accrue on the Day after

performance is d ue or on the Day a violation occurs, whichever is applicable, and shall continue

to accrue until performance is satisfactorily completed or until the violation ceases. Stipulated

penalties shall accrue simultaneously for separate violations of this Consen t Decree , but only one

stipulated penalty may be assessed per violation in accordance with Paragraphs 184 through 201

.
Any stipulated penalty shall be assessed only to the Defendant that is obligated to perform the

work or obligation pursuant to this Cons ent Decree.

205. Defendants shall pay stipulated penalties to the Plaintiffs within thirty ( 30 ) Days

of a written demand by either Plaintiff. Defendants shall pay fifty (50) percent of the total

stipulated penalty amount due to the United States and fifty (50) percent to the State , with the

exception of stipulated penalties paid pursuant to Paragraph 196 ( Modified Transportation AOC )

,
which shall be paid entirely to the United States. Except for penalties involving the Modified

Transportation AOC, the Plaintif f making a demand for payment of a stipulated penalty shall

simultaneously send a copy of the demand to the other Plaintiff.

206. Either Plaintiff may in the unreviewable exercise of its discretion, reduce or waive

stipulated penalties otherwise d ue it under this Consent Decree.

207. Stipulated penalties shall continue to accrue as provided in Paragraph 20 4 , during

any Dispute Resolution, but need not be paid until the following:

a. If the dispute is resolved by agreement or by a decision of EPA or the State

that is not appealed to the Court, Defendant s shall pay accrued penalties determined to be

ow ed , together with interest, to the United States or the State within thirty ( 30 ) Days ofDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 134

- the effective date of the agreement or the receipt of EPA ’ s or the State ’ s decisio n or

order.

b. If the dispute is appealed to the Court and the United States or the State

prevails in whole or in part, Defendant s shall pay all accrued penalties determined by the

Court to be ow ed , together with interest, within sixty ( 60 ) Days of receiving the Court ’ s

decision or order, except as provided in Subparagraph 207. c, below.

c. If any Party appeals the District Court ’ s decision, Defendant s shall pay all

accrued penalties determined to be ow ed , together with interest, within fifteen ( 15 ) Days

of receiv ing the final appellate court decision.

208. Obligations Prior to the Effective Date

209. Defendant s shall pay stipulated penalties owing to the United States in the manner

set forth and with the confirmation notices required by Paragraph 11 , except that the transmittal

letter shall state that the payment is for stipulate d penalties and shall state for which violation(s)

the penalties are being paid. Defendant s shall pay stipulated penalties owing to the State in the

manner set forth in Paragraph 13

. The checks and the signed Consent Decree shall be mailed to: . Upon the Effective Date of this Consent

Decree, the stipulated penalty provisions of this Decree shall be retroactively enforceable with

regard to any and all violations of this Consent Decree that have occurred between the Lodging

Date and the Effective Date of the Consent Decree, provided that stipulated penalties that may

have accrued prior to the Effective Date may not be collected unless and until this Consent

Decree is entered by the Court.

Collecti ons Specialist Office of the Attorney GeneralDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 135

- P.O. Box 899 Jefferson City, MO 65102

- 0899

210. If Defendant s fail to pay stipulated penalties according to the terms of this

Consent Decree, Defendant s shall be liable for interest on such penalties, as provided for in

28 U.S.C. § 1961, accruing as of the date payment became due. Nothing in this Paragraph shall

be construed to limit the United States or the State from seeking any remedy otherwise provided

by law for Defendants ’ failure to pay any stipula ted penalties.

211. Subject to the provisions of Section XXI (Effect of Settlement/Reservation of

Rights) of this Consent Decree , the stipulated penalties provided for in this Consent Decree shall

be in addition to any other rights, remedies, or sanctions avail able to the United States or the

State for Defendants ’ violation of this Consent Decree or applicable law. Where a violation of

this Consent Decree is also a violation of relevant statutory or regulatory requirements

,

Defendant s shall be allowed a credit for any stipulated penalties paid against any statutory

penalties imposed for such violation.

XVIII

.

212. “ Force majeure, ” for purposes of this Consent Decree, is defined as any event

arising from causes beyond the c ontrol of Defendant s , of any entity controlled by Defendant s , or

of Defendants ’ contractors, that delays or prevents the performance of any obligation under this

Consent Decree despite Defendants ’ best efforts to fulfill the obligation. The requirement th at

Defendant s exercise “ best efforts to fulfill the obligation ” includes using best efforts to anticipate

any potential force majeure event and best efforts to address the effects of any such event (a) as it

is occurring and (b) after it has occurred to pr event or minimize any resulting delay to the FORCE MAJEUREDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 136

- greatest extent possible. “ Force Majeure ” does not include Defendants ’ financial inability to

perform any obligation under this Consent Decree.

213. If any event occurs or has occurred that may delay the performa nce of any

obligation under this Consent Decree, whether or not caused by a force majeure event,

Defendant s shall provide notice orally or by electronic or facsimile transmission to EPA and

MDNR , within seventy

- two ( 72 ) hours of when Defendant s first knew that the event might cause

a delay. Within seven (7) Days thereafter, Defendant s shall provide in writing to EPA and the

State an explanation and description of the reasons for the delay; the anticipated duration of the

delay; all actions taken or to be t aken to prevent or minimize the delay; a schedule for

implementation of any measures to be taken to prevent or mitigate the delay or the effect of the

delay; Defendants ’ rationale for attributing such delay to a force majeure event if it intends to

assert such a claim; and a statement as to whether, in the opinion of Defendant s , such event may

cause or contribute to an endangerment to public health, welfare or the environment. Defendant s

shall include with any notice all available documentation supporting the claim that the delay was

attributable to a force majeure. Failure to comply with the above requirements shall preclude

Defendant s from asserting any claim of force majeure for that event for the period of time of such

failure to comply, and for any ad ditional delay caused by such failure. Defendant s shall be

deemed to know of any circumstance of which Defendant s , any entity controlled by Defendant s ,

or Defendants ’ contractors knew or should have known.

214. If EPA , after a reasonable opportunity for r evie w and comment by the State,

agrees that the delay or anticipated delay is attributable to a force majeure event, the time forDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 137

- performance of the obligations under this Consent Decree that are affected by the force majeure

event will be extended by EPA , aft er a reasonable opportunity for r eview and comment by the

State, for such time as is necessary to complete those obligations. An extension of the time for

performance of the obligations affected by the force majeure event shall not, of itself, extend the

time for performance of any other obligation. EPA will notify Defendant s in writing of the

length of the extension, if any, for performance of the obligations affected by the force majeure

event.

215. If EPA , after a reasonable opportunity for r eview and com ment by the State, does

not agree that the delay or anticipated delay has been or will be caused by a force majeure event,

EPA will notify Defendant s in writing of its decision.

216. If Defendant s elect to invoke the dispute resolution procedures set forth in Section

XIX (Dispute Resolution), t hey shall do so no later than fifteen ( 15 ) Days after receipt of EP A’ s

notice. In any such proceeding, Defendant s shall have the burden of demonstrating by a

preponderance of the evidence that the delay or anticipated d elay has been or will be caused by a

force majeure event, that the duration of the delay or the extension sought was or will be

warranted under the circumstances, that best efforts were exercised to avoid and mitigate the

effects of the delay, and that Def endant s complied with the requirements of Paragraphs 212 and

213 , above. If Defendant s carry this burden, the delay at issue shall be deemed not to be a

violation by Defendant s of the affected obligation of this Consent Decree identified to EPA and

the Co urt.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 138

- XIX

.

217. Unless otherwise expressly provided for in this Consent Decree, the dispute

resolution procedures of this Section shall be the exclusive mechanism to resolve disputes arising

under or with resp ect to this Consent Decree. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

218. Informal Dispute Resolution

219. . Any dispute subject to Dispute Resolution under

this Consent Decree shall first be the subject of informal negotiations. The dispute shall be

considered to have arisen when Defendant s send the U nited States and the State a written Notice

of Dispute. Such Notice of Dispute shall state clearly the matter in dispute. The period of

informal negotia tions shall not exceed twenty ( 20 ) Days from the date the dispute arises, unless

that period is modif ied by written agreement. If the Parties cannot resolve a dispute by informal

negotiations, then the position advanced by the United States and the State shall be considered

binding unless, within twenty ( 20 ) Days after the conclusion of the informal nego tia tion period,

Defendant s invoke formal dispute resolution procedures as set forth below.

Formal Dispute Resolution

220. The Plaintiffs shall serve their Statement of Position within sixty ( 60 ) Days of

receipt of Defendants ’ Statement of Position. The Plaintiffs’ Statement of Position shall include, . Defendant s shall invoke formal dispute resolu tion

procedures, within the time period provided in the preceding Paragraph, by serving on the United

States and the State a written Statement of Position regarding the matter in dispute. The

Statement of Position shall include, but need not be limited to, any factual data, analysis, or

opinion supporting Defendants ’ position and any supportin g documentation relied upon by

Defendant s

.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 139

- but need not be limited to, an y factual data, analysis, or opinion supporting that position and any

supporting documentation relied upon by the Plaintiffs . The Plaintiffs’ Statement of Position

shall be binding on Defendant s , unless Defendant s file a motion for judicial review of the dispute

in accordance with the following Paragraph.

221. Defendant s may seek judicial review of the dispute by filing with the Court and

serving on the Plaintiffs , in accordance with Section XXIII (Notices) of this Consent Decree , a

motion requesting judicial resolution of the dispute. The motion must be filed within ten ( 10 )

Days of receipt of the Plaintiffs’ Statement of Position pursuant to the preceding Paragraph. The

motion shall contain a written statement of Defendants ’ position on the matter in disput e,

including any supporting factual data, analysis, opinion, or documentation, and shall set forth the

relief requested and any schedule within which the dispute must be resolved for orderly

implementation of the Consent Decree.

222. The United States and the S tate shall respond to Defendants ’ motion within the

time period allowed by the Local Rules of this Court. Defendant s may file a reply memorandum,

to the extent permitted by the Local Rules.

223.

a. Standard of Review

Disputes Concerning Matters Accorded Record Re view . Except as

otherwise provided in this Consent Decree, in any dispute brought pursuant to the formal

dispute resolution procedures of this Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of this Consent

Decree, pertaining to the adequacy of the performance of the St ream Mitigation Project

work undertaken pursuant to Section XIV (Additional Injunctive Relief) of this ConsentDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 140

- Decree and the Remedial Action work undertaken pursuant to Section IX (Site

Remediation

– Herculaneum) of this Consent Decree , Defendant s shall h ave the burden

of demonstrating, based on the administrative record, that the position of the United

States and/or the State is arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law.

b. Other Disputes

224. The invocation of dispute resolution procedures under this Section shall not, by

itself, extend, postpone, or affect in any way any obligation of Defendant s under this Consent

Decree, unless and until final resolution of the dispute so provides. Stipulated penalties with

respect to the disputed matter shall continue to accrue from the first Day of noncompliance, but

payment shall be stayed pendi ng resolution of the dispute as provided in Paragraph 207 . If

Defendant s do not prevail on the disputed issue, stipulated penalties may be assessed by

Plaintiffs and , if assessed, shall be paid as provided in Section XVII (Stipulated Penalties). . Except as otherwise provided in this Consent Decree, in

any other judicial proceeding brought pursuant to the formal dispute resolution

procedures of this Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of this Consent Decree , Defendant s

shall be ar the burden of demonstrating that their position clearly complies wi th and

furthers the objectives of this Consent De cree and the relevant statutes and that

Defendants are entitled to relief under applicable law. The United States and the State

reserve the ir right to argue that their position is reviewable only on the adm inistrative

record and must be upheld unless arbitrary and capricious or otherwise not in accordance

with law.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 141

- 225. As part of the resolution of any dispute under this Section, in appropriate

circumstances the disputing Parties may agree, or this Court may order, an extension or

modification of the schedule for the completion of the work required under this Consent Decree.

XX

.

226. The United States , the State, and their representatives, including attorneys,

contractors, and consultants, shall have the right of entry into any facility covered b y this Consent

Decree, at all reasonable times, upon presentation of credentials, to: INFORMATION COLLECTION AND RETENTION

a. monitor the progress of activities required under this Consent Decree;

b. verify any data or information submitted to the United States or the State

in accordance with the t erms of this Consent Decree;

c. obtain samples and, upon request, splits of any samples taken by

Defendant s or their representatives, contractors, or consultants;

d. obtain documentary evidence, including photographs and similar data; and

e. assess Defendants ’ com pliance with this Consent Decree.

227. Upon request, Defendant s shall provide EPA and the State or their authorized

representatives splits of any samples taken by Defendant s pursuant to this Consent Decree . Upon

request, EPA and the State shall provide Defend ant s splits of any samples taken by EPA or the

State pursuant to this Consent Decree

.

228. Until five years after the termination of this Consent Decree, Defendant s shall

retain, and shall instruct its contractors and agents to preserve, all non

- identical copie s of all

documents, records, or other information (including documents, records, or other information inDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 142

- electronic form) in its or its contractors ’ or agents ’ possession or control, or that come into its or

its contractors ’ or agents ’ possession or contro l, and that relate in any manner to Defendants ’

performance of its obligations under this Consent Decree. This information retention

requirement shall apply regardless of any contrary corporate or institutional policies or

procedures. At any time during this information retention period, upon request by the United

States or the State , Defendant s shall provide copies of any documents, records, or other

information required to be maintained under this Paragraph.

229. At the conclusion of the information retenti on period provided in the preceding

Paragraph, Defendant s shall notify the United States and the State at least ninety ( 90 ) Days prior

to the destruction of any documents, records, or other information subject to the requirements of

the preceding Paragraph and, upon request by the United States or the State , Defendant s shall

deliver any such documents, records, or other information to EPA or the State . Defendant s may

assert that certain documents, records, or other information is privileged under the attor ney

- client

privilege or any other privilege recognized by federal law. If Defendant s assert such a privilege,

it shall provide the following: (1) the title of the document, record, or information; (2) the date

of the document, record, or information; (3) the name and title of each author of the document,

record, or information; (4) the name and title of each addressee and recipient; (5) a description of

the subject of the document, record, or information; and (6) the privilege asserted by Defendant s

.

How ever, no documents, records, or other information created or generated pursuant to the

requirements of this Consent Decree shall be withheld on grounds of privilege.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 143

- 230. Defendant s may also assert that information required to be provided under this

Section is protected as CBI under 40 C.F.R. Part 2. As to any information that Defendant s seek

to protect as CBI, Defendant s shall follow the procedures set forth in 40 C.F.R. Part 2.

231. This Consent Decree in no way limits or affects any right of entry and inspection

,
or any right to obtain information, held by the United States or the State pursuant to applicable

federal or state laws, regulations, or permits, nor does it limit or affect any duty or obligation of

Defendant s to maintain documents, records, or other in formation imposed by applicable federal

or state laws, regulations, or permits.

XXI

. EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT/RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

232. Definitions

a. “Applicable NSR/PSD Requirements” shall mean: . For purposes of this Section XXI (Effect of Settlemen t/Reservation of

Rights), the following definitions apply:

i. PSD requirements at Part C of Subchapter I of the CAA , 42 U.S.C.

§ 7475, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. §§ 52.21 and

51.166, as amended from time to time;

ii. “Plan Requirements for Non

- Attainment Areas” at Part D of

Subchapter I of the CAA , 42 U.S.C. §§ 7502

- 7503, and the regulations

promulgated thereunder at 40 C.F.R. §§ 51.165 (a) and (b); 40 C.F.R. Part 51,

Appendix S; and 40 C. F.R. § 52.24, as amended from time to time;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 144

- iii. Any Title V regulations that implement, adopt, or incorporate the

specific regulatory requirements identified above, as amended from time to time;

and

iv. Any applicable state or local laws or regulations that impl ement,

adopt, or incorporate the specific federal regulatory requirements identified above

regardless of whether such state or local laws or regulations have been formally

approved by EPA as being a part of the applicable state implementation plan.

b. “Appl icable NSPS Subparts A and R Requirements” shall mean the

standards, monitoring, testing, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, found at

40 C.F.R. §§ 60.180 through 60.186 (Subpart R), relating to a particular pollutant and a

particular affected facili ty, and the corollary general requirements found at 40 C.F.R.

§§ 60.1 through 60.19 (Subpart A) that are applicable to any affected facility covered by

Subpart R.

233. This Consent Decree resolves the civil claims of the United States and the State

for the viol ations alleged in the Complaint filed in this action through the Lodging Date

. The

claims so resolved include claims for:

a. Liability Resolution Regarding the Applicable NSR/PSD Requirements

.
With respect to emissions of SO 2 

### and lead from the Herculaneum Le ad Smelter Sinter

Machine, Sinter Bed, Sintering Machine Discharge End, and Sulfuric Acid Plant units

,
entry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability of Doe Run to the Plaintiffs

for alleged violations of the Applicable NSR/PSD Requirements resulting fromDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 145

- construction or modification from the date of the pre

- Lodging construction or

modification up to the Lodging Date;

b. Liability Resolution Regarding the Applicable NSPS Requirements

c. . With

respect to emissions of SO 2 

### from the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Sinter Machine, Sinter

Bed, and Sintering Machine Discharge End units , entry of this Consent Decree shall

resolve all civil liability of Doe Run to the Plaintiffs for alleged violations of the

Applicable NSPS Subparts A and R Requirements from the date that claims of the

Plaintiffs resulting from pre

- Lodging construction or modification (including

reconstruction) accrued up to the Lodging Date ;

Liability Resolution Regarding Additional CAA Claims Alleged

Concerning the Herculaneum Lead Smelter

. E n try of this Consent Decree shall resolve

all civil liability of Doe Run to the Plaintiffs for the following alleged past violations : (i)

alleged violations of Title V of the CAA based on an alleged past failure to comply with

the 2007 Consent Judgment inc orporated by reference into Doe Run’s Title V/Part 70

Operating Permit No. OP2006

- 011B as Condition PW008 ; (ii) alleged v iolations of

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ( “ NESHAPs ” ) for Primary

Lead Smelters, set forth at 40 C.F.R. Par t 63, Subpart TTT based on an alleged past

failure to submit required reports ; and (iii) violations of any corresponding state or local

laws or regulations arising out of any acts or omissions by Doe Run which formed the

basis for such alleged CAA violatio ns ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 146

- d. Liability Resolution Regarding Additional Claims Alleged Concerning the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter . Entry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability

of Doe Run to the Plaintiffs for the following alleged past violations: (i) alleged

viola tions of reporting requirements under CERCLA Section 103, 42 U.S.C. § 9603, and

EPCRA Section 304, 42 U.S.C. § 11004 based on an alleged release on or about March

22, 2005; (ii) alleged violations of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.
, as alleged in

inspection reports compiled by EPA following a RCRA inspection conducted at the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter in June 2005 and MDNR following a RCRA inspection

conducted at Herculaneum in May 2009, based on alleged past unauthorized treatment

storage, and/or disposal of certain hazardous waste at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter,

failure to comply with applicable hazardous waste generator requirements at the

Herculaneum Lead Smelter , and failure to comply with applicable used oil management

requirements at the Herculaneum Lea d Smelter ; (iii) alleged violations of RCRA, 42

U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.

e. , based on violations alleged in inspection reports compiled by EPA

following a RCRA inspection conducted at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter in June 2005

and MDNR following a RCRA inspection conducted at Herculaneum in May 2009 ; and

(i v ) violations of any corresponding state or local laws or regulations arising out of any

acts or omissions by Doe Run which formed the basis for such alleged CERCLA,

EPCRA , and RCRA violations ;

Liability Resolut ion Regarding Claims Alleged at the Buick Mine/Mill

.

E ntry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability of Doe Run to the PlaintiffsDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 147

- for the following alleged past violations : (i) alleged violations of Title V of the CAA and

the Missouri SIP based on an alleged past failure to submit accurate e mission s i nventory

q uestionnaires for Buick Mine/Mill and to comply with the Buick Mine/Mill Part 70

Operating Permit No. OP2003

- 011 requirement s to install pressure drop monitors for

emission units EU00 20 and EU0030 and notify the State when the wet cyclone s for

emission unit EU0010 were removed in 2005 ; (ii) alleged violations of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.

§ 6901 et seq.
, as alleged in inspection reports compiled by EPA following a multi

- media

inspection conducted at Buick Mine/Mill in February 2006, based on alleged past

unauthorized treatment storage, and/or disposal of certain hazardous waste at Buick

Mine/Mill, unauthorized transportation of hazardous waste from Buick Mine/Mill to

Buick Resource Recycling Facil ity, failure to comply with applicable hazardous waste

generator requirements at Buick Mine/Mill

, failure to complete hazardous waste

determinations for all solid waste generated at Buick Mine/Mill, and failure to comply

with applicable used oil management requirements at Buick Mine/Mill ; (iii) alleged

violations of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq. , t he CWA 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq. , the

CAA 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq., and EPCRA Section 3 13

, 42 U.S.C. § 110 23 based on

violations alleged in inspection reports co mpiled by EPA following a multi

- media

inspection conducted at Buick Mine/Mill in February 2006; and (i v ) violations of any

corresponding state or local laws or regulations arising out of any acts or omissions by

Doe Run which formed the basis for such alle ged CAA , CWA, EPCRA, and RCRA

violations;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 148

- f. Liability Resolution Regarding RCRA Claims Alleged at Buick Resource

Recycling Facilit y

. Entry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability of

Defendants to the Plaintiffs for the following alleged p ast violations: (i) alleged violations

of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.
, as alleged in inspection reports compiled by EPA

following a RCRA inspection conducted at the Buick Resource Recycling Facility in

March 2009 and by MDNR following RCRA inspections c onducted at the Buick

Resource Recycling Facility in September, November, and December of 2009, based on a

failure to properly label hazardous waste containers at the Buick Resource Recycling

Facility, a failure to complete hazardous waste determinations f or all solid waste

generated at the Buick Resource Recycling Facility, and a failure to comply with Buick

Resource Recycling Facility Hazardous Waste Management Facility, Part I Permit

Number MOD059200089 Special Permit Conditions I.G.1, III.B.3, III.C.1, III.C.5,

III.C.6.a, III.C .8.a, III.C.8.c, III.C.9, III.C.12, VI.A., VI.C.10, Schedule of Compliance

Provision I.F , and the r equirement to construct and operate the facility in accordance with

section F.3.5 (Leak Detection Liquid Collection and Removal Syst em) of the final permit

application ; (ii) alleged violations of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq. , based on

violations alleged in inspection reports compiled by EPA following a RCRA inspection

conducted at the Buick Resource Recycling Facility in March 2009 a nd by MDNR

following RCRA inspections conducted at the Buick Resource Recycling Facility in

September, November, and December of 2009; and (i i i) violations of any correspondingDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 149

- state or local laws or regulations arising out of any acts or omissions by Doe Run which

formed the basis for such alleged RCRA violations ;

g. Liability Resolution Regarding CWA Claims Alleged at Several Facilities:

Entry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability of Defendants to the Plaintiffs

for the following alleged past violations: (i) alleged past violations of the CWA 33 U.S.C.

§ 1251 et seq.
, at Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Buick Mine/Mill, Buick Resource Recycling

Facility, Fletcher Mine/Mill, Glover Lead Smelter, Herculaneum Lead Smelter,

Viburnum Mine/Mill, Viburnu m #35 Mine/Mill, West Fork Unit Facility based on

alleged discharges of pollutants in excess of allowable permit limits to navigable waters

of the United States and alleged failures to conduct required effluent monitoring and/or

submit complete accurate DM Rs, as listed in the table of alleged violations attached as

Appendix K ( Clean Water Act Alleged Effluent Violations and Alleged WET

Violations ) ; (ii) alleged past violations of the CWA 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.
, based on

violations alleged in inspection re ports compiled by EPA following CW A inspections

conducted at Brushy Creek Mine/Mill in August 2006, Buick Mine/Mill in February and

March 2005, Fletcher Mine/Mill in August 2006, Glover Lead Smelter and Doe

Run/ASARCO Slag Piles in July 2008, Herculaneum L ead Smelter in March 2007, and

West Fork Unit Facility in February 2005 and by MDNR following CWA inspections

conducted at Glover Lead Smelter and West Fork Unit Facility in April 2010 ; and ( i ii)

violations of any corresponding state or local laws or regul ations arising out of any acts or

omissions by Doe Run which formed the basis for such alleged CWA violations;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 150

- h. Liability Resolution Regarding C l aims Alleged in Certain NOV s/FOV s

234. .
Entry of this Consent Decree shall resolve all civil liability of Doe Run to the Plaintiffs

for the alleged past violations set forth in : (i) the March 9, 2010, Notice of Violation and

Finding of Violation EPA issued to Doe Run alleging violations of the CAA and the

Missouri SIP at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter and the Buick Mine/M ill ; and (ii) the

January 11, 2008 Notice of Violation MDNR issue to Doe Run alleged violations of the

CAA NESHAPs at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter.

Claims Based on Violations in EPA’s September 2008 Transportation AOC

Inspection Report

235. The Plaintiffs covenant not to sue Defendants for ci vil claims that could be

asserted for each violation of an effluent limit, monitoring or reporting requirement where there . Satisfaction of t he requirements in Section IV (Civil Penalty) and Section XI

(Transportation Order) of this Consent Decree shall resolve Doe Run’s civil and administrative

liability to the United States arising out of the violations alleged in the Complaint as specified i n

EPA’s September 2008 Transportation AOC Inspection Report and attachments thereto

.
Notwithstanding the resolution of liability in Paragraphs 2 33 and 2 34 , the release of liability by

the United States to Doe Run for claims arising out of the alleged viol ations specified in EPA’s

September 2008 Transportation AOC Inspection Report shall be rendered void if Doe Run

materially fails to comply with the obligations and requirements of Section IV (Civil Penalty)

and Section XI (Transportation Order) of this Con sent Decree; provided, however, that the

release in this Paragraph shall not be rendered void if Doe Run remedies such failure and pays

any stipulated penalties due as a result of such material failure.DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 151

- is an alternative effluent limit, monitoring or reporting requirement established pursuant to

Section VII, Subsection I (Schedule for Compliance W ith Missouri State Operating Permits) of

this Consent Decree and Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance

Deadlines) for the CWA Facilities, as may be modified pursuant to Paragraph 104 above , that

occurs from the Lodgi ng Date of this Consent Decree until the deadlines set for th pursuant to

Section VII, Subsection I (Schedule for Compliance W ith Missouri State Operating Permits) and

Appendix B ( MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadlines) , when

Defenda nts are in compliance with that alternative effluent limit, monitoring

, or reporting

requirement.

236. The Plaintiffs reserve, and this Consent Decree is without prejudice to, all rights

against Defendants with respect to all matters not expressly included within Plaintiffs ’ covenant

not to sue. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Consent Decree, the United States and

State reserve all rights against Defendants with respect to:

a. Claims based on a failure by Defendants to meet any requirement of th is

Consent Decree;

b. Criminal liability; and

c. Liability for damages for injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural

resources, and for the costs of any natural resource damage assessments.

237. The resolution of the Plaintiff s’ civil claims as set forth in Paragraphs 232 through

2 33 is expressly conditioned upon substantial completion and satisfactory performance of the

requirements set forth in this Consent Decree , including the Appendices hereto

. The UnitedDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 152

- States reserves all legal and equitable remedie s available to enforce the provisions of this

Consent Decree independently and jointly with the State, except as expressly stated in Paragraphs

232 through 235. With the exception of the obligations set forth in Section XI (Transportation

Order) of this C onsent Decree, the State reserves all legal and equitable remedies available to

enforce the provisions of this Consent Decree independently and jointly with the United States,

except as expressly stated in Paragraphs 232 through 235. This Consent Decree s hall not be

construed to limit the rights of the United States or the State to obtain penalties or injunctive

relief under the CAA, CWA, RCRA , EPCRA, CERCLA, or implementing regulations, or under

other federal or state laws, regulations, or permit conditio ns, except as expressly specified in

Paragraph s 232 through 23 5

.

238. The Plaintiffs further reserve all legal and equitable remedies to address any

imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or the environment

arising at, or posed by the Doe Run Facilities , whether related to the violations addressed in this

Consent Decree or otherwise.

239. In any subsequent administrative or judicial proceeding initiated by the United

States or the State for injunctive relief, civil penalties, or other appropriate r elief relating to the

Doe Run Facilities subject to this Consent Decree , Defendant s shall not assert, and may not

maintain, any defense or claim based upon the principles of waiver, res judicata, collateral

estoppel, issue preclusion, claim pr eclusion, claim

- splitting, or other defenses based upon any

contention that the claims raised by the United States or the State in the subsequent proceedingDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 153

- were or should have been brought in the instant case, except with respect to claims that have

been specifically resolved pursuant to Paragraph s 23 3 through 2 3 5 of this Section.

240. This Consent Decree is not a permit, or a modification of any permit, under any

federal, State, or local laws or regulations. Defendants are responsible for achieving and

mai ntaining complete compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws, regulations,

and permits; and Defendants ’ compliance with this Consent Decree shall be no defense to any

action commenced pursuant to any such laws, regulations, or permits, e xcept as set forth herein.

The United States and the State do not, by their consent to the entry of this Consent Decree,

warrant or aver in any manner that Defendants ’ compliance with any aspect of this Consent

Decree will result in compliance with provis ions of the CAA, CWA, CAA, RCRA, CERCLA, or

EPCRA , or with any other provisions of federal, State, or local laws, regulations, or permits.

241. Defendants hereby relinquish their rights under State and federal law to appeal

and/or challenge any provision in a CWA Facility MSOP regarding the matters address ed by, and

time periods of permit issuance covered in

, Section VII ( Clean Water Act Permits: Resolution of

Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and Compliance Deadlines ) above, but reserve any and

all right s to request a modification of the provisions of any CWA Facility MSOP not addressed

by Section VII ( Clean Water Act Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit

Appeals and Compliance Deadlines ) above, and to request a modification of, or appeal and/or

contest of , the provisions of any Future MSOP not addressed by Section VII (Clean Water Act

Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and Compliance Deadlines)DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 154

- above, and to appeal and/or contest the provisions of any CWA Facil ity MSOP issued after the

date of Termination of this Consent Decree pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination)

.

242. Defendants shall not object to MDNR’s jurisdiction to issue new MSOP s for the

CWA Facilities. Defendants nevertheless reserve any and all rights to object to and/or contest

the substantive requirements of any MSOP to be issued by MDNR following termination of this

Consent Decree pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination) or to appeal or challenge any provision

of a MSOP for a MSOP not addressed by the provisions of Section VII ( Clean Water Act

Permits: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and Compliance Deadlines )

.

243. Except as provided in Paragraphs 239, 241, and 242

, Defendants reserve any

defenses or arguments that may be available to it in resisting or defending against any action or

proceeding that may be brought by the United States or the State under any of the rights or

authorities reserved by the Plaintiffs under this Consent Decree or otherwise.

244. This Consent Decree does not limit or affect the rights of Defendant s or of the

United States or the State against any third parties, not party to this Consent Decree, nor does it

limit the rights of third parties, not party to this Consent Decree, against Defendant s , except as

otherwise p rovided by law.

245. This Consent Decree shall not be construed to create rights in, or grant any cause

of action to, any third party not party to this Consent Decree.

XXII

.

246. The Parties shall bear their own costs of this action, in cluding attorneys ’ fees,

except that the United States and the State shall be entitled to collect the costs (including COSTSDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 155

- attorneys ’ fees) incurred in any action necessary to collect any portion of the civil penalty or any

stipulated penalties due but not pai d by Defendant s

.

X X III

.

247. Unless otherwise specified herein, whenever notifications, submissions, or

communications , hereafter referred to generally as “notices”, are required by this Consent

Decree, they shall be made in wr iting and addressed as follows: NOTICES

To the United States (in addition to the EPA addresses below) :

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section Environment and Natural Resources Division U.S. Department of Justice P.O. Box 7611 Ben Franklin Station Washington, D. C. 20044

- 7611 Re: DOJ No. 90

- 5

- 2

- 1

- 0370/1

To EPA Chief, Waste Enforcement and Materials Management Branch :

Air and Waste Management Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, KS 66101 Facsimile: 913

- 551

- 7201

and

Office of Regional Counsel U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, KS 66101 Facsimile: 913

- 551

- 7925

With electronic copy to: Sanders.Steven@epa.gov and Toensing.Donald @epa.govDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 156

- To the State or MDNR Director, Di vision of Environmental Quality :

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 1101 Riverside Drive P.O. Box 899 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Facsimile: (573) 751

- 9277

With electronic copy to: leanne.tippett.mosby@dnr.mo.gov and betsy.crawford@dnr.mo.gov

To Defendant s Stacy Stotts :

Partner Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP 1201 Walnut Street, Suite 2900 Kansas City, MO 64106

- 2150

Louis J. Marucheau The Doe Run Company V ice P resident Law and Assistant Secretary 1801 Park 270 Drive, Suite 300 St. Louis, Missouri 63 146

Aaron W. Miller The Doe Run Company Environmental Management Coordinator 881 Main St. Herculaneum, MO 63048

With electronic copy to: sstotts@stinson.com

, lmarucheau@doerun.com , and amiller@doerun.comDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 157

- 248. Any Party may, by written notice to the other P arties, change its designated notice

recipient or notice address provided above.

249. U nless otherwise provided in this Consent Decree or by mutual agreement of the

Parties in writing , all notices submitted pursuant to this Section shall be sent by certified

re gistered mail and deemed submitted upon mailing

.

XXIV

.

250. The Effective Date of this Consent Decree shall be the date upon which this

Consent Decree is entered by the Court or a motion to enter the Consent Decree is granted,

whichever occurs first, as recorded on the Court ’ s docket ; provided, however, that Defendants

hereby agree that they shall be bound to perform duties scheduled to occur prior to the Effective

Date. In the event the United States withdraws or w ithholds consent to this Consent Decree

before entry, or the Court declines to enter the Consent Decree, then the preceding requirement to

perform duties scheduled to occur before the Effective Date shall terminate. EFFECTIVE DATE

XXV

.

251. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this case until termination of this Consent

Decree, for the purpose of resolving disputes arising under this Decree or entering orders

modifying this Decree, pursuant to Sections XIX (Dispute Resolution) and XXVI (Modification)

,
or effectuating or enforcing compliance with the terms of this Decree. RETENTION OF JURISDICTIONDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 158

- XXVI

.

252. The terms of this Consent Decree, including any attached appendices, may be

modified onl y by a subsequent written agreement signed by all of the Parties. Where the

modification constitutes a material change to this Decree, it shall be effective only upon approval

by the Court. For purposes of this Consent Decree, non

- material modifications shall include, but

are not limited to the frequency of reporting obligations and modifications to schedules that do

not extend final dates for compliance with emissions limitations or effluent limitations, provided

that such changes are agreed upon in writ ing between EPA and MDNR. A Party’s refusal to

agree to a modification of this Consent Decree shall not be subject to dispute resolution or

judicial review. MODIFICATION

253. Application for construction grants, State Revolving Loan Funds, or any other

grants or loans, or other delays caused by inadequate facility planning or plans and specifications

on the part of Defendants shall not be cause for extension of any required compliance date in this

Consent Decree.

XXVII

.

254. TERMINATION

Partial Term ination

a. .

Partial Termination f o r Shorter Term Obligations

. After Defendants have

completed the requirements of Section V (Compliance Requirements: Clean Air Act),

Section VI (Compliance Requirements: Clean Water Act), Section VII (Clean Water Act

Permi ts: Resolution of Missouri State Operating Permit Appeals and Compliance

Deadlines), Section VIII (Compliance Requirements: RCRA)

, the Enclosure of LeadDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 159

- Concentrate Storage and Handling provisions in Section XIV (Additional Injunctive

Relief)

, Section XV ( Environmental Mitigation P rojects) , and the applicable provisions

of Section XIII (Compliance Requirements: Permits) ; have thereafter maintained

compliance with each of those requirements for a period of at least one year; and have

paid the civil penalty a nd any accrued stipulated penalties as required by this Consent

Decree, Defendants may serve upon the Plaintiffs a Request for Partial Termination,

stating that Defendants have satisfied those requirements, together with all necessary

supporting documentat ion

. If the United States, after consultation with the State, agrees

that the Decree may be partially terminated, the Part ies shall submit, for the Court’ s

approval, a joint stipulation terminating those provisions of the Decree.

b. Partial Termination f o r Longer Term Obligations . After Defendants have

completed the requirements of Section IX (Site Remediation

– Herculaneum), the

Herculaneum Financial Assurances provisions in Section X (Financial Assurance)

, and

the Stream Mitigation provisions in Section XIV (Additional Injunctive Relief); have

thereafter maintained compliance with each of those requirements for a period of at least

one year; have paid any accrued stipulated penalties as required by this Consent Decree ;

and have satisfied all of the requir ements for partial termination pursuant to Paragraph

25 4 .a , Defendants may serve upon the Plaintiffs a Request for Partial Termination, stating

that Defendants have satisfied those requirements, together with all necessary supporting

documentation. If the United States, after consultation with the State, agrees that theDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 160

- Decree may be partially terminated, the Parties shall submit, for the Court’s approval, a

joint stipulation terminating those provisions of the Decree.

255. Complete Termination

256. If the United States

, af ter consultation with the State, does not agree that the

Decree may be terminated as a whole or in part

, Defendant s may invoke Dispute Resolution

under Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of this Decree. However, Defendant s shall not seek

Dispute Resolution of any dispute regarding termination, under Paragraph 21 8 of Section XIX

(Dispute Resolution) , until one hundred twenty ( 120 ) Days after service of its Request for

Termination. . After Defend ant s ha ve completed the requirements of

Section s V through XI of this Decree, have complied with all other requirements of this Consent

Decree, including those relating to the projects required by Section s XIV (Additional Injunctive

Relief) and XV (Environ mental Mitigation Projects) of this Consent Decree

, and have paid the

civil penalty and any accrued stipulated penalties as required by this Consent Decree, Defendant s

may serve upon the Plaintiffs a Request for Complete Termination, stating that Defendant s have

satisfied those requirements, together with all necessary supporting documentation

. If the United

States, after consultation with the State, agrees that the Decree may be terminated in whole , the

Parties shall submit, for the Court = s approval, a jo int stipulation terminating the Decree

.

XXVIII.

257. This Consent Decree shall be lodged with the Court for a period of not less than

thirty ( 30 ) Days for public notice and comment in accordance with 28 C.F.R. § 50.7. The United

States reserves the right to withdraw or withhold its consent if the comments regarding the PUBLIC PARTICIPATIONDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 161

- Consent Decree disclose facts or considerations indicating that the Consent Decree is inappro

priate, improper, or inadequate. This Consent Decree is also subject to the opportunity for a

public meeting in the affected area req uirement in accordance with RCRA Section 7003(d),

42 U.S.C. § 6973(d) . Defendant s consent to entry of this Consent Dec ree without further notice

and agree not to withdraw from or oppose entry of this Consent Decree by the Court or to

challenge any provisi on of the Decree, unless the United States has notified Defendant s in

writing that it no longer supports entry of the Decree.

XXIX

.

258. Each undersigned representative of Defendant s, the State of Missouri

, and the

Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the

Department of Justice certifies that he or she is fully authorized to enter into the terms and

conditions of this Consent Decree and to execute and legally bind the Party he or she represents

to this document. SIGNATORIES/SERVICE

259. This Consent Decree may be signed in counterparts, and its validity shall not be

challenged on that basis. Defendant s agree to accept service of process by mail with respect to

all matters arising under or relating to this Consent Decree and to waive the formal service

requirements set forth in Rules 4 and 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and any

applicable Local Rules of this Court including, but not limited to, service of a summons.

XXX

.

260. This Consent Decree constitutes the final, complete, and exclusive agreement and

understanding among the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in the Decree and INTEGRAT IONDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 162

- supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, wh ether oral or written, concerning the

settle ment embodied herein. Other than deliverables that are subsequently submitted and

approved pursuant to this Decree, no other document, nor any representation, inducement,

agreement, understanding, or promise, c onstitutes any part of this Decree or the settlement it

represents, nor shall it be used in construing the terms of this Decree.

XXXI

.

261. Upon approval and entry of this Consent Decree by the Court, this Consent

Decree shall constitute a final judgment of the Court as to the United States

, the State, and

Defendant s

. FINAL JUDGMENT

XXX I I

. APPENDICES

262. The following appendices are attached to and part of this Consent Decree:

“ Appendix A ” is the spreadsheet f or tracking compliance with interim milestones ;

“Appendix B ” are the MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance

Deadlines ;

“Appendix C ” is the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (“SWPPP”) Guidance ;

“ Appendix D” are the tables listing the Res olution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean

Water Act Facility MSOPs ;

“Appendix E” is the Financial Assurance for Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ;

“Appendix F” is the Trust Agreement for the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility ;

“Appendix G” is the Financi al Assurance for the Mine/Mill Facilities ;

“Appendix H” is the E nclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling ;DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 163

- “Appendix I” is the Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation ; and

“Appendix J” is the Environmental Mitigation Projects;

“Appendix K” are the l ist s of Clean Water Act Alleged Effluent Violations and Alleged

WET Violations ; and

“Appendix L” is the Trust Agreement for Mine/Mill Facilities

.

Dated and entered this day of __________

__ , 2010

.

_______________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE Eastern District of MissouriDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 16 4

- FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

__________________________ IGNACIA S. MORENO Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Divisi on United States Department of Justice P.O. Box 7611 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044

- 7611

_______________________________ CYNTHIA M. FERGUSON Trial Attorney Environmental Enforcement Se ction Environment and Natural Resources Division United States Department of Justice P.O. Box 7611 Benjamin Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044

- 7611 Telephone: (202) 616

- 6560 Fax: (202) 514

- 4180 Email: cynthia.fe rguson@usdoj.gov

LOCAL COUNSEL:

RICHARD G. CALLAHAN United States Attorney Eastern District of Missouri

SUZANNE J. MOORE Assistant United States Attorney Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse 111 South 10th Street, 20th Floor St. Louis, Missouri 63102 Telephone: (314) 539

- 2200DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 165

- FOR THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY :

__________________________ CYNTH I A GILES Assistant Administrator Office of Enforcement and Com pliance Assurance United States Environmental Protection Agency

__________________________ ADAM M. KUSHNER Director, Office of Civil Enforcement Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance United States Environmental Prot ection AgencyDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 166

- FOR THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION 7 :

__________________________ KARL BROOKS Regional Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101

__________________________ DAVID COZAD Regional Counsel United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101

STEVEN L. SANDERS DAN A SKELLEY PATRICIA GILLISPIE MILLER SARA HERTZ WU Office of Regional Counsel United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 901 N. 5th Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101DRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 167

- FOR PLAINTIFF STATE OF MISSOURI :

CHRIS KOSTER Attorney General

_________________________________ KARA VALENTINE Assistant Attorney General Missouri Bar No. 40926 221 West High Street P.O. Box 899 Jefferson City, MO 65102 phone: (573) 751

- 3640 fax: (573) 751

- 8 796 Email: kara.valentine@ago.mo.govDRRC multi

- media Consent Decree



### - 168

- FOR THE MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES :

_________________________________ K IP S TE TZLER Acting Director P.O. Box 176 Jefferson City, MO 651028 / 10

/ 2010 Page 1 of 12 

### Appendix B

MSOP Alternative Effluent Limitations and Compliance Deadline s

Except as specifically stated below, compliance for purposes of stipulated penalties will be determined based on the provisions of the effective CWA Facility Missouri State Opera ting Permit ( MSOP )

.

± Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) T esting P rovisions For purposes of th is Consent Decree, the following “WET testing” provisions shall apply where noted :

1) Defendants shall conduct chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) tests at each CWA Fa cility on a semi annual basis in April or May and in October or November each year using grab or twenty

- four (24) hour composite samples , as set forth in the respective table s , below, and the testing methodology set forth in the effective CWA Facility MSOP

. 2) During the period specified: a) no stipulated penalties will accrue for failure of a chronic WET test limitation; b) accelerated chronic WET testing will not be triggered by chronic WET failures; c) neither a toxic ity identification evaluation (TIE) nor a toxi c ity reduction evaluation (TRE) will be required, although Defendants ’ implementation of the Underground Water Management Plan (UWMP) and/or Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) at each CWA Facility will address all appropriate investigative and analytical components of a TIE and TRE and the UWMP and/or SWMP reports will include information consistent with a TIE and TRE report ; and d) Defendants may suspend any TIE and/or TRE in progress as of the Lodging Date of the Consent Decree until completion of the UWMP and/or SWMP, as applicable.

No Discharge Provisions For purposes of this Consent Decree, the following conditions shall apply to all “no discharge” provisions set forth below :

1) Defendants shall monitor flow from each “no discharge” outfall by using an el ectronic monitoring and data recording device or through daily observations of a staff gage measuring the distance below the overflow. If a staff gage is used, Defendants sh all keep a daily written log for each outfall, which shall at a minimum include th e date, time, gage reading and initials of the person performing the observation. 2) Should there be a discharge at a “no discharge” outfall, Defendants shall, for each day during which a discharge occurs, keep a record of the approximate time at which discha rge began and ended and shall provide an estimate of the flow rate and the total flow/volume of the discharge based upon practicable best practices. Such information shall be included in the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) for the respective CWA Facilit y. 3) Practicable best practices for estimating the flow rate and total flow/volume of a discharge, pursuant to paragraph 2 above, shall include measures no less accurate than utilization of the following infrastructure and procedures for each outfall:8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 2 of 12 

### a) Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility 004: Flow shall be measured twice daily at the V

- notch weir at Sweetwater 004 when flowing. Depth of flow in the weir shall be converted to volume using equations found in the US Bureau of Reclamation Water Measurement Manua l, (1997). b) Glover Facility 006: Flow shall be measured twice daily at the low berm area for Glover 006 when flowing. Depth, width and velocity of flow in the weir shall be converted to volume using equations found in the US Bureau of Reclamation Wat er Measurement Manual, (1997). c) West Fork Unit Facility 003: Flow shall be measured twice daily from either a V

- notch weir or Parshall flume at the West Fork 003 outfall. The flume or weir shall be installed within ninety ( 90 ) days from the Date of Lo dging. d) West Fork Unit Facility 004: Flow shall be measured twice daily in the spillway using either the float method described in the US Bureau of Reclamation Water Measurement Manual, (1997) if flow exceeds safe wading depths (>1.5') or if depth of f low is sufficient (>4.0") a standard field flow meter shall be used to convert depth, width and velocity of flow to volume. The float method shall also be used for flow depths less than 4.0". 4) Defendants shall not utilize pumps or any other method or equip ment to cause a discharge or to increase the flow rate during a period of discharge.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 3 of 12 

### Brushy Creek Mine/Mill Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 001848 Issued: 2/26/2010 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 2/25/2015 Appeal File d: 3/26/2010 ; Suppleme nt to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 001

, 002

, 003 μg/L 417 256 once/month grab Three (3) years from th e latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 001 μg/L 1

, 500 750 once/month grab Three (3) years f rom the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Cadmium, Total Recoverable 002, 003 μg/L 100 50 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Copper, Total Recoverable 001

, 002, 003 μg/L 88 53 once/mon th grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 001 grab ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

Specific UWMP or approval of the

Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within four (4) Months of the Lodging Dat e and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 4 of 12 

### Buick Mine/Mill Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0002 003 Issued: 9/25/2009 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 9/24/2014 Appeal Filed : 10/23/2009 ; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 002 μg/L 562 263 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Spec ific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 002 μg/L 860 430 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- S pecific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 002 24

- hour composite ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

Speci fic UWMP or approval of the

Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within two (2) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 5 of 1 2 

### Buick Resource Recycling Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 000 0337 Issued: 8/23/2002 Modified: 2/23/2007 Expires: 8/22/2007

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadl ine

Lead, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 2.58

190 1.05

190 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 2012

Antimony, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day 6.900 4.600 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 2012

Total Suspended Solids 001 lbs/day 283 162 o nce/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

Ammonia as N (summer/winter) 001 mg/L 4.0 4.0 once/quarter

**** grab June 1, 201 2

Arsenic, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day 2.28 0.92 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

Cadmium Total Recoverable 001 μg/L 100 50 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

Copper, Total Recoverable 001 μg/L 88 44 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

Zinc, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 1.67

2

, 120 0.60

1

, 060 once/month 24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

Silver. T otal Recoverable 001 μg/L 20 9.8 once/ quarter

  24

- hour composite June 1, 201 2

WET testing

- chronic 001 24

- hour composite ± June 1, 201 2

SWPPP Completed within six (6) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

. 

### ** **Sample once per quarter in the months of February, May, August and November.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 6 of 12 

### Fletcher Mine / Mill Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0001 856 Issued: 11/13/2009 Modified: 7/ 28 /2010 Expires: 11/12/2014 Appeal Filed : 12/11/2009 ; First Ame nded Appeal Filed: 4/23/2010; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 001, 002, 003 μg/L 398 192 o nce/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Cadmium, Total Recoverable 001

, 002, 0 03 μg/L 54 26 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 001

, 002, 003 μg/L 379 188 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Copper, To tal Recoverable 001, 002, 003 μg/L 45 22 once/year grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 001 grab ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

Specific UWMP or approval of the

Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Co mpleted within four (4) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 7 of 12 

### Glover Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0001121 Issued: 3/23/2007 Expires: 3/22/2012 Appeal Filed : 4/20/2007 ; First Amended Appeal Filed: 4/ 14/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 003 lbs/day

μg/L μg/L 0

. 673

>8 cfs = 80 ≤ 8 cfs = 27 0.264

>8 cfs = 80 ≤ 8 cfs = 27 once/month

once/month* grab Two (2) years from Lodging Date

.

Zinc, Total Recoverable 003 lbs/day

μg/L μg/L 2.452

>8 cfs = 2,050 ≤ 8 cfs = 340 0.745

>8 cfs = 1,400 ≤ 8 cfs = 340 once/month

once/month* grab Two (2) years from Lodging Date

.

Cadmium, Total Recoverable 003 lbs/day

μg/L μg/L 0.481

>8 cfs = 46 ≤ 8 cfs = 13 0.192

>8 cfs = 46 ≤ 8 cfs = 13 once/month

once/month* grab Two (2) years from Lodging Date

.

Thallium, Total Recoverable 003 μg/L μg/L >8 cfs = 176 ≤ 8 cfs = 11 >8 cfs = 176 ≤ 8 cfs = 11 once/month * grab Two (2) years from Lodging Date

.

Total Suspended Solids 003 mg/L monitoring once/month grab Two (2) years from Lodging Date

.

All Pollutant Parameters 006 no discharge no discharge once/discharge/ day grab The facility shall be operated in a manner to prevent all discharges for the duration of the Consent Decree. SWPPP Completed within two (2) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.



### * For e a ch effluent monitoring event for flow

- based limits , Defendants must measure stream flow within sixty (60) minutes of collecting the effluent sample. Defendants shall submit with the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) documentation such as signed sample c ollection logs, to demonstrate the time, date and location of sample collection and stream measurement and the person or persons collecting the samples/measurement.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 8 of 12 

### Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 000 0 2 8 1 Issued: 2/28/2003 Expires: 2/27/2008

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Chemical Oxygen Demand 001 mg/L Monitoring Only Monitoring Only one/week grab Until issuance of the Herculaneum MSOP

. Lead, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 2.72

1,500 1.09

1,500 once/week grab Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 9.9

4,900 3.26

4,900 once/week grab Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Total Suspended Solids 001 lbs/day 334 185 once/week grab Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Arsenic, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day 12.86 5.216 once/week grab Thre e (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Cadmium, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 1.964

720 0.785

720 once/week grab Three (3) years from the da te of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Copper, Total Recoverable 001 lbs/day

μg/L 11.839

580 4.750

580 once/week grab

grab Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Silver, Total Recoverable 001 μg/L 130 130 once/quarter grab Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but not to exceed f ive (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 001 24

- hour composite ± Three (3) years from the date of approval of the Site

- Specific SWMP, but

not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Dec ree

. SWPPP Completed within six (6) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 9 of 12 

### Sweetwater Mine/Mill Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0001 88 1 Issued: 7/10/2009 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 7/9/2 0 14 App eal Filed : 8/07/2009 ; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 002 μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L ≥ 20 cfs = 2 00 ≥10 to <20 cfs = 160

≥5 to <10 cfs = 72 0.0 to <5 cfs = 54 ≥ 20 cfs = 200 ≥10 to <20 cfs = 160

≥5 to <10 cfs = 72 0.0 to <5 cfs = 54 once/month * grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Si te

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 002 μg/L 440 440 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. All Pollutant Parameters 004 no discharge no discharge once/discharg e/day grab The facility shall be operated in a manner to prevent all discharges unti l such time as a MSOP or MSOP modification is issued removing Outfall 004. WET testing

- chronic 002 24

- hour composite ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

Specific UWMP or approval of the

Site

- Specific SWMP, but not t o exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within two (2) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

. 

### *For each effluent monitoring event for flow

- based limits, Defendants mus t measure stream flow within sixty (60) minutes of collecting the effluent sample. Defendants shall submit with the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) documentation such as signed sample collection logs, to demonstrate the time, date and location of samp le collection and stream measurement and the person or persons collecting the samples/measurement.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 10 of 12 

### Viburnum Mine/Mill Facility (Mine # 28 & 29)

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 000 0086 Issued: 12/4/2009 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 12/3/2014 Appeal Filed : 1/4/2010 ; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Zinc, Total Recoverable 002 , 003, 004, 005, 006 μg/L 1

, 500 750 o nce/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Lead, Total Recoverable 004 μg/L 6 00 3 0 0 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 002 & 004 grab ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within four (4) Months o f the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 11 of 12 

### Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel) Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0 1 002 26 Issued: 3 / 19 /20 10 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 3 / 18 /20 15 Appeal Filed: 4/16/2010; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 001, 003 μg/L 432 246 once/month grab Three (3) years from the latter of the fi nal submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. WET testing

- chronic 00 1 & 00 3 grab ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submiss ion of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within six (6) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafte r

.8 / 10

/ 2010 Page 12 of 12 

### West Fork Unit Facility

– Missouri State Operating Permit No. MO

- 0 1 0021 8 Issued: 3 / 1 2/ 2010 Modified: 7/13/2010 Expires: 3 /1 1 /201 5 Appeal Filed: 4/9/2010; Supplement to Appeal Filed: 5/19/2010

Effluent Parameter Outfall Number(s) Units Daily Maximum Monthly Average Monitoring Frequency Sample Type Permit Compliance Deadline

Lead, Total Recoverable 001 μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L ≥ 40 cfs = 124 ≥30 to <40 cfs = 97 ≥20 to <30 cfs = 69 <20 cfs = 5 3 ≥ 40 cfs = 124 ≥30 to <40 cfs = 97 ≥20 to <30 cfs = 69 <20 cfs = 5 3 once/month * grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Sit e

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five

(5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. Zinc, Total Recoverable 001 μg/L μg/L μg/L μg/L ≥ 40 cfs = 640 ≥30 to <40 cfs = 560 ≥20 to <30 cfs = 490 <20 cfs = 442 ≥ 40 cfs = 640 ≥30 to <40 cfs = 560 ≥20 to <30 cfs = 490 <20 cfs = 442 once/month* grab Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or approval of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. A ll Pollutant Parameters 003 no discharge no discharge once/discharge/ day grab The facility shall be operated in a manner to prevent all discharges for the duration of the Consent Decree. All Pollutant Parameters 004 no discharge no discharge once/ discharge/ day grab The facility shall be operated in a manner to prevent all discharges for the duration of the Consent Decree. WET testing

- chronic 001 grab ± Three (3) years from the latter of the final submission of the Site

- Specific

UWMP or appro val of the Site

Specific SWMP, but not to exceed five (5) years from the Effective Date of the Consent Decree

. SWPPP Completed within four (4) Months of the Lodging Date and implemented thirty (30) Days thereafter

. 

### *For each effluent monitoring ev ent for flow

- based limits, Defendants must measure stream flow within sixty (60) minutes of collecting the effluent sample. Defendants shall submit with the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) documentation such as signed sample collection logs, to demons trate the time, date and location of sample collection and stream measurement and the person or persons collecting the samples/measurement.

### INSTRUCTIONS FOR STORM WATER PLAN PREPARATION

All SWPPPs shall comply with the terms and conditions of th e Applicable Permit and Local Law and: (i) utilize BMPs appropriate for the specific Site conditions at all stag es of construction; (ii) select BMPs designed to be effective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants in storm water discharges from the Site; (iii) utilize an adequate combination of erosion and sediment control BMPs; (iv) connect the use of BMPs to specific cons truction activities and to a time schedule triggered by those activities; (v) provide separate plan sheets for clear ing and mass grading, utility and road installation, and build ing activities; (vi) provide narrative descriptions of the inspection and repair procedures to ensure BMPs are kept in effective operating condition; (vii) provide narrative descriptions of BMPs to explain the basis for BMP selection; and (viii) include methods for preventing non-storm water discharges.

The guidelines below are intended to aid personnel in contracti ng for consulting services for the preparation of Storm Water Po llution Prevention Plans (SWPPP).

Abbreviations

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

NPDES National Pollutant Disc harge Elimination System

SWPPP Storm Water Plan

NOI Notice of Intent

NOT Notice of Termination

MS4 A municipal separate st orm water collection system

BMP Best Management Practice

Performance Guidelines

There are three performance gui delines to which SWPPPs shoul d conform. They should:

1. Meet regulatory requirements . In states where the Fe deral EPA has authorized the state to implement the requirements of the federal NPDES program, "regulatory requirements" are defined as th e latest edition of the state’s general permit for discharges from large and sma ll construction sites or an individual permit. In states where the Federal EP A has retained authority over the NPDES program or otherwise conti nues to issue NPDES permits (e.g. on tribal lands),

### 2 "regulatory requirements" ar e defined as the latest edition of the "National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Discharge from Large and Small Construction Activ ities" or an individual permit.

2. Be easy to follow and implement . It is important that the SWPPP be written in such a manner that it is easy for the Defendants’ operational personnel to understand and implement. The SWPPP should not be prepared in a vacuum by the consultant, but should reflect discussi ons and agreements that have been made between the consultants and the Defe ndants’ operational personnel. These discussions and agreements should include such things as construction sequencing and types of Best Management Practices (B MPs) that each Defe ndant feels are the most cost effective and easiest to maintain.

3. Be efficient . There maybe several ways in whic h the reduction of pollutants from storm water discharges can be achieved in order to comply with Storm Water Requirements. It is the goal of the Defe ndants to achieve compliance in the most efficient manner possible. When analyzi ng efficiency, initial costs should be combined with long-term costs (incl uding operation and maintenance costs and potential replacement costs) to determ ine the appropriate solution for each situation.

Contents of the SWPPP (Checklist)

I. A Copy of the NOI and Other Storm Water Related Permits that are required for the Site.

Copies of any federal, state or local storm water related permits should be included with the SWPPP. Questions that need to be addres sed and answered in th is section include:

a) What storm water permits do I need? b) Do my subcontractors need separate permits or can they be covered under my permit?

II. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Certification. The SWPPP must be certified as per the Applic able Permit. Check the App licable Permit to see which of the following signatures are required. a) Signed by the ow ner of the Site. b) Signed by the operator of the Site. c) Signed by the Registered Professional Engineer w ho is responsible for the preparation of the SWPPP.

An example of a Title Block for the certification is as shown below:

ABC XYZ 123 HOMES, A Delaware corporation,

### 3 By: _____________________ Name: ____________________ Title: ____________________

III. Contact Information

The SWPPP shall include the names, phone numbers and a description of each person’s duties for the following indivi duals. If there is more than one Site Storm Water Compliance Manager for a Site, each S ite Storm Water Compliance Manager’s responsibilities shall be specified in the SWPPP: a) Site Storm Water Compliance Manager b) Company Storm Wate r Compliance Manager c) Field Manager for the Site (if different)

IV. Notice and Recordkeeping

a) Posting NOI. b) Location of SWPPP and Inspection Reports. c) Retention of Records.

V. Responsibilities of Owners and Operators

If there is more than one permittee at the Site , the SWPPP shall include a list of activities that must be completed by each permittee and who has been assigned to implement each activity.

VI. Definition of Permit Area

Check the Applicable Permit to see which of the following are required:

a) Site name, address, county or governme ntal subdivision and latitude and longitude of the Site

. b) Name of the water of the United States or MS4 into which the project discharges. c) Name of the agency or agencies that have jurisdictional authority for storm water pollution prevention. d) The function of the project (i.e., single family detached residential, townhouse, condo development). e) A description of any other activities such as dedicated crusher plants, asphalt plants, equipment staging areas, or materi al storage areas that may operate on the project site. f) Estimates of the total area expected to be disturbed by excavation, grading, or other construction activities, including off-site borrow pits and fill areas. g) A general location map (e.g., USGS quadr angle map, a portion of a city or county map or other map with enough detail to show the location of the construction site and Jurisdictional Waters within one mile of the site).

### 4 VII. Site Plan and BMP Map

Check the Applicable Permit to see which of the following are required:

a) Direction of storm wa ter flow and approximate slopes anticipated after major grading activities. b) Areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed. c) Locations of major structural and non-structural BMPs. d) Locations where stabilization pr actices are expected to occur. e) Locations of off-site material, wast e, borrow or equipment storage areas. f) Locations of all Jurisdictional Waters. g) Locations where storm water disc harges to Jurisdictional Waters. h) Areas where final stabilization has been accomplished and no further construction-phase permit requirements apply.

VIII. Endangered and Threatened Species and Critical Habitat Protection, as required by the Applicable Permit

IX. Historic Properties Protection, as required by the A pplicable Permit

X. Statement and Description of Storm Water Discharge Management Controls to Reduce Pollutants

a) A description of all pollutant cont rol measures (i.e. BM Ps) that will be implemented as part of the construction activity to control pollutants in storm water discharges. Each major activity in the project construction process should be clearly defined and the BMPs related to that activity should be listed. It is recommended that in addition to appear ing on a comprehensive map, these also appear on "tear out" sheets that can be posted in the construction office. b) A description of interim and perman ent stabilization practices for the site, including a schedule of when the practices will be implemented. c) Dates when major gr ading activities occur. d) Dates when construction activities te mporarily or permanently cease on a portion of the site. e) Dates when stabilization measures are initiated. f) A description of structural practices to divert flows from exposed soils, retain/detain flows or otherwise limit r unoff and/or the discharge of pollutants from exposed areas of the site. g) A description of all post-construction st orm water management measures that will be installed during the cons truction process to control pollutants in storm water discharges after construction operations have been completed. h) A description of the measures to pr event the discharge of solid materials, including building materials, to the Jurisdictional Waters. i) A description of the measures to mini mize, to the extent practicable, off-site vehicle tracking of sediments onto paved surfaces and the generation of dust. j) A description of controls and measures that will be implemented to control the storm water discharges from on-s ite crusher and asphalt plants.

### 5 XI. Description of Non-St orm Water Discharge Management Controls to Reduce Pollutants. Refer to the Applicable Perm it for which non-storm water discharges are allowable and which are prohibited. The list below is for discussion purposes only.

a) Discharges from fi re fighting activities. b) Fire hydrant flushing. c) Waters used to wash vehicles where detergents are not used. d) Water used to control dust. e) Water used to flush water lines and wash down buildings. f) Air conditioning condensate. g) Uncontaminated spring water, groun dwater and discharges from foundation drains. h) Uncontaminated excavation dewatering. i) Landscape irrigation.

XII. Procedures for Dealing with Spills, and Releases in Excess of Mandated Reportable Quantities, as required by the Applicable Permit.

a) A list of emergency contact numbers. b) A table listing types of material s and the reportable quantity of each. c) Procedures for dealing with and reporting spills and releases.

XIII. Maintenance of Storm Water Discharge Management Controls

A description of the maintenance requirements for the BMPs laid out in the SWPPP.

XIV. Inspections

a) Frequency of inspection. b) Standardized forms for inspection reports.

XV. Procedures for Updating and Modifying the SWPPP

a) A statement designating when the SWPPP must be amended. b) A statement of the procedure that sh ould be followed to update and modify the SWPPP.

XVI. Notice of Termination

a) When a NOT is filed. b) Procedure for filing a NOT.

# I ndustrial Stormwater

**Fact Sheet Series**

Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

U.S. EPA Office of Water EPA-833-F-06-022 December 2006



## What is the NPDES stormwater permitting program for industrial activity?
Activities, such as material handling and storage, equipment maintenance and cleaning, industrial processing or other operations that occur at industrial facilities are often exposed to stormwater. The runoff from these areas may discharge pollutants directly into nearby waterbodies or indirectly via storm sewer systems, thereby degrading water quality.
In 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed permitting regulations under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to control stormwater discharges associated with eleven categories of industrial activity. As a result, NPDES permitting authorities, which may be either EPA or a state environmental agency, issue stormwater permits to control runoff from these industrial facilities.


## What types of industrial facilities are required to obtain permit coverage? This fact sheet discusses stormwater discharges from metal mining (ore mining and dressing) facilities as defined by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Major Group 10. Metal mining is defined here as all ore mining and/or dressing and beneficiating operations performed at mills operated in conjunction with the mines served or at mills (i.e., custom mills) operated separately. Facilities and products in this group fall under the following categories, all of which require coverage under an industrial stormwater permit if discharges of stormwater have come into contact with any overburden, raw material, intermediate products, finished product, byproduct or waste products located on the site of such operations:

 Iron Ores (SIC 1011)

 Copper Ores (SIC 1021)

 Lead and Zinc Ores (SIC 1031)

 Gold Ores (SIC 1041)

 Silver Ores (SIC 1044)

 Ferroalloy Ores, Except Vanadium (SIC 1061)

 Uranium-Radium-Vanadium Ores (SIC 1094)

 Miscellaneous Metal Ores, Not Elsewhere Classified (SIC 1099)
Permit coverage is required of all phases of mining operations, whether active or inactive, as long as there is exposure to significant materials. This includes land disturbance activities such as the expansion of current extraction sites, active and inactive mining stages, and reclamation activities at those establishments primarily engaged in mining, developing mines, or exploring for metallic minerals (ores).



### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

A stormwater permit generally is not appropriate for the following types of mines:

 Sites or parts of sites which are determined to cause or contribute to water quality standards violations

 Active facilities and those under reclamation, which have discharges subject to effluent limitation guidelines under NPDES, including other non-stormwater discharges such as from floor drains in maintenance buildings and preparation plant areas

 Pollutant seeps or underground drainage from inactive mines and refuse disposal areas that do not result from precipitation events.
For these types of sites, contact the EPA or state NPDES permitting authority to determine if and what type of discharge permit may be necessary.


## What does an industrial stormwater permit require?
Common requirements for coverage under an industrial stormwater permit include development of awritten stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), implementation of control measures, and submittal of a request for permit coverage, usually referred to as the Notice of Intent or NOI. The SWPPP is a written assessment of potential sources of pollutants in stormwater runoff and control measures that will be implemented at your facility to minimize the discharge of these pollutants in runoff from the site. These control measures include site-specific best management practices (BMPs), maintenance plans, inspections, employee training, and reporting. The procedures detailed in the SWPPP must beimplemented by the facility and updated as necessary, with a copy of the SWPPP kept on-site. The industrial stormwater permit also requires collection of visual, analytical, and/or compliance monitoring data to determine the effectiveness of implemented BMPs. For more information on EPA’s industrial stormwater permit and links to State stormwater permits, go to www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater and click on “Industrial Activity.”


## What pollutants are associated with my facility’s activities?
Pollutants conveyed in stormwater discharges from metal mining (ore mining and dressing) facilities will vary. There are a number of factors that influence to what extent industrial activities and significant materials can affect water quality.

 Geographic location

 Topography

 Hydrogeology

 Extent of impervious surfaces (e.g.,, concrete or asphalt)

 T ype of ground cover (e.g., vegetation, crushed stone, or dirt)

 Outdoor activities (e.g., material storage, loading/unloading, vehicle maintenance)

 Size of the operation

 Type, duration, and intensity of precipitation events
Because of the land-disturbing nature of the ore mining and dressing industry, contaminants of concern generated by industrial activities include total suspended solids (TSS), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, acid drainage, and heavy metals. Although there are many activities that occur at a facility, this fact sheet only covers those activities that occur outdoors and where activities or materials may be exposed to precipitation.
The activities, pollutant sources, and pollutants detailed in Table 1 are commonly found at metal mining (ore mining and dressing) facilities.

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

Table 1: Common Activities, Pollutant Sources, and Pollutants at Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities Activity Pollutant Source Pollutant Site preparation Road construction Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity
Removal of overburden Removal of waste rock to expose the metal
Mineral extraction Blasting activities Dust, TSS, nitrate/nitrite
Beneficiation activities Milling Dust, TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity, fines, heavy metals
Flotation Dust, TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity, fines, chemical reagents, acids, heavy metals Gravity concentration TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity, heavy metals Amalgamation Dust, TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity, heavy metals, mercury Waste rock storage Dust, TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity , heavy metals Raw material loading Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity, heavy metals Process materials unloading Diesel fuel, oil, gasoline, chemical r eagents Raw waste material transportation Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity, heavy metals Leaching Heap leach piles Dust, TSS, TDS, pH, turbidity, heavy metals, cyanide
Other activities Sedimentation pond upsets TSS, TDS, turbidity, pH, heavy metals Sedimentation pond sludge removal and disposal Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity, pH, heavy metals

Air emission control device cleaning Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity, metals Equipment/vehicle fueling and maintenance Fueling activities Gas/diesel fuel, oil Parts cleaning Solvents, oil, heavy metals, acid/alkaline wastes Waste disposal of oily rags, oil and gas filters, batteries, coolants, and degreasers Oil, heavy metals, solvents, acids

Fluid replacement including hydraulic fluid, oil, transmission fluid, radiator fluids, and grease Oil and grease, arsenic, lead, cadmium, chromium, chemical oxygen demand (COD), and benzene
Reclamation activities Site preparation for stabilization Dust, TSS, TDS, turbidity , heavy metals



## What BMPs can be used to minimize contact between stormwater and potential pollutants at my facility?
A variety of BMP options may be applicable to eliminate or minimize the presence of pollutants in stormwater discharges from metal mining facilities. You will likely need to implement a combination or suite of BMPs to address stormwater runoff at your facility. Your first consideration should be for pollution prevention BMPs, which are designed to prevent or minimize pollutants from entering stormwater runoff and/or reduce the volume of stormwater requiring management. Prevention BMPs can include regular cleanup, collection and containment of debris in storage areas, and other housekeeping practices, spill control, and employee training. It may also be necessary to implement treatment BMPs, which are engineered structures intended to treat stormwater runoff and/or mitigate the effects of increased stormwater runoff peak rate, volume, and velocity. Treatment BMPs are generally more expensive to install and maintain and include oil-water separators, wet ponds, and proprietary filter devices.
Sediment ponds, discharge diversion techniques, as well as methods of runoff dispersion, are control strategies often used to minimize impacts of significant materials on stormwater. For mine sites

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

requiring additional sources of water for processing operations, rainfall events as well as stormwater run-on will be managed for use in dust suppression, processing, and washing activities. Many mine sites are already equipped with sedimentation ponds and other established process wastewater treatment methods in order to meet effluent limitation guidelines. Additional stormwater management practices used at metal mining facilities are described further in this fact sheet.
BMPs must be selected and implemented to address the following:



### Good Housekeeping Practices Good housekeeping is a practical, cost-effective way to maintain a clean and orderly facility to prevent potential pollution sources from coming into contact with stormwater. It includes establishing protocols to reduce the possibility of mishandling materials or equipment and training employees in good housekeeping techniques. Common areas where good housekeeping practices should be followed include trash containers and adjacent areas, material storage areas, vehicle and equipment maintenance areas, and loading docks. Good housekeeping practices must include a schedule for regular pickup and disposal of garbage and waste materials and routine inspections of drums, tanks, and containers for leaks and structural conditions. Practices also include containing and covering garbage, waste materials, and debris. Involving employees in routine monitoring of housekeeping practices has proven to be an effective means of ensuring the continued implementation of these measures.



### Minimizing Exposure Where feasible, minimizing exposure of potential pollutant sources to precipitation is an important control option. Minimizing exposure prevents pollutants, including debris, from coming into contact with precipitation and can reduce the need for BMPs to treat contaminated stormwater runoff. It can also prevent debris from being picked up by stormwater and carried into drains and surface waters. Examples of BMPs for exposure minimization include covering materials or activities with temporary structures (e.g., tarps) when wet weather is expected or moving materials or activities to existing or new permanent structures (e.g., buildings, silos, sheds). Even the simple practice of keeping a dumpster lid closed can be a very effective pollution prevention measure.



### Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs must be selected and implemented to limit erosion on areas of your site that, due to topography, activities, soils, cover, materials, or other factors are likely to experience erosion. Erosion control BMPs such as seeding, mulching, and sodding prevent soil from becoming dislodged and should be considered first. Sediment control BMPs such as silt fences, sediment ponds, and stabilized entrances trap sediment after it has eroded. Sediment control BMPs should be used to back-up erosion control BMPs.
Because ore mining and dressing is largely a land disturbance activity, BMPs that minimize erosion and sedimentation will be most effective if installed at the inception of operations and maintained throughout active operations and reclamation of the site. From the construction of access and haul roads, to closure and reclamation activities, implementation of BMPs is often essential to minimizing long-term environmental impacts to an area.
A number of structural collection devices have been developed to remove sediment from runoff before it leaves the site. Several methods of removing sediment from site runoff involve diversion mechanisms previously discussed, supplemented by a trapping or storage device. Structural practices typically involve filtering diffuse stormwater flows through temporary structures such as straw bale dikes, silt fences, brush barriers, or vegetated areas.
Structural practices are typically low in cost yet require periodic removal of sediment to remain functional. As such, they may not be appropriate for permanent use at inactive mines. However, these practices may be ef fectively used as temporary measures during active operation and/or prior to the final implementation of permanent measures.

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities



### Management of Runoff Your SWPPP must contain a narrative evaluation of the appropriateness of stormwater management practices that divert, infiltrate, reuse, or otherwise manage stormwater runoff so as to reduce the discharge of pollutants. Appropriate measures are highly site-specific, but may include, among others, vegetative swales, collection and reuse of stormwater, inlet controls, snow management, infiltration devices, and wet retention measures.
A combination of preventive and treatment BMPs will yield the most effective stormwater management for minimizing the offsite discharge of pollutants via stormwater runoff. Though not specifically outlined in this fact sheet, BMPs must also address preventive maintenance records or logbooks, regular facility inspections, spill prevention and response, and employee training.
All BMPs require regular maintenance to function as intended. Some management measures have simple maintenance requirements, others are quite involved. You must regularly inspect all BMPs to ensure they are operating properly, including during runoff events. As soon as a problem is found, action to resolve it should be initiated immediately

. 

### BMPs for Metal Mining Facilities EPA has identified a wide variety of best management practices (BMPs) that may be used to mitigate discharges of contaminants at mines. Many of the practices focus on sediment and erosion control and are similar to BMPs used in the construction industry. These controls to prevent erosion and control sedimentation are the most effective if they are installed at the inception of operations and maintained throughout active operations and reclamation of the site. For more details on the use and implementation of these practices you are encouraged to obtain a copy of one or more of the many good sediment and erosion control books available on the market. The following categories describe best management practice options for reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges at metal mining facilities.

 Discharge Diversions. Discharge diversions provide the first line of defense in preventing the contamination of discharges, and subsequent contamination of receiving waters. Discharge diversions are temporary or permanent structures installed to divert flow, store flow, or limit stormwater run-on and runoff. These diversion practices have several objectives. First, diversion structures can be designed to prevent otherwise uncontaminated (or less contaminated) water from crossing disturbed areas or areas containing significant amounts of contaminated materials, where contact may occur between run-on and site materials. These source reduction measures may be particularly effective for metal mining facilities because they prevent run-on of uncontaminated discharges from contacting exposed materials and/or reduce the flow across disturbed areas, thereby lessening the potential for erosion. Second, diversion structures can be used to collect or divert waters for later treatment, if necessary . The usefulness of these control measures are limited by such factors as the size of the area to be controlled and the type and nature of materials exposed and nature of precipitation events.
Dive rsion dikes, curbs, and berms are temporary or permanent diversion structures that prevent runoff from passing beyond a certain point, and divert runoff away from its intended path. Dikes, curbs or berms may be used to surround and isolate areas of concern, diverting flow around piles of overburden, waste rock, and storage areas, to minimize discharge contact with contaminated materials and to limit discharges of contaminated water from confined areas.

 Drainage/Stormwater Conveyance Systems. Drainage or stormwater conveyance systems can provide either a temporary or a permanent management practice which functions to channel water away from eroded or unstabilized areas, convey runoff without causing erosion, and/or carry discharges to more stabilized areas. The use of drainage systems as a permanent measure may be most appropriate in areas with extreme slopes, areas subject to high velocity runoff, and other areas where the establishment of substantial vegetation is infeasible or impractical.

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

For instance, several BMPs may be useful stormwater and erosion control methods. Some examples of drainage/stormwater conveyance systems include: -	 Channels	or	gutters -	 Open	top	box	culverts	and	waterbars -	 Rolling	dips	and	road	sloping -	 Roadway	surface	water	deflector
-	 Culverts

 Runoff Dispersion. Drainage systems are most effective when used in conjunction with runoff dispersion devises designed to slow the flow of water discharged from a site. These devices also aid stormwater infiltration into the soil and flow attenuation. Some examples of velocity dissipation devices include:
-	 Check	dams -	 Rock	outlet	protection -	 Level	spreaders -	 Serrated	slopes	and	benched	slopes

- Contouring -	 Drop	structures

 Sediment Control and Collection. Erosion and sediment controls limit movement and retains sediments, preventing transportation offsite. Several structural collection devices have been developed to remove sediment from runoff before it leaves the site. Several methods of removing sediment from site runoff involve diversion mechanisms previously discussed, supplemented by a trapping or storage device. Structural practices typically involve filtering dif fuse stormwater flows through temporary structures such as straw bale dikes, silt fences, brush barriers or vegetated areas. Structural practices are typically low in cost. However, structural practices require periodic removal of sediment to remain functional. As such, they may not be appropriate for permanent use at inactive mines. However, these practices may be effectively used as temporary measures along haul roads and access roads. Several examples of sediment control and collection BMPs include: -	 Gabions,	riprap,	and	native	rock	retaining	walls
-	 Biotechnical	stabilization
-	 Straw	bale	barrier

- Vegetated	buffer	strips

- Silt	fence/filter	fence
-	 Siltation	berms
-	 Brush	sediment	barriers -	 Sediment	traps	or	catch	basins -	 Sediment/settling	ponds

 Vegetation Practices. Vegetation practices involve establishing a sustainable ground cover by permanent seeding, mulching, sodding, and other such practices. A vegetative cover reduces the potential for erosion of a site by: absorbing the kinetic energy of raindrops which would otherwise impact soil; intercepting water so it can infiltrate into the ground instead of running off and carrying contaminated discharges; and by slowing the velocity of runoff to promote on-site deposition of sediment. These practices include: -	 Topsoiling

- Broadcast	seeding	and	drill	seeding

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

-	 Willow	cutting	establishment -	 Plastic	matting,	plastic	netting	and	erosion	control	blankets -	 Mulch-straw	or	wood	chips -	 Compaction
Typically, the costs of vegetative controls are low relative to other discharge mitigation practices. Given the limited capacity to accept large volumes of runoff, and potential erosion problems associated with large concentrated flows, vegetative controls should typically be used in combination with other management practices.

 Capping. Capping or sealing of waste materials is designed to prevent infiltration, as well as to limit contact between discharges and potential sources of contamination. Ultimately, capping should reduce or eliminate the contaminants in discharges. In addition, by reducing infiltration, the potential for seepage and leachate generation may also be lessened. In some cases, the elimination of a pollution source through capping contaminant sources may be the most cost effective control measure for discharges from inactive ore mining and dressing facilities. Depending on the type of management practices chosen the cost to eliminate the pollutant source may be very high. Once completed, however, maintenance costs will range from low to nonexistent.

 T reatment. In some cases (e.g., low pH and/or high metals concentrations), BMPs, and sediment and erosion controls may not be adequate to produce an acceptable quality of stormwater discharge. Under those circumstances additional physical or chemical treatment systems may be necessary to protect the receiving waters. Treatment practices are those methods of control which normally are thought of as being applied at the “end of the pipe” to reduce the concentration of pollutants in stormwater before it is discharged. This is in contrast to many BMPs, where the emphasis is on keeping the water from becoming contaminated. Treatment practices may be required where flows are currently being affected by exposed materials and other BMPs are insufficient to meet discharge goals. These practices are usually the most resource intensive as they often require significant construction costs and monitoring and maintenance on a frequent and regular basis. Treatment options may involve a range of maintenance controls. High maintenance treatment techniques require manpower to operate and maintain the BMP . Low maintenance cost techniques have initial capital costs but operate with low long-term maintenance after being implemented. At a few sites, treatment measures other than high maintenance measures may be appropriate to address specific pollutants. Several examples of treatment BMPs include chemical or physical treatment, oil/water separators, and artificial wetlands. An example of a high maintenance technology that is found at many active metal mining facilities is chemical/physical treatment. The most common type of chemical/physical treatment involves the addition of lime or other such caustics to remove metals. Metals may be removed from stormwater by raising the pH of the stormwater to precipitate them out as hydroxides. After metals precipitation, the addition of some form of acid or carbon dioxide may be required to reduce the pH to acceptable levels. Polymer addition may be required to enhance the settling characteristics of the metal hydroxide precipitate. In general, this practice requires significant operator participation to ensure proper neutralization and/or precipitation and thus may not be cost effective for most stormwater discharges. Another example of a high maintenance treatment technology is an oil/water separator. An American Petroleum Institute (API) oil/water separator or similar type of treatment device skims oil and settles sludge to remove oil from water. This type of BMP system can be effective for improving water quality either alone or in conjunction with other treatment practices. The use of artificial wetlands is another method of treating process wastewater from inactive mines. There has been extensive research on the use of artificial wetlands as a means of mitigating acid mine drainage. They can be an effective system for improving water quality either alone or in conjunction with other treatment practices. The complex hydrologic,

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

biological, physical, and chemical interactions that take place within a wetland result in a natural reduction and cleansing of influent pollutants. Wetland processes are able to filter sediments and absorb and retain chemical and heavy metal pollutant through biological degradation, transformation, and plant uptake. Artificial wetlands are designed to maintain a permanent pool of water. Properly installed and maintained retention structures (also known as wet ponds) and artificial wetlands will be most cost-effective when used to control runoff from larger, intensively developed sites. These artificial wetlands are created to provide treatment but also provide a wildlife habitat, and may enhance recreation and landscape amenities.


## BMPs for Site Activities
A number of sites and activities found at metal mining facilities require the implementation of BMPs to prevent the contamination of stormwater. Implementation of BMPs are required not only for mineral extraction sites and material piles, but for discharges from roads accessing these sites. Additionally, restabilization must occur with any disturbed areas. An overview of additional BMPs that may be applicable at haul or access roads; pits or quarries; overburden, waste rock, and raw material piles; and reclamation activities are discussed below.

 Haul Roads and/or Access Roads. Placement of haul roads or access roads should occur as far as possible from natural drainage areas, lakes, ponds, wetlands, or floodplains where soil will naturally be less stable for heavy vehicle traffic. If a haul road must be constructed near water, as little vegetation as possible should be removed from between the road and the waterway, as vegetation is a useful buffer against erosion and is an efficient sediment collection mechanism. The width and grade of haul or access roads should be minimal and designed to match natural contours of the area. Construction of haul roads should be supplemented by BMPs that divert runoff from road surfaces, minimize erosion, and direct flow to appropriate channels for discharge to treatment areas or other well-stabilized areas.

 Equipment/V ehicle Fueling and Maintenance. Fueling and maintenance activities should be conducted indoors or under cover on an impermeable surface. Berms, curbs, or similar means should be used to ensure that stormwater runoff from other parts of the facility does not flow over maintenance and fueling areas. Runoff from fueling and maintenance areas should be collected and treated or recycled. Proper waste management and spill prevention and response procedures should be implemented. Select good housekeeping procedures to minimize the amount of contaminated runoff generated (e.g. use dry cleanup methods, use drip pans, and drain parts of fluids before disposal). Conduct inspections of fueling areas to prevent problems before they occur.

 Pits or Quarries. Excavation of a pit or quarry must be accompanied by BMPs to minimize impacts to area surface waters. As little vegetation as possible should be removed from these areas during excavation activities to minimize exposed soils. In addition, stream channels and other sources of water that may discharge into a pit or quarry should be diverted around that area to prevent contamination. BMPs can be used to control total suspended solids levels in runoff from unvegetated areas. These can include sediment/settling ponds, check dams, silt fences, and straw bale barriers.

 Overburden, Waste Rock, and Raw Material Piles. Overburden, topsoil, and waste rock, as well as raw material and intermediate and final product stockpiles, should be located away from surface waters, other sources of water and from geologically unstable areas. In addition surface waters and stormwater should be diverted around the piles. As many piles as possible should be revegetated, (even if only on a temporary basis). At closure, remaining piles should be reclaimed.

 Reclamation Activities. When a mineral deposit is depleted and operations cease, a mine site must be reclaimed according to appropriate state or federal standards. Closure activities typically include restabilization of disturbed areas such as access or haul roads, pits or

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

quarries, sedimentation ponds or work-out pits, and remaining waste piles. Overburden and topsoil stockpiles may be used to fill in a pit or quarry (where practical). Recontouring and revegetation should be performed to stabilize soils and prevent erosion. Major reclamation activities such as recontouring roads and filling in a pit or quarry can only be performed after operations have ceased. However, reclamation activities such as stabilization of banks, reseeding, and revegetation should be implemented in mined out portions, or inactive areas of a site as active mining moves to new areas.
EPA recognizes that quarries are frequently converted into reservoirs, or recreational areas, after the mineral deposit is depleted. However, this does not preclude the reclamation of disturbed areas above the quarry rim.
Typically, the costs of stabilization controls are low relative to other discharge mitigation practices. Given the limited capacity to accept large volumes of runoff, and potential erosion problems associated with large concentrated flows, stabilization controls should typically be used in combination with other management practices. These measures have been documented as particularly appropriate for mining sites. 

## BMPs for Various Extraction Techniques
Metals are recovered by three basic extraction techniques: surface mining; underground mining; and placer mining. Each type of extraction method may be followed by varying methods of beneficiation and processing. Due to similarities in mining operations for many of the minerals within this industry, activities, significant materials, and materials management practices are fairly uniform.

 Surface mines. Materials management practices at surface mines are typically designed to control dust emissions and soil erosion from extraction activities, and offsite transport of significant materials. Settling ponds and impoundments are commonly used to reduce TSS and other contaminants in process generated wastewaters. These controls may also be used to manage stormwater runoff and run-on with potentially few alterations to on-site drainage systems. Impoundments are used to manage tailings generated at facilities engaged in flotation or heavy media separation operations. These impoundments are used to manage beneficiation/ processing wastewaters generated at the facility and may also be used to manage stormwater runoff.

 Undergr ound mines. Materials management practices for significant materials at the surface of underground mining facilities are similar to those materials management practices used at surface mining operations. However, waste rock or mill tailings are in some cases being returned to the mine as fill for the mined-out areas or may be directed to a disposal basin.

 Placer mines. Settling ponds are used to manage process wastewaters and are, in some cases, being used to manage contaminated stormwater runof f.

 Inactive mines. Inactive mine sites also require implementation of BMPs. Inactive ore mining and dressing operations are those where industrial activities are no longer occurring. When active, mineral extraction could have occurred from surface mines, solution mines, placer operations, or underground mines. These sites require permit coverage until reclaimed because significant materials may remain on-site, and, if exposed, are potential sources of stormwater contamination. Due to the seasonal nature of this industry, mine sites can become temporarily inactive for extended periods of time. T emporarily inactive sites are not viewed the same as permanently inactive sites.
Implement BMPs, such as those listed below in Table 2 for the control of pollutants at metal mining facilities, to minimize and prevent the discharge of pollutants in stormwater. Identifying weaknesses in current facility practices will aid the permittee in determining appropriate BMPs that will achieve a reduction in pollutant loadings. BMPs listed in T able 2 are broadly applicable to metal mining

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

facilities; however, this is not a complete list and you are recommended to consult with regulatory agencies or a stormwater engineer/consultant to identify appropriate BMPs for your facility.

Table 2. BMPs for Potential Pollutant Sources at Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

Pollutant Source BMPs
Haul Roads and/or Access Roads  Construction of haul roads should be supplemented by BMPs that divert runoff from road surfaces, minimize erosion, and direct flow to appr opriate channels for discharge to treatment areas. Examples of BMPs include:

- Install dikes, curbs, and berms for discharge diversions.
- Install conveyance systems such as channels, gutters, culverts, rolling dips and road sloping,

and/or roadway water deflectors.
- Use check dams, rock outlet protection, level spreaders, stream alternation and drop

structures for runoff dispersion.
- Install gabions, riprap, native rock retaining walls, straw bale barriers, sediment traps/catch

basins, and vegetated buffer strips for sediment control and collection.
- Keep as much vegetation as possible when building roads and seed as necessary. Stabilize

soil via willow cutting establishment.

 Place as far as possible from natural drainage areas, lakes, ponds, wetlands, or floodplains

 Width and grade of roads should be as small as possible to meet regulatory requirements and designed to match the natural contours of the area.

 Frequently inspect all stabilization and structural erosion control measures and perform all necessary maintenance and repairs.
Pits/Quarries or Underground Mines  Install dikes, curbs, and berms for discharge diversions.

 Install conveyance systems such as channels and gutters to control runoff and run-on.

 Use serrated slopes, benched slopes, contouring, and stream alteration to direct uncontaminated discharges away from a pit or quarry

.  Install sediment settling ponds, straw bale barrier , and siltation berms.

 Keep as much vegetation as possible when excavating and seed as necessary to minimize the amount of exposed soils. Overburden, Waste Rock, and Raw Material Piles

Reclamation  Overburden, topsoil, waste rock, raw material, or intermediate and final product stockpiles should be located away from surface waters and other sources of run-on, as well as geologically unstable areas.

 Install dikes, curbs, and berms for discharge diversions to control runoff and run-on.

 Install conveyance systems such as channels and gutters to control runoff and run-on.

 Use serrated slopes, benched slopes, contouring, and stream alteration around piles for sediment control and runoff dispersion.

 Install plastic matting, plastic netting, erosion control blankets, mulch straw, sediment/settling ponds, silt fences, siltation berms, and/or compaction for sediment control and collection.

 Stabilize and recontour piles as necessary.

 Vegetate as many piles as possible (involves topsoiling, seedbed preparation, and/or seeding).

 Install dikes, curbs, and berms for discharge diversions.

 Install conveyance systems such as channels and gutters.

 Use check dams, rock outlet protection, level spreaders, stream alter nation, drop structures, serrated slopes, drain fields, benched slopes, contouring, and stream alteration for runoff dispersion.

EPA-833-F-06-022 0

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

Table 2. BMPs for Potential Pollutant Sources at Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities (continued)

Pollutant Source

Reclamation (continued) BMPs

 Install gabions, riprap, native rock retaining walls, straw bale barriers, sediment traps/catch basins, biotechnical stabilization, silt fences, siltation berms, brush sediment barriers, and vegetated buffer strips for sediment control and collection.

 Recontouring and vegetation should be performed to stabilize soils and pr event erosion in mined out portions or inactive areas of the site as active mining moves to new areas (includes topsoiling, seedbed preparation, seeding, and willow cutting establishment).

 If a quarry is being converted into a reservoir or recreational area, disturbed areas above the quarry rim must still be reclaimed.

 Use overburden and topsoil stockpiles to fill in a pit or quarry (when practical). Equipment/vehicle maintenance Minimizing Exposure

 Perform all cleaning operations indoors or under covering when possible. Conduct the cleaning operations in an area with a concrete floor with no floor drainage other than to sanitary sewers or treatment facilities.

 If operations are uncover ed, perform them on a concrete pad that is impervious and contained.

 Park vehicles and equipment indoors or under a roof whenever possible and maintain proper control of oil leaks/spills.

 Check vehicles closely for leaks and use pans to collect fluid when leaks occur.
Management of Runoff

 Use berms, curbs, or other diversion measures to ensure that stormwater runoff from other parts of the facility do not flow over the maintenance area.

 Collect the stormwater runoff from the cleaning area and provide treatment or recycling. Discharge vehicle wash or rinse water to the sanitary sewer (if available and allowed by sewer authority), wastewater treatment, a land application site, or recycle on-site. DO NOT discharge washwater to a storm drain or to surface water.
Inspections and Training

 Inspect the maintenance area regularly for proper implementation of control measures.

 Train employees on proper waste control and disposal procedures.
Good Housekeeping

 Eliminate floor drains that are connected to the storm or sanitary sewer; if necessary, install a sump that is pumped regularly. Collected wastes should be properly treated or disposed of by a licensed waste hauler.

 Use drip pans, drain boards, and drying racks to direct drips back into a fluid holding tank for

reuse.

 Drain all parts of fluids prior to disposal. Oil filters can be crushed and recycled.

 Promptly transfer used fluids to the proper container; do not leave full drip pans or other open containers around the shop. Empty and clean drip pans and containers.

 Dispose of greasy rags, oil filters, air filters, batteries, spent coolant, and degreasers properly.

 Store batteries and other significant materials inside.

 Label and track the recycling of waste material (e.g., used oil, spent solvents, batteries).

 Maintain an organized inventory of materials.

 Eliminate or reduce the number and amount of hazardous materials and waste by substituting nonhazardous or less hazardous materials.

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities

Table 2. BMPs for Potential Pollutant Sources at Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities (continued)

Pollutant Source BMPs Equipment/vehicle maintenance (continued) Good Houskeeping (continued)

 Clean up leaks, drips, and other spills without using large amounts of water. Use absorbents for dry cleanup whenever possible.

 Prohibit the practice of hosing down an area where the practice would result in the discharge of pollutants to a stormwater system.

 Clean without using liquid cleaners whenever possible.

 Do all cleaning at a centralized station so the solvents stay in one area.

 If parts are dipped in liquid, remove them slowly to avoid spills.

 Do not pour liquid waste into floor drains, sinks, outdoor storm drain inlets, or other storm drains or sewer connections. Fueling activities  Conduct fueling operations (including the transfer of fuel from tank trucks) on an impervious or contained pad or under a roof or canopy where possible. Covering should extend beyond spill containment pad to prevent rain fr om entering.

 When fueling in uncovered area, use a concrete pad (asphalt is not chemically resistant to the fuels being handled).

 Use drip pans where leaks or spills of fuel can occur and where making and breaking hose connections.

 Use fueling hoses with check valves to prevent hose drainage after filling.

 Use spill and overflow protection devices.

 Keep spill cleanup material readily available. Clean up spills and leaks immediately.

 Minimize/eliminate run-on into fueling areas with diversion dikes, berms, curbing, surface grading or other equivalent measures.

 Collect stormwater runoff and provide treatment or recycling.

 Use dry cleanup methods for fuel area rather than hosing down the fuel area. Follow procedures for sweeping up absorbents as soon as spilled substances have been absorbed.

 Perform inspection and preventive maintenance on fuel storage tanks to detect potential leaks before they occur.

 Inspect the fueling area to detect problems before they occur.

 Train personnel on fueling procedures in the SWPPP.

 Provide curbing or posts around fuel pumps to prevent collisions from vehicles.

 Discourage “topping off” of fuel tanks.



## What if activities and materials at my facility are not exposed to precipitation?
The industrial stormwater program requires permit coverage for a number of specified types of industrial activities. However, when a facility is able to prevent the exposure of ALL relevant activities and materials to precipitation, it may be eligible to claim no exposure and qualify for a waiver from permit coverage. If you are regulated under the industrial permitting program, you must either obtain permit coverage or submi t a no exposure certification form, if available. Check with your permitting authority for additional information as not every permitting authority program provides no exposure exemptions.

EPA-833-F-06-022 

### Industrial Stormwater **Fact Sheet Series** Sector G: Metal Mining (Ore Mining and Dressing) Facilities



## Where do I get more information?
For additional information on the industrial stormwater program see www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

. A list of names and telephone numbers for each EPA Region or state NPDES permitting authority can be found at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwatercontacts

. 

## References
Information contained in this Fact Sheet was compiled from EPA’s past and current Multi-Sector General Permits and from the following sources:

 Idaho Department of Lands.1992. Best Management Practices for Mining in Idaho.

 Maine Department of Environmental Protection. 2003. “Maine Erosion and Sedimentation Control BMPs.” www.state.me.us/dep/blwq/docstand/escbmps/

 U.S. EPA. September 1992. Stormwater Management for Industrial Activities: Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices. EPA 832–R–92–006. www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater

 U.S. EPA, Office of Science and T echnology. 1999. Preliminary Data Summary of Urban Stormwater Best Management Practices. EPA-821-R-99-012. www.epa.gov/OST/stormwater/

 U.S. EPA, Office of W astewater Management. NPDES Stormwater Multi-Sector General Permit for Industrial Activities (MSGP). www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

EPA-833-F-06-022 Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators i 

# Contents

Section 1: Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1

. A Why Should You Use This Guide?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1

. B What Is Stormwater Runoff and What Are Its Impacts?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

## Section 2: Getting Started

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2

. A Am I Required to Develop a SWPPP?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2

. B What Are the Basic Elements Required in a SWPPP?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2

. C Stormwater Pollution Prevention Team (Step 1)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2

. D What Do I Need to Do to Complete My SWPPP?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

## Section 3: Site Assessment and Planning (Step 2)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3

. A Conduct an Assessment of the Activities Performed at Your Facility

. . . . . . . . 7

3

. B Evaluate Sampling Data

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

. C Develop General Location and Site Maps

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

## Section 4: Selecting Control Measures (Step 3)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

4

. A Minimize Exposure

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4

. B Good Housekeeping

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

4

. C Maintenance

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

4

. D Spill Prevention and Response Procedures

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

4

. E Erosion and Sediment Controls

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

4

. F Management of Runoff

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4

. G Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4

. H Sector-Specific Requirements

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4

. I Employee Training

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4

. J Non-Stormwater Discharges

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4

. K Waste, Garbage, and Floatable Debris

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4

. L Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial Materials

. . . . . . . . . . . . 24

4

. M Numeric Effluent Limitations Based on Effluent Limit Guidelines

. . . . . . . . . 24

4

. N Additional Controls to Address Impaired Waters

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 

## Section 5: Procedures for Inspections and Monitoring (Step 4)

. . . . . . . . . . 26
5

. A Routine Facility Inspections

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
5

. B Visual Assessments

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5

. C Annual Comprehensive Site Inspections

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5

. D Documentation of Monitoring Procedures

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 10

11ii Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## Section 6: Completing Your SWPPP

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

6

. A Finish your SWPPP

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

6

. B Obtain NPDES Permit Coverage

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

6

. C Updating Your SWPPP

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

## Section 7: Keeping Records of Your Implementation Activities

. . . . . . . . . . . 36 

## Section 8: Common Compliance Problems at Industrial Facilities

. . . . . . . . 37


## Resources

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

## Appendices
Appendix A: MSGP SWPPP Template

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Appendix B: Additional MSGP Documentation Template

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Appendix C: Example Site Map

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 1 

# Section 1: Introduction

This guide includes suggestions on how to develop a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP)

. This guide d oes not impose any new legally binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated community, and does not confer legal rights or impose legal obligations upon any member of the public

. In the event o f a conflict between the discussion in this document and any statute, regulation, or permit, this document would not be controlling

. Interested parties are free to raise questions and objections about the substance of this guide and the appropriateness of the application of this guide to a particular situ

ation

. EPA and other decision makers retain the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by-case basis that differ from those described in this guide where appropriate

. 

## 1.A Why Should You Use This Guide?
You should use this guide if you are an operator of an industrial facility required to develop a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) that complies with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) industrial stormwater permit issued by your State or the U

. S

. Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA)

. You may also find this guide to be useful if you are a State or EPA inspector who reviews SWPPPs, or you operate a commercial facility that is not required to obtain an NPDES permit but you are nevertheless interested in ways to minimize stormwater-related pollution at your facility

. Because each State permit can be slightly different, this guide is written more generi

cally in an attempt to make it applicable to as many industrial general permits as possible

. Owners and operators of industrial facilities should carefully read their respective industrial stormwater general permit to understand where using this guide may conflict with a State SWPPP require

ment, and make adjustments to their SWPPPs as needed

. EPA includes additional text describing how to address SWPPP requirements that are specifically included in the Agency’s own 2008 Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP), the “2008 MSGP”

. In addition to helping you develop a SWPPP, this guide also includes sections that will assist you in keeping your implemen

tation records and in avoiding common compliance problems, after you are authorized under the EPA 2008 MSGP or your State’s general permit

. See Sectio n 7 for a discussion of how to keep implementation records

. See Sectio n 8 for a discussion of common compliance problems

. 

## 1.B What Is Stormwater Runoff and What Are Its Impacts?
Stormwater runoff is water from rain or snowmelt that does not immediately infiltrate into the ground and flows over or through natural or man-made storage or convey

ance systems

. When undeve loped areas are converted to land uses with impervious surfaces such as buildings, parking lots, and roads, the natural hydrology of the land is altered and can result in increased surface runoff rates, volumes, and pollut

ant loads

. Stormwat er runoff picks up industrial pollutants and typically discharges them directly into nearby waterbodies or indirectly via storm sewer systems

. Runoff from areas where industrial activities occur can contain toxic pollutants (e

. g

. , heavy Owners and operators of industrial facilities, which are subject to a State or EPA industrial stormwater general permit typically must develop a SWPPP as a basic requirement. If your facility is subject to such a requirement, failing to develop a SWPPP can result in enforcement action against your facility by EPA or a State! For example, EPA has targeted enforcement actions against some industrial sectors for failing to have developed SWPPPs for their facilities.2 Developing Y our Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators metals and organic chemicals) and other pollutants such as trash, debris, and oil and grease, when facility practices allow exposure of industrial materials to stormwater

. This increased flow and pollutant load can impair waterbodies, degrade biological habitats, pol

lute drinking water sources, and cause flood

ing and hydrologic changes to the receiving water, such as channel erosion

. Industrial facilities typically perform a portion of their activities in outdoor areas exposed to the elements

. This may i nclude activities such as material storage and han

dling, vehicle fueling and maintenance, ship

ping and receiving, and salt storage, all of which can result in pollutants being exposed to precipitation and capable of being carried off in stormwater runoff

. Also, fac ilities may have performed industrial activities outdoors in the past and materials from those activities still remain exposed to precipitation

. In addi

tion, accidental spills and leaks, improper waste disposal, and illicit connections to storm sewers may also lead to exposure of pollutants to stormwater

. EPA has identified six types of activities at industrial facilities that have the potential to be major sources of pollutants in stormwater: **•	 Loading and**  **Unloading Operations**  Loading and unloading operations can include pumping of liquids or gases from tankers to storage facilities, pneumatic transfer of dry chemicals, transfer by mechanical conveyor systems, or transfer of bags, boxes, drums or other contain

ers by forklift or other material handling equipment

. Material sp ills or losses in these areas can accumulate and be washed away during a storm

. **•	 Outdoor Storage**  Outdoor storage activities include stor

age of fuels, raw materials, by-products, intermediate products, final products, and process residuals

. Materials m ay be stored in containers, on platforms or pads, in bins, boxes or silos, or as piles

. Storage are as that are exposed to rainfall and/or runoff can contribute pollutants to stormwater when solid materials wash off or materials dissolve into solution

. **•	 Outdoor Process**  **Activities** Although many manufacturing activities are performed indoors, some activities, such as timber processing, rock crush

ing, and concrete mixing, occur outdoors

. Outdoor processing activities can result in liquid spillage and losses of material solids, which makes associated pollutants avail

able for discharge in runoff

.
**•	 Dust or**  **Particulate Generating**  **Processes** Dust or particulate generating processes include industrial activities with stack emissions or process dusts that settle on surfaces

. Some industries, such as mines, cement manufacturing, and refractories, also generate significant levels of dust that can be mobilized in stormwater runoff

. **•	 Illicit Connections**  **and Non-Stormwater**  **Discharges** Illicit connections of process wastes or other pollutants to stormwater collection systems, instead of to sanitary sewers, can be a significant source of stormwater pol

lution

. Non-stormwater discharges include any discharge from the facility that is not generated by rainfall runoff (for example, wash water from industrial processes)

. With few exceptions, these non-stormwater discharges are prohibited

. Refer to your permit for a list of authorized non-storm

water discharges

.
**•	 Waste Management**  Waste management practices include everything from landfills to waste piles to trash containment

. All industri al facilities conduct some type of waste management at their site, much of it outdoors, which must be controlled to prevent pollutant discharges in stormwater

. Figure 1. Stormwater runoff can carry pollutants from impervious surfaces to receiving waters.Tetra TechDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 3 

# Section 2: Getting Started

2.A Am I Required to Develop a SWPPP?
The Clean Water Act (Section 402(p)) requires that operators of “discharges associated with industrial activity” obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit

. EPA regula tions (40 CFR 122

. 26) define the c ategories of industrial activity required to obtain NPDES permits, and specify the application requirements for these permits

. To regulat e stormwater discharges from these industrial activities, EPA and authorized States issue NPDES general permits

. Most industrial stormwater discharges are covered under general permits, as opposed to individual permits, although States and EPA can and do issue individual permits to some facilities based on site-specific or industry-specific concerns

. General pe rmits are used primarily because they avoid the need to issue multiple permits, and instead only require a single permit to cover a large number of industrial facilities performing similar types of activities

. To be covere d under a general permit, an eligible operator of an industry must read the general permit, typically develop a SWPPP, comply with any special eligibility provisions, and submit a notice of intent (NOI) or permit appli

cation to the permitting authority

. Federal regulations require NPDES permit coverage for stormwater discharges from the following categories of industrial activity: •	 Category One (i): Facilities subject to federal stormwater effluent discharge stan

dards in 40 CFR Parts 405-471 •	 Category Two (ii): Heavy manufacturing (for example, paper mills, chemical plants, petroleum refineries, and steel mills and foundries) •	 Category Three (iii): Coal and mineral mining and oil and gas exploration and processing •	 Category Four (iv): Hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities •	 Category Five (v): Landfills, land application sites, and open dumps with industrial
wastes •	 Category Six (vi): Metal scrapyards, salvage yards, automobile junkyards, and battery reclaimers •	 Category Seven (vii): Steam electric power generating plants •	 Category Eight (viii): Transportation facilities that have vehicle maintenance, equipment cleaning, or airport deicing operations •	 Category Nine (ix): Treatment works treating domestic sewage with a design flow of 1 million gallons a day or more •	 Category Eleven (xi): Light manufactu ring (For example, food processing, printing and publishing, electronic and other elec

trical equipment manufacturing, and public warehousing and storage)

. **EPA’s 2008 Multi-Sector General Permit (2008 MSGP) Applies to a Limited Geographic Area** 

**–** The 2008 MSGP applies in five States (Alaska, Idaho, New Mexico, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire), Indian Country lands, most territories, and some federal facilities. Alaska will be taking over administration of stormwater permits beginning in 2009. Information on where the 2008 MSGP is available is included as Appendix C of the 2008 MSGP, which can be found at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

.4 Developin g Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## Where Do I Get a Copy of the Industrial Stormwater General Permit in My State?

To determine who issues the industrial stormwater permit in your State, you can visit EPA’s stormwater website at www.epa.gov/ npdes/stormwater/authorizationstatus or the Industrial Stormwater Resource Locator at www.envcap.org/iswrl

. 

## Who Is an Operator?
EPA defines the operator of an industrial facil

ity as:

•	 The entity that has operational control over industrial activities, including the ability to modify those activities, or

•	 The entity that has day-to-day operational control of activities at a facility neces

sary to ensure compliance with the permit (e

. g

. , the entity that is authorized to direct workers at a facility to carry out activities required by the permit)

. See definit ion in Appendix A of the 2008 MSGP

. In many cases, the owner and operator are one in the same person

. In a few insta nces, there may be more than one operator at a site (with the owner being an operator based on the definition provided above)

. Where ther e is both an owner (without operational control) and an operator, it is the operator’s responsi

bility to obtain permit coverage and comply with the permit provisions

. 

## 2.B What Are the Basic Elements Required in a SWPPP?

A SWPPP is a written document that identi

fies the industrial activities conducted at the site, including any structural control prac

tices, which the industrial facility operator will implement to prevent pollutants from making their way into stormwater runoff

. The SWPPP also must include descriptions of other relevant information, such as the physi

cal features of the facility, and procedures for spill prevention, conducting inspections, and training of employees

. The SWPPP is i ntended to be a “living” document, updated as neces

sary, such that when industrial activities or stormwater control practices are modified or replaced, the SWPPP is similarly revised to reflect these changes

. The process of developing a SWPPP involves the following four steps:

• Step 1 : Formation of a pollution preven

tion team of qualified personnel who will be responsible for preparing the plan and assisting the plant manager in implement

ing practices to comply with the permit;

• Step 2 : Assessment of potential stormwater pollution sources;

• Step 3 : Selection of appropriate control measures that minimize the discharge of pollutants during storm events for each of these sources; and

• Step 4 : Development of procedures for conducting required inspection/monitoring activities, as well as regular maintenance of control measures

. This guide will assist you with these four steps

. The selection of a pollution preven

tion team is discussed in the next section (Section 2

. C)

. Site asses sment is addressed in Section 3, the selection of control measures is discussed in Section 4, and inspection/moni

toring procedures are addressed in Section 5

. The remaining sections of the guide address implementation of practices to comply with the permit and periodic evaluation of your SWPPP

.

Prepare your SWPPP before submitting an NOI or permit application for coverage! 

### What is a SWPPP?
A SWPPP is a site-specific, written document that:

• Identifies potential sources of stormwater pollution at the industrial facility;

• Describes stormwater control measures that are used to reduce or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharges from the industrial facility; and

• Identifies procedures the operator will use to comply with the terms and conditions of the 2008 MSGP or a State general industrial stormwater permit. You are required to develop your SWPPP to address the specific conditions at your site and keep it up-to-date to reflect changes at your site both for your use and for review by the regulatory agencies responsible for overseeing your permit compliance.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 5 To assist permittees in their recordkeeping, EPA has developed an Additional MSGP Documentation template, which is available at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

. This template, developed for permit holders subject to the 2008 MSGP, is available in Microsoft Word and can be modified as necessary to address State-specific permit requirements

. 

## 2.C Stormwater Pollution Prevention Team (Step 1)
The first step in developing the SWPPP is to identify the stormwater pollution prevention
team

. The stormwater pollution prevention team is responsible for assisting the facility manager in developing the facility’s SWPPP as well as implementing and maintaining stormwater control measures, taking correc

tive action where necessary to address permit violations or to improve the performance of control measures, and modifying the SWPPP to reflect changes made to the control mea

sures

. Since industrial facilities differ in size and complexity, the number of team members will also vary

. The stormw ater pollution pre

vention team should consist of those people on-site who are most familiar with the facility and its operations and responsible for ensur

ing that necessary controls are in place to eliminate or minimize the impacts of storm

water from the facility

. A key member of the stormwater pollution prevention team (for some facilities, this may be the only member) is the person with primary responsibility for developing and overseeing facility activities necessary to com

ply with the permit

. This shoul d be someone who will be on-site on a daily basis and who is familiar with the facility and its operations

. This person will also likely have primary responsibility for ensuring that inspections and monitoring activities are conducted

. If an EPA or State inspector visits the facility, this person will be the main point of contact for the SWPPP

. A typical SWPPP includes the following elements:

•	 Stormwater pollution prevention team;

•	 Site description;
•	 Summary of potential pollutant sources; •	 Description of control measures;
•	 Schedules and procedures;

•	 Documentation to support eligibility con

siderations under other federal laws; and

•	 Certification of the SWPPP.
EPA has developed a model Industrial SWPPP Template , which can be found in Appendix A, and on EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/npdes/ stormwater/msgp

. This template, developed for permit holders subject to the 2008 MSGP, is available in Microsoft Word and can be customized to address SWPPP requirements in different State NPDES permits

. Where your facility has other written pro

cedures in place, such as a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan or an Environmental Management System (EMS) developed for a National Environmental Performance Track facility, your SWPPP can reference the portions of those documents in lieu of duplicating that information in your SWPPP

. In these instances, you should keep copies of the relevant portions of those docu

ments with your SWPPP

.



## Additional SWPPP Documentation
After you become authorized under the permit, you will need to keep records on any implementation activities required under your permit, including records related to inspec

tions, maintenance, monitoring results, and corrective actions

. This addit ional documen

tation, although separate from the actual SWPPP, should be kept with the SWPPP so that all of your NPDES stormwater records are filed in one central location (see Section 7)

. EPA’s 2008 MSGP includes the requirements for a SWPPP in Part 5 of the permit.

In your SWPPP, identify the staff members (by name or title) that comprise the facility’s stormwater pollution prevention team as well as their individual responsibilities. Make sure you keep this information up-to-date as staff members change. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP6 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators Each member of the stormwater pollution prevention team should have ready access to either an electronic or paper copy of appli

cable portions of the industrial stormwater general permit and the SWPPP

. 

## 2.D What Do I Need to Do to Complete My SWPPP?
After identifying your pollution prevention team, you are ready to complete the next three steps in the development of your SWPPP:

• Step 2 : Assessing your site and activities (Section 3);
•	 Step 3 : Selecting control measures (Section 4); and

• Step 4 : Developing procedures for inspec

tions and monitoring (Section 5)

. Section 6 describes final steps necessary to complete your SWPPP and to obtain permit coverage

. Section 7 suggests how records relating to permit compliance should be kept

.

**Qualified Personnel –** Members of your stormwater pollution prevention team and those conducting inspections and monitoring activities should be “qualified personnel.” EPA defines qualified personnel as “those who posses the knowledge and skills to assess conditions and activities that could impact stormwater quality at your facility, and who can also evaluate the effectiveness of control measures.” Consider adding a stormwater management component to employee job descriptions and annual reviews, as appropriate to specific jobs. Often these requirements compliment existing tasks such as maintaining a clean work area; promptly cleaning up spills and leaks; performing regularly scheduled equipment maintenance; and properly storing all chemicals, oils, and other liquid pollutants.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 7 This section describes how to collect the information needed for your SWPPP

. This information includes:

• An assessment of the activities performed at your facility – this assessment will help identify potential pollutant sources

.

• An evaluation of existing sampling data – a review of sampling data will show where past problems have occurred

.

• Preparing maps of your facility – site maps will identify the location of industrial activities, pollutant sources, control measures, and the direction of stormwater flow

. 

## 3.A Conduct an Assessment of the Activities Performed at Your Facility
The first step in developing a SWPPP is to gain a thorough understanding of the activities conducted and equipment located at your facility to be able to identify potential pollutant discharge concerns

. To comple te this step, you will need to conduct a detailed walk-through of your facility to identify industrial materials or material handling activities exposed to stormwater (see text box below), any stormwater controls already in place at your facility, the direc

tion of stormwater flow through and from your facility, and the location of all stormwater outfalls

. If possib le, you should conduct your walk-through dur

ing a rain event so that you can observe the flow of stormwater on your site

. In addition to your walk-through, you should communicate with fellow site employees who may be more familiar with daily operations than you so that you can thoroughly identify any activities that may contribute stormwater pollutants, but that may not be readily visible during a routine walk-through (e

. g

. , to identif y activities that are not performed on a routine basis)

. 

# Section 3: Site Assessment and Planning (Step 2)

How Does EPA Define Industrial Materials and Material Handling Activities?

Industrial materials or activities include, but are not limited to: material handling equipment or activities; industrial machinery; raw materials; industrial production and processes; and intermediate products, by‐products, final products, and waste products. Material handling activities include, but are not limited to: the storage, loading and unloading, transportation, disposal, or conveyance of any raw material, intermediate product, final product or waste product. See 40 CFR 122.26(g). Develop a list of industrial activities at your site exposed to stormwater. Identify these activities on your site map. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP8 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators The facility assessment will reveal locations where industrial materials or material han

dling activities may be contributing stormwa

ter contaminants, and help you identify the most important pollutant sources

. The follo w

ing approach is suggested for completing your facility assessment:
Identification of Activities Exposed to Stormwater

. As you conduct your facility assessment, make a list of the industrial activities exposed to stormwater (e

. g

. , mate

rial storage; equipment fueling, maintenance, and cleaning; cutting steel beams)

. Note thei r location so they can be identified on the site
map

. Inventory of Materials and Pollutants

. Make a list of the materials and pollutants (e

. g

. , crankcase oil, zinc, sulfuric acid, and clean

ing solvents) associated with each identified activity, including pollutants associated with these materials, based on how they are stored, handled, disposed, etc

. Note wh ether these materials are exposed to stormwater, or have the potential to be exposed to stormwater

. How materials are stored and handled has a bearing on the potential for stormwater pollution

.

Areas with Spill or Leak Potential

. Document where potential spills and leaks may occur, and specify the outfall(s) that could be affected by such spills and leaks

. Documen t all significant spills and leaks that actually occurred at exposed areas, or that drained to a stormwater conveyance, in the three years prior to the date you prepare or amend your SWPPP

. You should consider spillage and leakage of all types of materials when prepar

ing for and documenting such releases

. Presence of Non-Stormwater Discharges

. A nonstormwater discharge is any discharge from your facility this is not composed entirely of rainfall or snowmelt runoff

. Non-sto rmwater discharges often come from potable water sources or process wastewater discharges

.With few exceptions, the discharge of nonstormwater as runoff from your facility is pro

hibited unless it is specifically allowed under an NPDES permit

.You must evaluate for the presence of nonstormwater discharges and be able to demon

strate that all unauthorized non-stormwater discharges have been eliminated prior to obtaining coverage under a stormwater permit (or that any other discharges are otherwise covered under a different NPDES permit)

. Conduct your evaluation during a period of dry weather (no rain for at least the previous three days)

. Walk your s ite and evaluate each outfall to identify any locations with flowing or stagnant water or discharging liquid; the presence of such water or liquid that would be indicative of a non-stormwater discharge

. You should try to identify the source of the water or liquid, and determine if it is one of the allowable non-stormwater discharges identi

fied below or otherwise in need of further action to eliminate the source

. You shoul d also identify any indicators of past or inter

mittent non-stormwater discharges (such as evidence of stains at the outfall)

.

Identify locations of potential spills and leaks that could contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges, and the corresponding outfalls that would be affected. Review past records of all significant spills and leaks that occurred in areas exposed to stormwater or that drained to a stormwater conveyance over the past three years, and provide a summary or copy of such records in your SWPPP. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP

For each of the activities identified above, create an inventory of the materials associated with each activity (this may be easiest to do in a table). Identify whether these materials are or have the potential to be exposed to stormwater. Also, identify any pollutants associated with these materials based on how they are stored, handled, disposed, etc. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 9 If any non-stormwater discharges are identi

fied during the evaluation, you should take steps to eliminate any that are prohibited under your permit

. For examp le, plug a floor drain, re-route a sink drain to the sanitary sewer, or submit an NPDES permit application for an unauthorized cooling water discharge

. Location of Salt Storage

. Document the loca

tion of any storage piles containing salt used for deicing or that are used for other commer

cial or industrial purposes

. Salt and dei cing materials should be stored inside and not exposed to stormwater runoff, if possible

.

Documentation of your evaluation for nonstormwater discharges. Typically, this documentation should include: •	 The date of any evaluation;

•	 A description of the evaluation criteria used;

•	 A list of the outfalls or onsite drainage points that were directly observed during the evaluation;

•	 The different types of non-stormwater discharge(s) and source locations; and

•	 The action(s) taken, such as a list of control measures used to eliminate unauthorized discharge(s), if any were identified. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP If your facility has storage piles containing salt, document the type of material, amount, and its location. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Allowable Non-Stormwater Discharges Most industrial stormwater general permits include a list of non-stormwater discharges that are “allowable” and do not need to be eliminated. As used in EPA’s 2008 MSGP, “allowable non-stormwater discharges” are those that while not stormwater discharges, are covered under the terms and conditions of the stormwater permit. These are often discharges that if not covered under a stormwater permit would require coverage under some other NPDES permit. The list of allowable non-stormwater discharges from the 2008 MSGP (Part 1.1.3) includes:

• Discharges from fire-fighting activities;
•	 Fire hydrant flushings;
•	 Potable water, including water line flushings;
•	 Uncontaminated condensate from air conditioners, coolers, and other compressors and from the outside storage of refrigerated gases or liquids; •	 Irrigation drainage; •	 Landscape watering provided all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer have been applied in accordance with the approved labeling;
•	 Pavement wash waters where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous materials have occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed);
•	 Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents;
•	 Uncontaminated ground water or spring water;
•	 Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; and
•	 Incidental windblow n mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of your facility, but not intentional discharges from the cooling tower (e.g., “piped” cooling tower blowdown or drains).10 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## 3.B Evaluate Sampling Data
You should evaluate any stormwater sampling data you, or others, collected, from the pre

vious permit term or any time in the past 5 years, which are associated with stormwater discharges from the facility

. This in cludes any analytic sampling data, such as benchmark monitoring or effluent limitation guideline data

. The purpose of evaluating your past sam

pling data is to identify or pinpoint any pollut

ants of concern, hotspots, or control measures that are not functioning correctly

. This in for

mation will be useful as you identify and select control measures (described in Section 4)

.

A summary of all stormwater discharge sampling data collected at your facility during the previous permit term. You should summarize the data by pollutant, and indicate whether the pollutant parameter exceeded any applicable benchmark or effluent limit. Include in your SWPPP your evaluation of the data, particularly where pollutants exceeded the 2008 MSGP benchmark values (see SWPPP Tip below). Attempt to identify why that pollutant existed in elevated concentrations, what are the potential sources of that pollutant at your facility, and what potential measures you could use to reduce that pollutant. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Compare your sampling results to EPA’s 2008 MSGP Benchmark values below.

Pollutant 2008 MSGP Benchmark

Ammonia* 2.14 mg/L Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5 day) 30 mg/L

Chemical Oxygen Demand 120 mg/L Total Suspended Solids 100 mg/L
Turbidity 50 NTU Nitrate + Nitrite Nitrogen 0.68 mg/L Total Phosphorus 2.0 mg/L pH 6.0 – 9.0 s.u. Aluminum (T) (pH 6.5 - 9) 0.75 mg/L Antimony (T) 0.64 mg/L
Arsenic (T) 0.15 mg/L Beryllium (T) 0.13 mg/L
Cadmium (T)† 0.0021 mg/L Copper (T)*† 0.014 mg/L Cyanide 0.022 mg/L
Iron (T) 1.0 mg/L
Lead (T)*† 0.082 mg/L Magnesium (T) 0.064 mg/L Mercury (T) 0.0014 mg/L
Nickel (T)† 0.47 mg/L
Selenium (T)* 0.005 mg/L
Silver (T)*† 0.0038 mg/L
Zinc (T)† 0.12 mg/L
(T) Total recoverable

* New criteria are currently under development, but values are based on existing criteria. † These pollutants are dependent on water hardness. The benchmark value listed is based

on a hardness of 100 mg/L. The 2008 MSGP requires industrial facility to analyze receiving water samples for hardness, and use the hardness tables provided in the 2008 MSGP to determine the applicable benchmark value for that facility.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 11 One free web-based mapping service is EPA’s Water Locator Tool, which is avail

able at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/ msgp

. To use the tool, enter your facility address in Step 1, then click on “Window to My Environment” in Step 2 (make sure your pop-up blocker is turned off)

. You will be able to zoom and reposition the map

. When you get the map to the appropriate scale and location, you can copy and paste it into your SWPPP

. Use a graphics program or a pen to mark the location of your facility on the map

. An example general location map is included in Figure 3

. 

## 3.C Develop General Location and Site Maps
The final step in the site assessment process is to document the results of your site assess

ment on a detailed site map

. If you have already developed a site map for an earlier permit, you should modify the map as neces

sary to reflect changes at your facility, includ

ing changes to any of your control measures or industrial activities

. Your SWPPP must include both a general loca

tion map and a detailed site map

. The follo w

ing is a discussion of what is required for each type

.



## General Location Map A general location map is helpful to identify nearby, but not necessarily adjacent, water

bodies around your facility

. Include i n your SWPPP a general location map (e

. g

. , U

. S

. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map, or other large scale area map) with enough detail to identify the location of your facil

ity and all nearby receiving waters that may receive your stormwater discharges

. Create a USGS map for your area by using the USGS National Map Viewer ( http://nmviewogc. cr.usgs.gov/viewer.htm )

. Maps can be printed or saved as PDF documents and inserted into your SWPPP

. Develop a general location map of your facility that shows: •	 the location of your facility •	 receiving waters to which your facility discharges It may also be helpful to include roads or political boundaries to better locate your facility. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Figure 2. Example general location map. Figure 3. Example general location map.12 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators appropriate control measures (Section 4) and monitoring locations (Section 5), you should revise your site map to reflect this information and any additional changes identified as you develop your SWPPP

. If you are unable to fit all the information on one map, use multiple maps to provide a full characterization of the information described above

. Also, i f activities and conditions change at your site during the term of the NPDES permit, you should update the map as described in Section 6

. C of thi s guide

. An example of a site map is included (see Figure 4) and in Appendix C

. 

## Site Map
Develop a map of your site that includes, among other things, the footprint of all build

ings, structures, paved areas, and parking lots

. The site map is intended to show the direction of stormwater flow throughout your facility and the potential pollutant sources that may come into contact with your storm

water runoff

. EPA recommends that you develop a first draft of the site map based on the information col

lected during your assessment

. After y ou select

Figure 4. Example site map.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 13 Include a site map of your facility which includes the items below: •	 The size of the property in acres;
•	 The location and extent of significant structures and impervious surfaces;

•	 Directions of stormwater flow (use arrows);

•	 Locations of all existing structural control measures;
•	 Locations of all receiving waters in the immediate vicinity of your facility, indicating if any of the waters are impaired and, if so, whether the waters have TMDLs established for them;

•	 Locations of all stormwater conveyances including ditches, pipes, and swales;

•	 Locations of potential pollutant sources identified (see Section 3.B);

•	 Locations where significant spills or leaks have occurred;

•	 Locations of all stormwater monitoring points;

•	 Locations of stormwater inlets and outfalls, with a unique identification code for each outfall (e.g., Outfall No. 1, No. 2, etc), indicating if you are treating one or more outfalls as “substantially identical”, and an approximate outline of the areas draining to each outfall; •	 Municipal separate storm sewer systems, where your stormwater discharges to them;

•	 Locations and descriptions of all non-stormwater discharges;

•	 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 and storage areas;

– Immediate access roads and rail lines used or traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste material, or by-products used or created by the facility;
–	 Transfer areas for substances in bulk; and –	 Machinery; and
•	 Locations and sources of run-on to your site from adjacent property that contains significant quantities of pollutants. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP14 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators Control measures are the best management practices (BMPs) or other structural or non-structural practices that are used to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater

. Structu ral control measures, as the name implies, focus on installation of hard structures to control discharges

. Structu ral controls include practices such as vegetative swales, collection and reuse of stormwater, inlet controls, snow management, infiltration devices, and wet retention measures

. Non-str uctural control measures are intended to prevent or reduce the generation of pol

lutants in stormwater and/or the volume of stormwater runoff using practices that focus on facility operations and procedures

. Example s of non-structural control measures include procedural practices such as employee trainings and the posting of signs that raise staff awareness to the BMPs and procedures in place to control stormwater pollutants

. A combination of preventive and active treatment control measures usually results in the most effective stormwater management for minimizing the offsite discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff

. Most cont rol measures require regular maintenance to function as intended

. Some control measures have simple main

tenance requirements, while others may require more extensive upkeep in order to maximize their performance

. Note that i dentify

ing weaknesses in current facility practices will help permittees determine appropriate control measures for use at the site

. 

## General Stormwater Management Principles In most industrial stormwater permits, including the 2008 MSGP, the site operator is given the flexibility to select the type of control measures, including specific technologies, which he/she believes are best suited to the facility and that will meet the permit’s require

ments

. This flexibility is necessary given the variability of each industrial operation, the differences in the topography from site to site, and the dissimilarities in the activities and materials exposed to
stormwater

. However , there are certain general principles of storm

water management that are common to all sites, and that can be used by operators in their selection and design of control measures

. These general principles, listed below, should be considered as a way to maximize the performance of control measures at your site

.

• Pollution prevention – The best way to prevent stormwater pollution is to mini

mize the use of water contaminants in your industrial activities

. When sele cting control measures for the facility, you should focus on controls that are geared toward reducing pollutants at the source to prevent stormwater pollution

. Source control practices include maintaining equipment, picking up trash and debris, training site staff on appropriate spill procedures, and proper materials manage

ment and storage

. 

# Section 4: Selecting Control Measures (Step 3)

Effluent limits = stormwater control requirements. In the 2008 MSGP, as with most state industrial stormwater general permits, stormwater control measures are those structural or non-structural practices that are used to achieve the permit’s effluent limits.



### What does “minimize” mean?

The technology

- based limi ts included in EPA’s 2008 MSGP require that you minimize (i.e., defined as reduce and/or eliminate) stormwater exposure to pollutants using control measures that are technologically available, economi

‐ cally practicable, and achievable in light of best industry practice.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 15 • Minimizing exposure – Another effective way to minimize stormwater pollution is to eliminate opportunities for stormwater to come into contact with industrial activi

ties and polluting materials

. You shoul d look for opportunities to relocate industrial activities/materials to covered or contained areas and to properly store and transport any accumulated scrap or waste material

.

• Combining controls – Combined control measures are often more effective than control measures in isolation

. For examp le, good housekeeping will often go a long way to minimize stormwater pollution but is more effective when combined with mini

mizing the exposure of significant materi

als or activities and a structural control, such as inlet protection

.

• Examining your site’s pollutant sources – Understand the type and quantity of pol

lutants that could contaminate stormwater leaving your facility

. Use your kn owledge of the potential pollutants to drive your selection and design of effective control

measures

.

• Maximizing infiltration – Onsite infiltra

tion reduces overland runoff, improves groundwater recharge, and augments base flow in local streams

. You shoul d look for opportunities to minimize impervious area and increase areas where stormwater can infiltrate on-site

. Keep in mind , however, that the use of onsite infiltration typically must be combined with other control mea

sures to avoid ground water contamination

.

• Using existing vegetated areas – Open vegetated swales and natural depressions can be used to dissipate energy in overland flow and reduce erosion

. Vegetat ed swales and natural depressions can increase infil

tration and, in some cases, promote uptake of metals and nutrients by plants

.

• Buffering on-site or adjacent waterbodies or drainage systems – Maintain or restore vegetated buffer zones between your facili

ty’s impervious areas and adjacent surface
waters

. • Using structural practices (as applicable) – When non-structural control measures are not effective in preventing stormwater contamination, structural control measures (e

. g

. , swirl separators, sand filters, retention basins, etc

. ) may be needed to treat storm

water before it leaves your facility

. 

## EPA’s Technology-Based Discharge Requirements The following sections describe the 12 catego

ries of discharge requirements (or “effluent limits”) required by the 2008 MSGP

. Althoug h the wording of these requirements may be unique to the EPA permit, many State permits include requirements that are similar to the 2008 MSGP

. 

## 4.A Minimize Exposure
The first step in an effective stormwater con

trol program is minimizing exposure of man

ufacturing, processing, material storage areas, loading and unloading areas, dumpsters and other disposal areas, maintenance activities, and fueling operations to rain, snow, snow

melt, and runoff by both locating industrial materials and activities inside or protecting them with storm resistant coverings

.



### No Exposure Exemption

EPA’s regulations recogniz e the effective ness of minimizing exposure by allowing faciliti es to opt out of the permit by submitting a “No Exposure Certification” when all industrial activities are protected from contact with stormwater. The “No Exposure Certification” is included as Appendix K of the 2008 MSGP. Note that industrial materials do not need to be enclosed or covered if stormwater runoff from affected areas will not be discharged to receiving waters or if discharges

are authorized under another NPDES permit. Check your State permit for specific requirements for incorporating minimizi ng exposure into your SWPPP.16 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators Figure 5. Minimize exposure by providing cover for potential contaminants.Tetra Tech

Describe all structural controls or practices used to minimize the exposure of industrial activities to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff. The SWPPP must describe where the controls or practices are being implemented at your site. The location must also be identified on the SWPPP site map. Examples of exposure-minimizing control measures that could be used at your facility and described in the SWPPP include:
•	 The location and extent of grading, berms, or curbs used to contain contaminated stormwater or divert stormwater around areas of industrial activity;

•	 A description of the types of materials and equipment that are stored within secondary containment and the location of contained storage areas;
•	 The location of spill cleanup kits and a description and schedule for employee spill abatement and cleanup training; •	 Proper procedures for leaky vehicles and equipment, such as drip pans; parking in a contained area, or parking indoors;

•	 The use and location of spill/overflow protection equipment;

•	 Procedures for long-term storage or disposal of equipment and vehicles, such as draining all fluids;

•	 The location of covered and/or contained equipment cleaning areas; and

•	 The disposal method for all wash water, such as an on-site sump (if a sump is used, specify the pumping frequency) or sanitary sewer. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 17 

## 4.B Good Housekeeping
Good housekeeping practices offer a practical and cost-effective way to maintain a clean and orderly facility to prevent potential pollution sources from coming into contact with storm

water

. Good housekeeping practices also help to enhance safety and improve the overall work environment

. To effect ively document in your SWPPP that you are including good housekeeping procedures at your site, you should establish protocols to reduce the pos

sibility of mishandling materials or equipment and train employees in good housekeeping techniques

. An effect ive good housekeeping program not only benefits stormwater quality but makes the facility a clean, safe place for employees and clients

.

Common areas where good housekeeping practices should be followed include areas where trash containers are kept and adjacent areas, material storage areas, vehicle and equipment maintenance areas, and loading docks

. Involving employees in routine moni

toring of housekeeping practices has proven to be an effective means of ensuring the contin

ued implementation of this control measure

.

**Labeling Storm Drains –** A good stormwater awareness practice is to label all storm drains on your industrial facility with a “No Dumping – Drains to Stream” or similar message. If select drains at your facility discharge to the sanitary sewer system or to a sump (for example, at a wash rack), you should label those with a “Drains to Sanitary Sewer” or similar message.

Figure 6. Two photos showing an industrial facility before and after it followed good housekeeping practices.Tetra Tech

Describe any practices you are implementing to keep exposed areas of your site clean. Describe where each practice is being implemented at your site. Include here your schedule or approach for: •	 Regular pickup and disposal of waste materials and scrap equipment;

•	 Maintenance of clean work spaces;
•	 Routine inspections for leaks and of the condition of drums, tanks, and containers;

•	 Routine inspections to make sure that industri al materials are properly stored and labeled;

•	 A schedule for sweeping paved areas and floors, including who will perform the sweeping (employee or contractor);

•	 The individual or position responsible for emptying drip pans placed beneath leaking equipment, valves, and fill lines. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP18 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## 4.C Maintenance
A good maintenance program requires regu

lar inspections, testing, and the preventive maintenance and repair of industrial equip

ment (stationary and mobile) and industrial systems

. Maintenance programs are intended to ensure that structural control measures and industrial equipment are kept in good operating condition and to prevent or mini

mize leaks and other releases of pollutants (see Section 4

. D for more spe cific informa

tion)

. If you notice a deficiency or otherwise find that your control measures or industrial equipment need to be replaced or repaired to ensure proper functioning, and to avoid leaks or other releases, you must make the neces

sary repairs or modifications, typically prior to the next wet weather event and as expedi

tiously as practicable

. Facilities with good maintenance programs will keep a maintenance log that tracks the regular maintenance of industrial equipment and stormwater control measures

. The log provides a maintenance history for each piece of equipment and demonstrates to regulatory authorities that you have implemented the maintenance program outlined in your SWPPP

. 

## 4.D Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
Spills and leaks, together, are the largest source of industrial stormwater pollution

. For this reason, your SWPPP must identify control measures that are used at your site to minimize the potential for spills, leaks, and other releases that may come into contact with stormwater

. Among the p ractices that should be in place at your site are plans for effective response to spills if or when they

occur

. If your facility has more than 1,320 gallons of oil storage capacity in aboveground tanks you may also be required to develop a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) plan consistent with 40 CFR 112

. 1

.

Employees must be aware of notification procedures in the event of a spill or leak, including when to contact appropriate facility personnel, emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. State or local requirements may necessitate reporting of spills or other prohibited discharges to local emergency response, public health, or drinking water supply agencies. Contact information must be posted in locations that are readily accessible and available to employees. Where a leak, spill, or other release containing a hazardous substance or oil in an amount equal to or in excess of a reportable quantity established under either 40 CFR Part 110, 40 CFR Part 117, or 40 CFR Part 302, occurs during a 24-hour period, you must notify the National Response Center (NRC) at (800) 424-8802 or, in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, call (202) 267-2675 in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 110, 40 CFR Part 117, and 40 CFR Part 302 as soon as you have knowledge of the discharge. Figure 8. Spill kits should be maintained in areas with spill potential, such as fueling stations.

Describe procedures to: •	 Maintain industrial equipment so that leaks and other releases are avoided, and

•	 Maintain any of your site’s control measures in effective operating condition. Include the schedule you will follow for such maintenance activities. Describe where each applicable procedure is being implemented at the site. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Figure 7. Equipment should receive routine preventative maintenance to prevent drips and leaks.Tetra TechTetra TechDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 19 

## 4.E Erosion and Sediment Controls
Permits typically require control measures to be selected and implemented to limit erosion on areas of the site that, due to topography, land disturbing activities, soils, cover, materi

als, or other factors, are likely to experience erosion

. In general, erosion control measures, which prevent soil or sediment from becoming mobilized, should be used as the primary line of defense, while sediment control measures, which trap, infiltrate, or settle out mobilized sediments, should be used to back-up the ero

sion control measures

. For ins tance, erosion control measures, include grading, seeding, mulching, and sodding, that prevent soil from becoming dislodged, should be considered first

. Where sediment may be dislodged and potentially mobilized in stormwater runoff, sediment control measures that trap eroded sediment include silt fences, sediment ponds, and stabilized entrances should be considered

. When selecting, designing, installing, and implementing appropriate erosion and sedi

ment control measures, you should consult with your Tribal, State, and local authorities to ensure that you consider the appropriate con

trol measures

. EPA’s i nternet-based resources relating to controlling erosion and sedimen

tation include the sector-specific Industrial Stormwater Fact Sheet Series , ( www.epa.gov/ npdes/stormwater/msgp ), National Menu of Stormwater BMPs ( www.epa.gov/npdes/ stormwater/menuofbmps ), and National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint Source Pollution from Urban Areas ( www.epa.gov/owow/nps/urbanmm/ index.html )

. Projects that disturb 1 acre or more of land generally require coverage under an NPDES construction general permit (CGP). Information on EPA’s 2008 CGP requirements, including links to construction SWPPP resources, is available at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/cgp

.

Include the following:
•	 A narrative description of areas of your site that are susceptible to erosion (note: the site map will also identify these areas);

•	 A description of erosion and sediment control measures used at your site to stabilize exposed areas and contain runoff to minimize onsite erosion and potential offsite discharges of sediment.

**Note** : Permits often require flow velocity dissipation devices at discharge locations and within outfall channels where necessary to reduce erosion and/or settle out pollutants. Describe in your SWPPP the location of each control implemented at your site. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP

Figure 9. Slope drains to protect a hillside from erosion.Tetra Tech

Describe any structural controls or procedures you are putting in place to minimize the potential for leaks, spills, and other releases. At a minimum, your SWPPP should include:
•	 The location(s) of spill response plans for significant materials;
•	 A schedule for training employees in spill response procedures;
•	 Procedures for plainly labeling containers (e.g., “Used Oil,” “Spent Solvents,” “Fertilizers and Pesticides,” etc.) that could be susceptible to spillage or leakage to encourage proper handling and facilitate rapid response if spills or leaks occur; •	 Preventative measures such as barriers between material storage and traffic areas, secondary containment provisions, and procedures for material storage and handling;
•	 The individual or position responsible for making sure the spill kits are complete and ready for use; •	 Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning up leaks, spills, and other releases; and
•	 Procedures for notification of appropriate facility personnel, emergency response agencies, and regulatory agencies. Describe where each control is to be located or where applicable procedures will be implemented. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP20 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## 4.F Management of Runoff

Similar to erosion and sediment controls, the management of stormwater runoff that flows through your site is an effective way to reduce the pollutants that are discharged from your site

. Where you employ structures or practices that are intended to divert, infiltrate, reuse, or otherwise reduce stormwater runoff so as to reduce the discharge of pollutants, your SWPPP must include a description of those controls

. Appropriate measures are highly site-specific, but may include vegetative swales, berms, collection and reuse of storm

water, inlet controls, snow management, infil

tration devices, and wet retention measures

.

As mentioned previously, a combination of pre

ventive and treatment control measures usually results in the most effective approach to storm

water management for minimizing the offsite discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff

. 

## 4.G Salt Storage Piles or Piles Containing Salt
Salt is commonly used for deicing and other commercial or industrial purposes, including maintenance of paved surfaces

. Salt pi les or piles that are predominantly composed of other materials that contain some salt typically must be covered or enclosed and otherwise isolated from coming into contact with stormwater (e

. g

. , good housekeeping, diversions, contain

ment)

. Piles do not need to be enclosed or covered if stormwater runoff from the piles is not discharged or if discharges from the piles are authorized under another NPDES permit

. To effectively document in your SWPPP that you are minimizing exposure of these piles to stormwater, you should consider creating a checklist to verify that salt loading and offload

ing operations occur within contained areas with appropriate measures in place to prevent the track out of salt from the contained areas

.

When selecting control measures, be careful not to violate local building or fire codes and other ordinances. An example would be constructing a shed for storage of chemicals and then finding out from the fire department that you are in violation for locating the shed too close to the main building, not equipping the shed with sprinklers or other fire control device, and not properly labeling containers. Figure 10. Vegetated berm used to prevent facility inundation when the river is at flood stage.Tetra Tech

Figure 11. Salt pile covered with a tarp.Tetra Tech Include the following: •	 A description of controls used at your site to divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain, or otherwise reduce stormwater runoff.
•	 A description of locations at your site where each control will be implemented. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 21 

## 4.H Sector

- Specific Requirements
Most industrial stormwater general permits regulate discharges of stormwater from a number of different industrial sectors

. For instance, EPA’s 2008 MSGP regulates dis

charges from 29 different industrial sectors

. These “sectors” consist of similar facilities categorized by the nature of their industrial activity, type of materials handled, and mate

rial management practices employed

. The sectors are structured to a large extent on the definition of “stormwater discharge associ

ated with industrial activity” found at 40 CFR 122

. 26 (b)(14)(i)–(ix), (xi), under which many sectors are identified based on their standard industrial classification (SIC) code

. Review your industrial stormwater general permit to determine if there are additional sector-specific discharge requirements (or “effluent limits”) for which your type of industrial activity are subject

. If so, you wi ll need to specifically document how you will comply with those requirements in your SWPPP

. Not all sectors will necessarily have additional sector-specific discharge require

ments

. For example, Sector N of EPA’s 2008 MSGP includes specific requirements for scrap recycling and waste recycling facili

ties as defined by SIC Major Group Code 50 (5093)

. One of the specific Sector N discharge requirements is to “minimize surface runoff from coming in contact with scrap processing equipment

. ” Alternat ively, the Chemical and Allied Products Manufacturing, and Refiningsector (Sector C) does not have any sectorspecific discharge requirements in the 2008 MSGP

. Note that, if covered by the 2008 MSGP, youare responsible for complying with sectorspecific requirements associated with your primary industrial activity and all co-located industrial activities

. Co-loca ted industrial activities are industrial activities, exclud

ing your primary industrial activity, located on-site that are also required to be covered by the 2008 MSGP or a State general permit

. Statewide general permits may have different requirements for specific industrial sectors

.

**Sector-specific requirements for the 2008 MSGP** 

**–** All sector-specific requirements can be found in Part 8 of the 2008 MSGP. **Sector-specific fact sheets –** EPA has developed fact sheets specific to the industrial activities, pollutants and control measures used at each of the 29 sectors covered by the 2008 MSGP. These sector fact sheets can be found at http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/ swsectors.cfm

.

Include the following: •	 The industrial sector, or sectors, applicable to the permitted site.
•	 A discussion of the control measures implemented to address sector-specific requirements, if applicable, consistent with Part 8 of the 2008 MSGP.
•	 The location of each control and/or procedure used to comply with the sector-specific requirements. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Include the following: •	 The identification of salt storage piles or piles containing salt, and a description of structures at your site covering or enclosing such piles, or that prevent the discharge of stormwater from such piles.

•	 If tarps are used to cover piles, the SWPPP should describe procedures for when tarps will be placed over the piles.

•	 A description of any controls or procedur es used to minimize exposure resultin g from adding to or removing materials from the pile.

•	 The locations at your site where each control and/or procedure are implemented. Note that these locations must be identified on the SWPPP site map as well. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP22 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## 4.I Employee Training
Stormwater training is required for all employees who work in areas where indus

trial activities or material handling activities are exposed to stormwater, or who are respon

sible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this permit

. These employees include inspectors, maintenance personnel, and all members of your Pollution Prevention Team

. The train ing session or sessions are expected to cover the contents of the facility SWPPP, control measures imple

mented to achieve compliance with applicable discharge requirements, spill containment and cleanup procedures, maintenance, moni

toring, inspection, planning, reporting, and documentation requirements

. EPA recommends that training be conducted for any applicable employees at least annu

ally and whenever a new employee starts who meets the description above

. You shoul d have a sign-in/sign-out sheet at each training class to document that employees have partici

pated

. Keep the sign-in/sign-out sheet with your SWPPP

. Customize the employee training to the issues at your facility, and ensure that employees are trained on the control measures they are expected to implement. Among the topics you cover in your training should be some of the basic principles of stormwater management. For example, you should convey that: •	 Stormwater pollution occurs when rainfall runoff picks up pollutants from the ground or areas exposed to rainfall.

•	 Polluted stormwater can cause significant water quality problems, such as fish kills and drinking water contamination. Stormwater runoff is typically discharged directly to receiving waters, and is not treated somewhere else, like at a wastewater treatment plant.

•	 Potential stormwater pollutants should be kept inside or under cover whenever possible.

•	 The best way to prevent stormwater problems is through general good housekeeping practices. A clean and organized facility will usually have very few stormwater problems.

•	 If anyone sees any potential stormwater problems, they should report it to the facility operator or a member of the stormwater pollution prevention team.

Figure 12. In addition to employee training, labeling storm drains is a good measure to educate employees. Include the following: •	 Person(s) responsible for conducting the training (a member of the Pollution Prevention Team, contractor, or other?)

•	 The employees or positions that will receive stormwater training.

•	 The frequency of stormwater training sessions (annually, upon hire, or other). EPA recommends at least once per year. For example, the SWPPP might state that stormwater training will be conducted annually in September so employees are ready for the upcoming wet weather season.

•	 The stormwater topics covered during the training session or sessions.

•	 The sign-in/sign-out sheets from the training session. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPTetra TechDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 23 

## 4.J Non

- Stormwater Discharges

In Section 3

. A, this guid e discussed theassessment of allowable and prohibited nonstormwater discharges at your site

. As stated in that section, unauthorized non

- stormwat er discharges cannot be discharged from your facility unless specifically authorized by a separate, individual NPDES permit

. Your SWPPP should describe the assessment you conducted under Section 3

. A, how you eliminated any unauthorized non-stormwater discharges, and your plans to prevent unau

thorized non-stormwater discharges at your facility

. 

## 4.K Waste, Garbage, and Floatable Debris
You are responsible for making sure that stormwater runoff does not carry waste, gar

bage, and floatable debris to receiving waters

. To verify compliance with this requirement, you should identify and implement control measures (e

. g

. , good house keeping, sweep

ing, keeping lids closed on dumpsters) to keep exposed areas free of such materials

. Alternatively, your SWPPP should identify how you will intercept and properly dispose of these materials before they leave your facility

.

Figure 13. Unauthorized non-stormwater discharge from an industrial facility.

Figure 14. Poor management of waste and garbage at a facility. Include the following:
•	 A list of allowable non-stormwater discharges that occur at your facility.

•	 A description of unauthorized non-stormwater discharges found at your site and how they were eliminated. •	 Steps taken to ensure that other unauthorized non-stormwater discharges do not occur in the future. Note: If this section is already addressed by your documentation of non-stormwater discharges (see Section 3.A), you can simply include a crossreference to that section of your SWPPP. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP Include the following:
•	 A description of controls and procedures that will be used to minimize discharges of waste, garbage, and floatable debris. •	 Descriptions of the location of these control measures and procedures at your site. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPTetra TechTetra Tech24 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

## 4.L Dust Generation and Vehicle Tracking of Industrial Materials
As an operator, you are responsible for minimizing generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final or waste materials

. Dust control practices can reduce the activities and air movement that cause dust to be gener

ated from disturbed soil surfaces

. Airborn e particles pose a dual threat to the environ

ment and human health

. Dust can be car

ried offsite, thereby increasing soil loss from disturbed areas and increasing the likelihood of sedimentation and water pollution

. Control measures to minimize the generation of dust include:

• Sprinkling/Irrigation

. Moistening the ground surface with water is an effective dust control method for haul roads and other traffic routes

.

• Vegetative Cover

. By establishing a vegeta

tive cover on areas that will not see vehicle traffic, exposed soil is stabilized and wind velocity at ground level can be reduced, thus reducing the potential for dust to become airborne

.

• Mulch

. Mulch is a quick and effective, but not permanent, means of dust control for newly disturbed areas

.

• Wind Breaks

. Wind breaks can be trees or shrubs left in place during site clearing or constructed barriers such as a wind fence, snow fence, tarp curtain, hay bale, crate wall or sediment wall

. The break r educes wind velocity, minimizing airborne trans

fer of soil off site

.

• Tillage

. Deep tillage in large open areas brings soil clods to the surface where they rest on top of dust, preventing it from becoming airborne

.

• Stone

. Stone can be an effective dust deter

rent for construction roads and entrances or as a mulch in areas where vegetation cannot be established

.

• Spray-on Chemical Soil Treatments (Palliatives)

. Examples of chemical adhe

sives include anionic asphalt emulsion, latex emulsion, resin-water emulsions and calcium chloride

. Chemica l pallia

tives should be used only on mineral soils

. When considering chemical application to suppress dust, determine whether the chemical is biodegradable or water-soluble and what effect its application could have on the surrounding environment, including waterbodies and wildlife

. To reduce vehicle tracking of materials and sediment, the operator should keep stored or spilled materials away from all roads within the site

. Specific measures such as setting up a wash site or separate pad to clean vehicles prior to their leaving the site may be effective as well

.



## 4.M Numeric Effluent Limitations Based on Effluent Limit Guidelines

Some industrial activities identified in indus

trial stormwater permits also have Federal numeric effluent limits (called effluent limita

tion guidelines) that must be achieved in stormwater discharges

. The efflue nt limits are maximum concentrations or levels of specific pollutants that can be discharged in facility
stormwater

. If your fac ility includes one of the industrial categories listed below, refer to your industrial stormwater general permit (Parts 6

. 2

. 2

. 1 and 2

. 1

. 3 of EPA’s 200 8 MSGP) regard

ing numeric effluent limits and monitoring requirements to which you are subject: •	 Discharges resultin g from spray down or intentional wetting of logs at wet deck storage areas
•	 Runoff from phosphate fertilizer manu

facturing facilities that comes into contact with any raw materials, finished product, by-products or waste products

•	 Runoff from asphalt emulsion facilities

•	 Runoff from material storage piles at cement manufacturing facilities

•	 Mine dewatering discharges at crushed stone, construction sand and gravel, or industrial sand mining facilities

•	 Runoff from hazardous waste landfills

Include the following:
•	 A description of controls and procedures used at your site to minimize the generation of dust. •	 Descriptions of procedures and controls used to minimize off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials.

•	 Describe the location where each control and/ or procedure will be implemented and include on the SWPPP site map. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 25 •	 Runoff from non-hazardous waste landfills

•	 Runoff from coal storage piles at steam electric generating facilities
An example of a numeric effluent limit is the requirement for facilities that discharge storm

water from asphalt emulsion facilities to meet specific, numeric concentration limits for TSS, pH, and oil and grease (i

. e

. , based on the l im

its in 40 CFR Part 443, Subpart A)

. If your facility is subject to numeric effluent limits, you must document the location and type of control measures installed at your site to meet those limits

.



## 4.N Additional Controls to Address Impaired Waters
Many general permits have additional require

ments for discharges to impaired waters

. “Impaired waters” have been identified by a Tribe, State, or EPA as not meeting appli

cable State water quality standards pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act

. This may include both waters with approved or established Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), and those for which a TMDL has not yet been approved or established

. A TMDL determines the greatest amount of a given pollutant, such as sediment, that a water body can receive without violating water quality standards and designated uses

. The TMDL then establishes pollution reduc

tion goals to bring the water body into compli

ance with water quality standards

. Facilit ies that are subject to NPDES permits (i

. e

. , “point sources”), such as facilities subject to EPA’s 2008 MSGP, which discharge the pollutant causing the water body impairment, receive “waste load allocations” or “WLAs”

. The WLA estimates the daily amount of the impairment pollutant that can be discharged from par

ticular sources or categories of sources so that the waterbody can be restored to meeting its applicable water quality standards

. Should your facility discharge stormwater to a water body subject to a TMDL, EPA or a State permit authority may require additional effluent limits, monitoring requirements, or other restrictions consistent with an appli

cable WLA, or you may be required to apply for an individual NPDES permit

. Where you have been informed either in the permit or directly by EPA or a State permit authoritythat you are subject to any “water qualitybased” discharge requirement consistent with an applicable WLA, you are required to docu

ment in your SWPPP the control measures used to meet that requirement and to describe the location of such control measures

.

Impaired waters are streams, rivers, and lakes that do not currently meet designated uses and water quality standards. States, territories, and authorized tribes are required under the Clean Water Act to compile lists of known impaired waters, called 303(d) lists. Stormwater discharges to impaired waters may trigger additional control measures and monitoring requirements. For facilities subject to EPA’s 2008 MSGP, see Part 2.2 for a more detailed discussion of water quality-based effluent limitations and conditions for discharging to impaired waters. **Find impaired waters near your facility –** Use EPA’s Water Locator Tool (availab le at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp ) or other tool to map impaired waters within 10 miles of your facility. Enter your facility address in Step 1, then click on “Retrieve List of Impaired Waterbodies” under step 3 to see the list. Include the following:
•	 All numeric effluent limits the facility is required to meet based on effluent limit guidelines.

•	 A description of the control measures used to meet the numeric effluent limits.

•	 The location of each control measure at your site. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP

Include the following:
•	 A description of the control measures used to meet the water quality-based effluent limits.

•	 The location of each control measure at your site. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP26 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

# Section 5: Procedures for Inspections and Monitoring (Step 4)

The next step in developing your SWPPP is to set out the procedures you will follow for inspecting your site and monitoring your stormwater discharge

. The proce dures you develop in your SWPPP for inspection and monitoring will help you understand whether your control measures are working and, if not, provide you with ways you may improve your stormwater control

. Industrial stormwater permits typically require three types of inspections:

1

. Routine facility inspections (see Section 5

. A)

2

. Visual assessments (see Section 5

. B)

3

. Annual comprehensive site inspec

tions (see Section 5

. C)
Some States also require you to take samples of your stormwater discharge for laboratory analysis

. Check the a pplicable section of your industrial stormwater permit to determine if you are required to collect water quality monitoring samples

. See Section 5

. D for guidan ce on how to address your monitoring procedures in the SWPPP

. The following sections describe the type of information you should document in your SWPPP and the associated decisions you will have to make when planning for and conducting each of the three types of inspections

. 

## 5.A Routine Facility Inspections
Your industrial stormwater permit will likely specify a minimum frequency for con

ducting routine facility inspections

. The minim um frequency typically ranges from once per month to once per quarter; however, EPA recommends that you develop a routine inspection schedule customized for your facility and specific site condi

tions, which in many instances will require that you inspect more frequently than the minimum requirement

. EPA also su ggests conducting routine inspections when measurable precipitation falls during normal business hours

. Observin g site condi

tions during storms provides you with real-time feedback on control measures that are working and those that are not working effectively

. 

### EPA’s 2008 MSGP requires three types of facility inspections.

1. Routine facility inspections (2008 MSGP, Part 4.1)

2. Quarterly visual assessment of stormwater discharges (2008 MSGP, Part 4.2)

3. Comprehensive site inspections (2008 MSGP, Part 4.3)


### The 2008 MSGP also includes the requirements for the following types of monitoring:

1. Benchmark monitoring (2008 MSGP, Part 6.2.1)

2. Effluent guidelines limitation monitoring (2008 MSGP, Part 6.2.2)

3. State or Tribal monitoring (2008 MSGP, Part 6.2.3)

4. Impaired waters monitoring (2008 MSGP, Part 6.2.4)
Monitoring procedures are described in Part 6.1 of the 2008 MSGP.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 27 

## Recommended Routine Facility Inspection Sequence Although you are given the discretion to determine how best to conduct your inspec

tion, EPA recommends that your inspection follow a sequence that corresponds to how raw materials arrive at your site and are stored or processed in areas exposed to storm

water, and to how intermediate or finished products are stored, processed, or transported from your facility

. Accordi ngly, the following recommended inspection sequence will help ensure that you conduct a thorough routine inspection at your facility

. Whichev er process you determine is appropriate for your facility, you are required to describe that approach in your SWPPP

. 1

. Plan your inspection: Develop a consis

tent process to ensure that you inspect all areas

. One metho d to ensure that your inspections are consistent and thorough is to create a checklist (or make notes on a copy of your SWPPP) of areas to inspect

. Use as a resource your updated site map identifying the locations of industrialactivities exposed to stormwater, stormwater conveyances and discharge points, and any BMPs

. 2

. Evaluate the area where raw materials are delivered

. Are these areas contained or is there potential for stormwater to carry spills or pollutants away from the drop area? If so, can these pollutants leave your site to an adjoining facility, storm drain, or surface water? If so, additional control measures should be implemented

. 3

. Are raw materials stored in a contained area with overhead cover, berms, or other secondary containment? If not, do the raw materials have the potential to contribute to stormwater pollution?

Note : Single-wall chemical containers need to be located within secondary containment structures, behind berms, or covered to prevent stormwater con

tamination from an accidental release of containerized chemicals

. Similarl y, solid materials with the potential to contain pollutants (i

. e

. , scrap mate rial or wrecked vehicles) should include secondary containment

.
4

. Is equipment maintenance and fueling conducted in appropriately contained areas? Are spill kits present and full in areas where a liquid spill could be expected?

5

. Do the industrial processes occur in cov

ered and contained areas?

6

. Where do you store waste material?

Note : If the waste material has the poten

tial to contaminate stormwater it must be stored in a contained area or otherwise controlled

. Be sure to evaluate the facil

ity “bone-yard” and scrap all equipment that is out-of-date and not intended to be reused

. EPA’s 2008 MSGP requires quarterly routine facility inspections of all areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater, and of all stormwater control measures used to comply with the effluent limits contained in the permit. Inspections must be conducted by qualified personnel, including at least one member of your pollution prevention team, during regular business hours. You must specify the relevant inspection schedules in your SWPPP document as required in Part 5.1.5.
The 2008 MSGP requires that at least one of the four quarterly inspections each year be conducted when a stormwater discharge is occurring.

You should check your industrial stormwater general permit to determine if it establishes exceptions to the inspection requirements for certain types of sites. For example, 2008 MSGP Part 4.1.3 identifies exceptions to routine visual inspections for inactive or unstaffed sites.

Invest in an inexpensive digital camera to photo-document your inspections. Maintaining a photo history of inspections and control

measures can help you to recognize if conditions changed or your control measures are degrading. Photographs can also help provide documentation to EPA or state inspectors that control measures are being maintained and replaced as needed.28 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 7

. Is the finished product appropriately con

tained for potential pollutant sources?

8

. Following the internal evaluation, walk the perimeter of your site and look for evidence of stormwater discharges—particularly stains from oil and grease or chemicals

. Should you observe these, look at the dis

charge area and consider additional control

measures

. You should specifically observe all stormwater outfalls where stormwater leaves your facility

. 9

. Following each inspection, you will need to make note of control measures that require maintenance, or that need to be replaced, and make sure that the SWPPP and site map are current regarding indus

trial activities and potential pollutants

. 10

. Finally, where appropriate, repair or replace worn or ineffective control mea

sures as soon as possible but certainly before the next forecasted precipitation
event

. 

## Routine Facility Inspection Reports
Your routine facility inspections will need to be recorded and documented

. Generally, a standard inspection report is taken into the field and completed for each inspection

. You should include in your SWPPP a copy of the standard inspection form you will

use

. An example routine facility inspection form can be found in the “Additional MSGP Documentation Template” on EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/ msgp2008_recordkeepingtemplate.doc

.

Remember to update your SWPPP if you add, remove, or modify control measures following a routine visual, or other, inspection. Should you get inspected, EPA or the State agency will expect that all control measures identified in your SWPPP to be current and to be effectively implemented at your facility. Figure 15. Example of a sheen indicating the presence of oil or other hydro carbons.Tetra Tech As you conduct your routine facility inspections, keep in mind these visual indicators of poor control measures or missing control measures:
1.	 Rainbow colored sheen on the surface of stormwater indicates the presence of oil or other hydrocarbons;

2. Brown or other dark colored streaks in flowing stormwater indicates soil erosion or uncontained sediment;

3. Stormwater flowing through straw waddles or other stormwater containment barriers;

4. Foam;

5. Trash and other debris being carried off-site by stormwater; and

6. Overflowing storm drains or detention ponds could be indicative of a clog or poor inlet design.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 29 

## 5.B Visual Assessments
The second component of an effective storm

water inspection program is periodic visual assessments of the stormwater discharging from your facility

. Visual a ssessments are con

ducted on samples taken during a storm event, and require that you make observations of the stormwater sample in order to qualitatively assess the nature of your discharge based on several visual parameters

. This re quires that you collect a stormwater sample in a clean, clear jar and look at the sample in a well lit

area

. Generally, a sample must be collected from each stormwater discharge location asso

ciated with industrial activity

. The pur pose of conducting visual assessments is to make sure that stormwater discharges are free from objectionable characteristics (i

. e

. , pollut ants you can see)

. Should you observe objection

able characteristics, you should backtrack upstream from the sample collection location to identify potential sources of the pollutants

. Some pollutants may be present in stormwater but cannot be seen; for this reason EPA or your State may require benchmark or effluent limit monitoring depending on the facility SIC code or industrial sector

. See Sec tion 5

. D for mo re information on monitoring

. Most industrial stormwater permits do not require visual assessment samples to be col

lected consistent with 40 CFR Part 136 pro

cedures (the Clean Water Act guidelines for Your SWPPP should describe the routine facility inspection process in enough detail that a member of your staff could complete an inspection by following the description in the SWPPP. The SWPPP description should include:

1. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for conducting the routine facility inspections At least one member of your stormwater pollution prevention team should be involved in the routine facility inspections. Consider involving employees who regularly work in areas where stormwater may come into contact with industrial activity or materials.

2. Schedules for conducting the routine facility inspections Identify the minimum inspection frequency (e.g., monthly, quarterly) in your SWPPP. Consider scheduling the inspections for a set day every month or quarter, yet allow sufficient flexibility to be able to take advantage of a storm event, since many permits require that at least one inspection be conducted during a rain event.
3. Routine facility inspection procedures Describe how the routine facility inspection will be conducted, including which control measures or areas will be inspected and what the inspector will be looking for. Examples of things the inspector should be looking for include the condition of stormwater outfalls (trash accumulation, staining, evidence of unauthorized non-stormwater discharges, etc.); overall good housekeeping; and the condition of installed control measures (do any need to be maintained or replaced?). Among other procedures to describe, provide a description of the sequence you will follow during each inspection. One option is to use the recommended inspection sequence above or customize it to better suit your facility’s layout.

4. Reporting procedures Describe your reporting procedures and include a blank copy of the inspection form that will be used during the routine inspections. Most industrial stormwater general permits require that inspection reports include the following:
•	 The inspection date and time. •	 The name(s), title(s), and signature(s) of the inspector(s).
•	 Weather information for the day of the inspection and, if appropriate, days or weeks prior to the inspection.
•	 A description of any discharges observed.
•	 A description of the visual quality of discharges (sheen, turbid, etc.). •	 Control measures in need of maintenance or repairs. •	 Control measures that need to be replaced. •	 Any incidents of noncompliance observed. •	 Additional control measures needed to comply with the permit requirements. Inspection reports also need to be signed by the inspector. Your inspection form should include a signature line for this. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP

Check your industrial stormwater permit to determine if you are required to submit your visual assessment samples to a laboratory for analysis. The 2008 MSGP does not require samples to be submitted to a laboratory. However, if your permit does require you to submit samples for laboratory analysis, the samples must be collected and documented in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136 guidelines.30 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators establishing test procedures for the analysis of pollutants); however, visual assessment samples should be collected in such a man

ner that the samples are representative of the stormwater discharge

. EPA’s 2008 MSGP includes specific require

ments for when and how to collect the visual assessment sample

. You shoul d look in your permit to determine what requirements apply to your facility’s visual assessments

. However

, EPA believes its permit’s requirements offer a clear and consistent way to conduct these
assessments

. They are su mmarized as follows:

•	 Collect stormwater samples within the first 30 minutes of an actual discharge from a
storm event

. If it i s not possible to collect the sample within the first 30 minutes of discharge, collect the sample as soon as possible after the first 30 minutes

. In this case, be sure to document in your records (kept with your SWPPP) why it was not possible to take samples within the first 30 minutes

. In the case of snowmelt, samples must only be taken during a period with a measurable discharge from your site

. •	 Collect the sample in a clean, clear glass, or plastic container

. •	 Examine the sample in a well-lit area or, if necessary, illuminate with a strong flashlight

. •	 Collect the samples from discharges that happen at least 72 hours (3 days) from the previous discharge event

.

Include in your SWPPP a description of your visual assessment process:
1. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for visual assessments.
**Note:** The visual assessment should be conducted by a member of your stormwater pollution prevention team.

2. Schedules for conducting the visual assessments.
**Note:** Identify the minimum inspection frequency (typically quarterly) in your SWPPP. You should also describe procedures for determining when to conduct the visual assessments (e.g., within 30 minutes of an actual discharge, at least 3 days from previous discharge, etc.).

3. Specific items to be covered by the assessment (e.g., the 2008 MSGP requires permittees to visually inspect the sample in a well-lit area to assess the following water quality characteristics:
•	 Color •	 Odor •	 Clarity •	 Floating solids •	 Settled solids

4. The number and locations of outfalls scheduled for visual assessments. List the outfalls where visual assessments will take place, and make sure these locations are identified on your site map.

5. A description of safety considerations, requirements, and equipment for collecting samples during wet weather events.
**Note:** Sample must be collected in a clean, clear glass (required for oil and grease samples) or plastic container. Describe any other equipment necessary to collect the samples (such as sampling poles for hard to reach outfalls, rain gear, etc.). Describe any necessary safety considerations for staff while collecting the samples (for example, if they are sampling at an outfall discharging into receiving water with high flows, or sampling in a manhole).

6. Reporting procedures: Describe your reporting procedures and include a blank copy of the assessment form that will be used during the visual assessments. Most industrial stormwater general permits require that visual assessment reports include the following: •	 Sample location(s) •	 Sample collection date and time, and visual assessment date and time for each sample •	 The names of individuals, and titles or job positions, collecting the sample and performing visual assessment, and their signatures •	 Nature of the discharge (i.e., runoff or snowmelt)
•	 Results of observations of the stormwater discharge •	 Probable sources of any observed stormwater contamination •	 If applicable, why it was not possible to collect samples within the first 30 minutes of discharge.

The SWPPP should also contain a checklist or list of the water quality parameters that must be observed and documented. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP

•	 Suspended solids •	 Foam •	 Oil sheen •	 Other obvious indicators of stormwater pollution)Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 31 

## Visual Assessment Documentation
Similar to the inspection reports for the routine facility inspections, you must docu

ment the results of your visual assessments in a written report

. You shoul d include a blank copy of your visual assessment report form that you will use in your SWPPP

. An exampl e of a visual assessment report can be found in the “Additional MSGP Documentation Template” on EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp2008_ recordkeepingtemplate.doc

. Digital photos of the samples are recom

mended, but not required, to document the condition of the sample and future reference

. 

## 5.C Annual Comprehensive Site Inspections
Most industrial stormwater general permits require an annual comprehensive site inspec

tion

. The annual comprehensive site inspec

tion is a more in-depth version of the routine facility inspection

. The annua l comprehensive site inspection evaluates the condition of control measures, taking into account trends observed in analytic and visual stormwater samples taken during the year, and found dur

ing routine inspections

. Check your general permit to determine if the comprehensive site inspection needs to be conducted at a certain time (e

. g

. , by the end of the fiscal year)

. Some pe rmits require you to submit your comprehensive site inspection findings to the State permit authority as part of your annual report, typically due shortly after the end of the fiscal year

. EPA’s 2 008 MSGP requires that the annual report be submitted and postmarked within 45 days of completing the annual comprehensive site inspection

. The comprehensive site inspection must cover all areas of the facility affected by the require

ments of your industrial stormwater general permit, including all potential stormwater pol

lutant sources identified in the SWPPP, areas where control measures are used to comply with applicable effluent limits, and areas where spills and leaks have been documented in the three years prior to the annual comprehensive site inspection

. In addi tion, the annual inspec

tion must, as appropriate, include a review of visual stormwater monitoring data collected each quarter of the previous year and the results of the routine site inspections

. Comprehensive site inspections must be conducted by qualified personnel with at least one member of your stormwater pollution prevention team participating in the compre

hensive site inspections

. The annual inspection should be preceded by evaluation of the year’s visual stormwater sample observations, analytic monitoring data, and your routine site inspection findings

. The overall review of the previous year’s visual and analytic monitoring results will provide you with areas of focus for the annual inspection; however, the annual inspection must include all control measures included in the SWPPP, regardless of the results from the past visual assessments and site inspections

. Inspecti ng all stormwater control measures is meant to ensure that they are functioning correctly, and, if not, to correct any deficiency or malfunction

. Accordingly, at the end of the annual compre

hensive inspection you, and your stormwater pollution prevention team, should be able to answer the following questions

. •	 Are the control measures in place, main

tained, and operating effectively?

•	 Is the routine site inspection protocol effective and conducted at the appropriate frequency?

•	 If your previous visual samples been were indicated the presence of pollutants in your stormwater, and your analytic samples been found to have high levels of any benchmark pollutants or other pollutants of concern, do you suspect that any particular areas of your site are contributing to these monitoring results? Do you suspect that the improper functioning of any stormwater control measures is contributing to these monitoring results?

•	 Is the SWPPP up-to-date regarding all of the stated control measures and monitoring schedules? EPA’s 2008 MSGP requires you to conduct annual comprehensive site inspections once during each of the following inspection periods: Year 1: September 2 9, 2008 – September 29, 2009

Year 2: September 2 9, 2009 – September 29, 2010

Year 3: September 2 9, 2010 – September 29, 2011

Year 4: September 2 9, 2011 – September 29, 2012

Year 5: September 2 9, 2012 – September 29, 201332 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators Based on the answers to these questions, you may need to modify your stormwater man

agement program and to update your SWPPP to address problems found during your inspection

. 

## Comprehensive Site Inspection Documentation
The results, and documentation, of your annual site inspection must be maintained on-site and, depending on the requirements in your stormwater permit, submitted with your annual report

. An exam ple of a compre

hensive site inspection report can be found in the “Additional MSGP Documentation Template” on EPA’s website at www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/msgp2008_ recordkeepingtemplate.doc

.

Include in your SWPPP a description of the annual comprehensive site inspection process:
1. Person(s) or positions of person(s) responsible for inspection
**Note** : Include at least one member of the stormwater pollution prevention team.

2. Schedules for conducting the inspections
**Note** : Describe when during the year the annual inspection will take place.

3. Describe the list of documents to be reviewed prior to the annual site inspection. This list will typically include: •	 The current SWPPP
•	 All routine inspection reports for the past year •	 All visual assessment reports for the past year •	 Other documentation that may relate to how your facility complies with stormwater permit requirements, such as maintenance records, spill records, etc. for the past year.
4. A copy of the current SWPPP site map
**Note** : A current copy of the site map can be used during the comprehensive site inspection to make sure the inspector is covering all required areas.
5. Procedures for how the annual inspection will be conducted. Describe how the annual inspection will be conducted, including which control measures or areas will be inspected and what the inspector will be looking for. Specific items to be covered by the inspection include: •	 Industrial materials, residue, or trash that may have or could come into contact with stormwater; •	 Leaks or spills from industrial equipment, drums, tanks, and other containers; •	 Offsite tracking of industrial or waste materials, or sediment where vehicles enter or exit the site; •	 Tracking or blowing of raw, final, or waste materials from areas of no exposure to exposed areas; and •	 Control measures needing replacement, maintenance, or repair.

6. A copy of the annual site inspection form you will use.
**Note** : EPA’s 2008 MSGP has a comprehensive site inspection form in Appendix I of EPA’s 2008 MSGP. Your annual site inspection form should contain: •	 The date of the inspection; •	 The name(s) and title(s) of the personnel making the inspection; •	 Findings from the areas of your facility that were examined;
•	 All observations relating to the implementation of your control measures including:

– Previously unidentified discharges from the site,

– Previously unidentified pollutants in existing discharges,
–	 Evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system;

– Evidence of pollutants discharging to receiving waters at all facility outfall(s), and the condition of and around the outfall, including flow dissipation measures to prevent scouring, and
–	 Additional control measures needed to address any conditions requiring corrective action identified during the inspection. •	 Any required revisions to the SWPPP resulting from the inspection; •	 Any incidents of noncompliance observed or a certification stating the facility is in compliance with this permit (if there is no noncompliance); and
•	 A statement, signed and certified in accordance with Appendix B, Subsection 11 of EPA’s 2008 MSGP.

7. A schedule for completing and submitting (if required) the annual site inspection form/report in a timely manner. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPPDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 33 

## 5.D Documentation of Monitoring Procedures
Your industrial stormwater general permit may include requirements to conduct stormwater discharge monitoring

. The typ e of monitor

ing you are required to conduct will likely be based on your type of industrial activity

. Not all types of industrial activity will be required to collect stormwater discharge samples, however, if your facility is required to conduct monitoring (such as benchmark monitoring or effluent limitation guideline monitoring), you must describe the procedures you will use to carry out this monitoring in your SWPPP

. EPA has prepared an Industrial Stormwater Monitoring and Sampling Guide (available
at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp ) that will support this guide

. The Industrial Stormwater Monitoring and Sampling Guide provides a more detailed description of moni

toring approaches and procedures that are recommended than is included in this guide

. As a general matter, your stormwater discharge samples will be taken at your facility’s storm

water outfall locations, not at locations within your facility

. Some st ormwater general permits allow you to sample at only one outfall when multiple outfalls at your facility have similar industrial activities, control measures, exposed materials, and runoff coefficients

. Outfall s that have these similar characteristics are called “substantially identical outfalls” or “represen

tative outfalls

. ” See yo ur industrial stormwater general permit for more information

.

Include in your SWPPP, a description of the following monitoring requirements:
1. What you need to monitor Make sure your SWPPP clearly identifies the parameters you need to monitor, and any applicable benchmark concentrations or effluent limits associated with each parameter.

2. Where you need to monitor Your site map should identify the outfalls at your facility. In your SWPPP, identify at which outfalls you will be required to monitor. If you are allowed to sample one of the outfalls that are “substantially identical”, and you plan on using a representative outfall, include the following documentation in your SWPPP: •	 Location of each substantially identical outfall; •	 Description of the general industrial activities conducted in the drainage area of each substantially identical outfall; •	 Description of the control measures implemented in the drainage area of each substantially identical outfall; •	 Description of the exposed materials located in the drainage area of each substantially identical outfall that are likely to be significant contributors of pollutants to stormwater discharges;
•	 An estimate of the runoff coeffici ent of the drainage areas (low = under 40%; medium = 40 to 65%; high = above 65%); and •	 Why the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical effluents. 3. When you need to monitor If you are required to monitor, your industrial stormwater general permit will specify a monitoring frequency (typically quarterly

or annually). For each of the parameters you identified above, include in your SWPPP the monitoring frequency. Some permits also specify exemptions or alternative monitoring periods, which should also be addressed in your SWPPP.

Your SWPPP should also describe the type of storm event that should be monitored. In the 2008 MSGP, EPA requires monitoring during a storm event those results in an actual discharge from your site (“measurable storm event”) that follows the preceding measurable storm event by at least 72 hours (3 days).

4. How you will conduct the monitoring Describe in your SWPPP how you will conduct the monitoring, including who will collect the samples. Typically, monitoring is conducted by taking one grab sample from a discharge resulting from a measurable storm event and collected within the first 30 minutes of a measurable storm event, during normal business hours, when stormwater is discharging from your facility. Also describe any sample documentation and preservation procedures you plan to use. Some samples may need to be analyzed within a short time, or may need to be preserved with blue ice before being analyzed.

5. Where you will send the sample for analysis Finally, in your SWPPP, include information about the laboratory where you will send the samples for analysis. Include information such as lab name and address, any sampling procedur es required by the lab, and who will take the samples to the lab. 

# What to Include in Your SWPPP34 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

# Section 6: Completing Your SWPPP

Now that you have conducted a site assessment of your facility, developed maps, selected control measures, and developed procedures for inspections and monitoring

. You are almost done with your SWPPP! The last step is to make sure all this informa

tion is organized into a single document (your SWPPP) and to obtain NPDES permit coverage

. 

## 6.A Finish your SWPPP
The information you put together as part of Sections 3 through 5 make up the con

tents of your SWPPP

. There are o nly two more steps for you to finish before your SWPPP is complete:

•	 Conduct a final review of your SWPPP; and •	 Sign and certify your SWPPP



## Review Your Draft SWPPP You should review the SWPPP requirements in your industrial stormwater general permit to ensure that your SWPPP includes all required elements

. For examp le, in the 2008 MSGP, the SWPPP requirements are in Part 5

. Check off a ll the SWPPP permit requirements as you verify that they have been met

. Also, d evelop a final copy of your site map and make sure that all required elements are addressed

. EPA recommends that you have both your stormwater pollution prevention team, and someone who was not involved in developing the SWPPP, review your draft SWPPP

. 

## Sign and Certify Your SWPPP The last step in completing your SWPPP is to have a facility executive or duly autho

rized representative of that executive sign and certify that the SWPPP meets all the requirements in the general permit

. This sign ature demonstrates that the SWPPP was reviewed by someone who has operational control over the facility (i

. e

. , can commit resources to implementing the SWPPP and ensuring compliance with the permit)

. You should check your general permit to determine which person is required to sign and certify the SWPPP

. Note that t he signatory requirements for the 2008 MSGP are found in Appendix B, Subsection 11 of EPA’s 2008 MSGP

. 

## 6.B Obtain NPDES Permit Coverage
Important! Before obtaining permit coverage, you should read the appropriate industrial stormwater permit and develop your SWPPP.
Most permits require that you develop your SWPPP before you can obtain NPDES per

mit coverage for your industrial stormwater discharges

. However , in some instances, the permit may provide you with additional time to complete or update a SWPPP after permit coverage is obtained

. Nevertheless, it is recommended that your SWPPP be completed at least in draft form prior to applying for permit coverage, even in those States where additional time is granted

. 

## Obtaining Coverage Under a General Permit To obtain coverage under a State industrial stormwater general permit, you will typi

cally need to fill out and submit an application form, often called a Notice of Intent orDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 35 NOI

. Submitting an NOI form to the permit

ting authority indicates your certification that you have met the eligibility requirements for coverage under the permit, and your agree

ment to abide by the terms and conditions of the general permit

. Dependi ng on the permit, you may be authorized to discharge immedi

ately or at some later time

. In some cases, you are not authorized to discharge until the State has notified you accordingly

. EPA’s 2 008 MSGP (see Part 1

. 3

. 1) uses a 30 to 60-day waiting period following the receipt of a facility’s com

plete NOI

. The waiting period expires when the permit’s status changes from “waiting” to “active” on the Agency’s eNOI website

. Read the application requirements in your general permit for information on the proce

dures and the specific form you will need to complete before becoming authorized

. Some States charge an administrative fee to apply for permit coverage

. Before submitting your appli

cation, you must also make sure that you meet all eligibility requirements in the permit

. For example, if your facility discharges to one of several highly protected waters (e

. g

. , a Tier 3 or “Outstanding Natural Resource Water”), you may not be eligible for coverage under a general permit and instead may have to file an application for individual permit coverage

.



## 6.C Updating Your SWPPP

Your SWPPP is a document that will need to be reviewed and updated on a regular basis

. Whenever you find the need to change a pro

cedure that is described in your SWPPP or to modify a control measure described therein, you must update the SWPPP to reflect those changes as quickly as practicable

. Should th e SWPPP require modification to document cor

rective actions, a new certification statement must be signed and dated upon completion of the revision

. Below are some examples of events that, if they result in a change in control measures or procedures, will require prompt revision of the SWPPP to reflect the new facility conditions

. •	 A change in the composition of the storm

water pollution prevention team or new responsible official

. •	 An unauthorized release or discharge (e.g., spill, leak, or discharge of non-stormwater not authorized by this or another NPDES permit) occurs at your facility

. •	 A discharge violates a numeric effluent limit

. •	 You become aware, or EPA determines, that your control measures are not stringent enough for the discharge to meet applicable water quality standards;

•	 An inspection or evaluation of your facility by an EPA official, or local, State, or Tribal entity, determines that modifications to the control measures are necessary to meet the non-numeric effluent limits in this permit

. •	 Construction or a change in design, opera

tion, or maintenance at your facility sig

nificantly changes the nature of pollutants discharged in stormwater from your facil

ity, or significantly increases the quantity of pollutants discharged

. •	 The average of four quarterly sampling results exceeds an applicable benchmark

. If less than four benchmark samples have been taken, but the results are such that an exceedance of the 4 quarter average is mathematically certain (i

. e

. , if the sum of quarterly sample results to date is more than 4 times the benchmark level) this is considered a benchmark exceedance, trig

gering a review of control measures and possible SWPPP modification

. Remember, revisions to the SWPPP to docu

ment corrective actions requires a new signed and dated certification statement by the respon

sible official

. All oth er changes must be signed and dated by the person preparing the change

.

In the interim between the annual inspection and completed SWPPP revision, keep a copy of the original SWPPP with your handwritten notes for SWPPP modifications at the facility. Should you be inspected before the revised SWPPP is complete, the copy with your notes can be used to demonstrate the changes that will be in the revised document. 

### Documentation to Support Eligibility Considerations Under Other Federal Laws The 2008 MSGP requires that you keep with your SWPPP the documentation supporting your eligibility pertaining to endangered species requirements, historic properties requirements, and NEPA review requirements described in the permit (see Part 5.1.6 of the permit). State industrial stormwater permits may have other documentation requirements.36 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators Completing your SWPPP and obtaining NPDES permit coverage is an important step towards complying with your State or EPA Clean Water Act requirements

. Having completed these steps, you are now ready to begin documenting your compliance with the requirements of your permit

. EPA’s 200 8 MSGP and many State permits require you to keep records of any activities at your site that are related to your com

pliance, such as conducting inspections, visual assessments, stormwater discharge monitoring, and corrective actions

. As you conduct inspections, monitoring, corrective actions, and other permit imple

mentation activities, you will generate additional records, such as inspection reports and monitoring results

. Keep this a dditional documentation on-site with your SWPPP, and ensure these records are accessible, complete, and up-to-date so that they demon

strate your full compliance with the conditions of your permit

. Some examples of this additional documentation include:

• Permit records – copies of the NOI or permit application submitted, any letters received from the permitting authority, and a copy of your general permit

.

• Spill records – dates of any incidences of significant spills, leaks, or other releases that resulted in a discharge of pollutants, the circumstances leading to the release, actions taken in response to the release, and measures taken to prevent the recur

rence of a release

.

• Employee training records – keep copies of all employee training records, including dates, who was trained, and the training topics

.

• Maintenance records – retain copies of all maintenance and repairs of control mea

sures, including dates of regular maintenance, dates when maintenance needs were discovered, and dates when control measures were returned to full function

.

• Inspection records – keep copies of all routine facility inspection reports, quarterly visual assessment reports, and annual comprehensive site inspection reports

.

• Monitoring records – retain records of all sampling results including data collection forms, lab results, and discharge monitoring reports (DMRs)

.

• Corrective action records – keep records of any cor

rective actions and follow-up activities conducted to demonstrate compliance with the permit

. 

# Section 7: Keeping Records of Your Implementation Activities

For 2008 MSGP permit holders, the list of additional documentation requirements can be found in Part 5.4 of the permit. Also, EPA has developed an “Additional MSGP Documentation Template” with sample forms that you can download from www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/ msgp to help you organize this information.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 37 The following are common problems found during inspections of industrial sites conducted by EPA

. These are p rovided to assist you in developing and maintaining an effective SWPPP

. As a genera l matter, it is not enough to simply have a completed SWPPP at your site

. To establ ish compliance with your permit’s limits and condi

tions, you must also implement the procedures, and install and maintain the control measures, described in your SWPPP, and make modifications as necessary to improve your performance

. You should review these common compliance problems and consider how your SWPPP, or how your implementation of the procedures described in your SWPPP, can be modified to ensure you are not making the same mistakes

. 1. No SWPPP developed. Some facilities do not realize that they need to develop a SWPPP, or they may copy a generic SWPPP or a SWPPP for another facility

. A SWPPP is a si te-specific plan and should address only your facility

. 2. Control measures described in SWPPP not used. The SWPPP identifies stormwater control measures that are not actually being used at the site

. The storm water regulations hold you responsible for effectively implementing all control measures identified in your SWPPP

. If your SWPPP has identified control measures not being used at your site, you need to edit your SWPPP accordingly to accurately reflect those measures you are in fact using

. 3. No SWPPP on-site. A copy of the SWPPP is not available on-site for review when a permitting authority or other regulatory agency inspects your site

. You are res ponsible for maintaining a copy on-site at all times

. If your SWP PP is being updated off-site, keep a marked-up copy on-site or an electronic copy until the revised SWPPP arrives

. 4. SWPPP not signed. The responsible facility representative did not sign and authorize the current version of the SWPPP

. 5. Stormwater pollution prevention team not up-to-date. The stormwater pollution prevention team identified in the SWPPP is not current

. This is par ticularly a problem at facilities with high turnover

. Remembe r, you can identify team members by title rather than by name if high turnover makes it difficult to keep a current list of names

. 6. On-site staff not familiar with SWPPP. Upon arrival of an inspector, no one familiar with the stormwater program is available

. A common pe rmit requirement is that at least one employee per shift is familiar with the stormwater program and has access to the relevant files

. 

# Section 8: Common Compliance Problems at Industrial Facilities

Figure 16. Good housekeeping is probably the most common BMP in SWPPPs. Poor sweeping practices can contribute significant pollutants in stormwater runoff.Tetra Tech38 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 7. Improper collection of visual assessment samples. Visual stormwater samples are collected from pooled areas on site

. Pooled areas tend to concentrate pollutants and are not representative, unless the contents of the pooled areas flow off of the facility (this is to your disadvantage)

. 8. Uncovered dumpsters. Dumpsters that receive metal waste are not covered or contained

. Dumpsters from contract waste collection agencies are often not appro

priately sealed and can leak oils or other contaminants

. 9. Poor employee/contract staff training. Employees or contract staff are not famil

iar with your stormwater management program

. You are responsible for educat

ing employees and contractors because if they release pollutants at your facility, you are responsible

. If you use co ntractors, they should be referred to in your SWPPP and required to be trained as a part of the
contract

. 10. Inspection or monitoring records are not kept with the SWPPP. Records of routine site inspections, visual assessments, or monitoring results are not available with the SWPPP for review

. All recor ds on implementation of practices required in the permit must be kept with the SWPPP (see Section 6

. C for more inf ormation)

. **SWPPP Availability –** Keep a copy of the current, signed and certified SWPPP at your facility, and make it available to EPA, State, local agency or other regulatory agency staff at the time of an onsite inspection or upon request. The SWPPP should also be made easily available to facility staff, and should be readily referred to during regular facility operations to ensure that all activities are implemented as described in the SWPPP. Figure 17. Leaking dumpsters can introduce pollutants into stormwater runoff.Tetra TechDeveloping Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 39 

# Resources

EPA, 2008 Multi-Sector General Permit , issued September 29, 2008 (available at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp )

. EPA’s Stormwater Website – www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater

Industrial Stormwater Resource Locator – www.envcap.org/iswrl/

EPA’s Industrial Stormwater Website – www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/indust

EPA’s 2008 MSGP Website – www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

The Industrial Stormwater and MSGP Websites have a number of resources and tools to aid MSGP permittees, which include:

• Annual Reporting Form – Permittees can use this form to report their annual comprehensive site inspection and corrective actions to EPA

.

• Conditional “No Exposure” Exclusion – Industrial facilities can use this form to certify that their industrial materials and operations are not exposed to stormwater

.

• Developing your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators – Provides guidance on how to develop a SWPPP that meets the requirements of the 2008 MSGP

.

• Electronic Notice of Intent (eNOI) System – Allows permittees to quickly apply for permit coverage under EPA’s 2008 MSGP

.

• Industrial Stormwater Monitoring and Sampling Guide – Provides guidance on how to meet the monitoring and sampling requirements in the 2008 MSGP

.

• Industrial Sector Fact Sheets – These fact sheets summarize the types of facilities included that sector, the pollutants associated with this sector, and the types of stormwater control measures generally used

.

• List of Tier 2 and Tier 3 Waters – Lists of waters currently designated by states as Tier 2 or Tier 3 for antidegradation purposes to help you complete your NOI

.

• MSGP Discharge Monitoring Report (MDMR) – Permittees can use this paper copy form to submit monitoring data to EPA

.

• Reporting MSGP Monitoring Data – Allows permittees to electronically file all benchmark, effluent limitation guidelines, and impaired waters monitoring data through the eNOI system

.

• Sample MSGP SWPPP Template – Industrial facilities can use the “Industrial SWPPP Template” to create their own SWPPPs

.

• Sample Recordkeeping Templates – Use the sample templates and forms to keep records of your monitoring, inspection, maintenance, visual evaluation, and corrective action activities

.

• Search, Sort, and View Industrial NOIs – Searchable database of stormwater notices of intent (NOIs) for industrial facilities seeking coverage under EPA’s MSGP

.

• Water Locator Tool – Helps industrial facilities pinpoint their site’s latitude and longitude, receiving water, and impairment status of the water, applicable total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), and potential pollutants of concern

. EPA’s NPDES Authorization Status Website – www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/authorizationstatus

EPA’s Menu of National Stormwater BMPs – www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/menuofbmps

Industrial Stormwater Permit Guide – www.pneac.org/stormwater/40 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

# Appendix A: MSGP SWPPP Template

EPA has created a template to assist operators in developing an industrial SWPPP that addresses the requirements in the 2008 MSGP

. The templ ate includes instructions and space to help operators document activities specific to their facility, such as: •	 Facility Description and Contact Information

•	 Potential Pollutant Sources

•	 Stormwater Control Measures
•	 Schedules and Procedures for Monitoring •	 Inspections

•	 Documentation to Support Eligibility Considerations under Other Federal Laws

•	 SWPPP Certification

•	 SWPPP Modifications

•	 SWPPP Attachments
A customizable Microsoft Word version of the MSGP SWPPP Template is available for download from www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

.Developing Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 41 

# Appendix B: Additional MSGP Documentation Template

EPA has created a template to assist 2008 MSGP permit holders in collecting the addi

tional documentation required during implementation of the permit

. The Addit ional MSGP Documentation Template includes example forms and tables to help permittees document activities related to: •	 Significant spills, leaks or other releases •	 Employee training

•	 Maintenance

•	 Routine Facility Inspection Reports •	 Quarterly Visual Assessment Reports •	 Comprehensive Site Inspection Reports •	 Monitoring results

•	 Deviations from assessment or monitoring schedule

•	 Benchmark Exceedances •	 Impaired Waters Monitoring: Documentation of Natural Background Sources or Non-Presence of Impairment Pollutant
•	 Active/Inactive status change

•	 SWPPP Amendment Log
The Additional MSGP Documentation template can be downloaded in Microsoft Word format at www.epa.gov/npdes/stormwater/msgp

.42 Developi ng Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A Guide for Industrial Operators 

# Appendix C: Example Site Map7/15/2010

Page 1 of 22 

### APPENDIX D Resolution of Permit Appeal Issues for Clean Water Act Facility Missouri State Operating Permits (MSOPs)

The following table contains the terms of resolution for certain Permit Appeal Issues raised by Defendants regarding the Missouri State Ope rating Permits (MSOPs) identified below. The left column of the table identifies each Permit Appeal Issue, and the second column from the left identifies the MSOP or MSOPs for which resolution is complete.

a. B rushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MSOP No. MO

- 0001848 : re

- issued February 26, 2010 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed March 26, 2010 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010 Collectively, the following ten facilities are referred to as the “CWA Facilities” :

b. Buick Mine/Mill

- MSOP No. MO

- 0002003 : re

- issued September 25, 2009 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed October 23, 2009 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010

c. Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MSOP No. MO

- 0001856 : re

- issued November 13, 2009 ; modified July 28 , 2010 ; appeal filed December 11, 2009 ; f irst a mended n otice of a ppeal filed April 23, 2010 ; supplement to amended notice of appeal filed May 19, 2010

d. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

- MSOP No. MO

- 0001881 : re

- issued July 10, 2009 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed August 7, 2009 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010

e. Viburnum (#28/29) Mine/Mill

- MSOP No. MO

- 0000086 : re

- issued December 4, 2009 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed January 4, 2010 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010

f. Viburnum Mine #35 (Casteel)

- MSOP No. MO

- 0100 226 : re

- issued March 19, 201 0 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed April 1 6 , 2010 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010

g. West Fork

- MSOP No.

- M O

- 0100218 : re

- issued March 12, 2010 ; modified July 13, 2010 ; appeal filed April 9 , 2010 ; supplement to appeal filed May 19, 2010

h. Buic k Resource Recycling

- MSOP No. MO

- 0000337 : re

- issued August 23, 2002 ; modified February 2 3, 2007 ; comments filed March 1 5 , 2010

i. Glover Facility

- MSOP No. MO

- 0001121 : re

- issued March 23, 2007 ; appeal filed April 20, 2007 ; f irst a mended n otice of

a ppeal f iled April 14, 2010

j. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

- MSOP No. MO

- 0000281 : re

- issued February 28, 2003 ; comments filed January 6, 20107/15/2010

Page 2 of 22 

### TABLE 1

– CWA Facility MSOPs Modifi cations t o Resolve Permit Appeal Issues MSOP Modifications Issued in July 2010

Permit Ap peal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

1 The Doe Run Resources Corporation is the correct owner name Fletcher Mine /Mill (para. 10) MDNR made the c orrection to the owner name

.

2 M onthly mercury monitoring should
not be required or should be changed to annual monitoring

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine /Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 13) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 (para. 14 & 16 ) MD NR change d the requirement to annual monitoring. MDNR also remove d the requirement for mercury monitoring in the Buick Mine/Mill permit at Outfall 003, the in

- stream monitoring point.

3 M onthly mercury monitoring should be changed to annual monitoring; W QBEL limit should be removed until sufficient data supports a reasonable potential analysis

. Viburnum 28 /29

– 002 & 004 (para. 20) MDNR change d the requirement to annual monitoring.

4 P ermit requires use of EPA methods 1669 and 1631E for mercury sampli ng and analysis, respectively. Mercury is not part of the ore body mined and has not been detected since Jan 2006 at detection limit of 0.2 ug/L. EPA guidance only suggests use of the ultra low testing method, but indicates other methods may be appropria te sometimes. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 12) (para. 24

– request for stay) Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 13) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 15) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 (p ara. 15) Viburnum 28 /29

– 002 & 004 ( para. 20) West Fork Unit

– 001, 003 & 004 (para. 8) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 7) MDNR remove d the sampling methodology requirements from the permit. Monitoring for mercury is required by the effluent guideli ne s (40 CFR Part 440 Subpart J), unless the permittee can demonstrate mercury is not present in the discharge. The permittee shall choose sampling and analysis methods based on the detection limits necessary to demonstrate compliance with the effluent gui deline and the applicable state water quality standards.

5 M onthly sampling for copper is not necessary and should be changed back to annual

. Fletcher Mi ne/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 16) MDNR change d the copper sampling frequency to annual

.

6 I nter im and final monitoring requirements and limits for oil and grease should be removed

. Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 17) MDNR remove d the oil and grease limit from the permit7/15/2010

Page 3 of 22 Permit Ap peal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

7 D iscrepancies between the fact sheet references to WET testing re quirements and the permit should be resolved

, including references to WET testing for 001 and 004

. Sweetwater Mine/Mill (para. 17) MDNR prepare d a fact sheet for the permit modification that clarifies that WET testing is only required at Outfall 002, a s stated in the permit

. The original fact sheet statement regarding WET testing at Outfalls 001 and 004

was in error

.

8 T he daily maximum and monthly average values in the fact sheet for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc on pages 7 & 11 should be updated b ased on the appropriate hardness (provided by Doe Run in para. 10 of the Appeal)

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill (para. 23) MDNR prepare d a fact sheet for the permit modification that identifies the correct daily maximum and monthly average values for cadmium, cop per, lead and zinc . The original fact sheet information regarding these limitations

was in error

.

9 Interim limits for metals should be adjusted upward using an appropriate translator to account for the un

dissolved portion

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 00 1, 002 & 003 (para. 9 & 10) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 ( amended para. 14) MDNR adjust ed interim limits based on default hardness and dissolved metals translators (DMTs).

10 B ecause neither outfall has discharge d in 5 years, the WET monitoring

re quirement should be annual, not quarterly Because of infrequent discharges and likelihood of discharges only during high

- flow conditions, an AEC of 100% at critical low

- flow conditions is not meaningful. Therefore, WET testing requirement should be monito ring only

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 14) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 ( amended para. 23) MDNR revised permit language to clarify that WET testing is only required for Outfall 001, as stated in the table in Part C, paragraph 10.7/15/2010

Page 4 of 22 

### TABL E 2

– Dismissed Permit Appeal Issues

Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

11 T he permit contains inconsistent requirements for WET te sting of 100% AEC and 1.6 TUc, which should be clarified and corrected

. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 (para. 21) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

12 T he permit should clarify inconsistencies regarding effluent v. in

stream sampling

. Sweetwater Mi ne/Mill

– 002 (para. 22) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

13 Only a single

- d ilution Allowable Effluent Concentration (ACE) of 100% should be required and not a multiple dilution test series

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 17) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 18) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 004 (para. 22) Viburnum 28/29

– all outfalls (para. 21) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 15) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

14 A TRE should not be required by Paragraph D.2 of the Schedule of Compliance because the facility has been passing its WET tests

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 2 1) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed. TRE suspended by Consent Decree under compliance schedule

15 Only acute, and not chronic

, WET testing should be required

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 ( para. 15) Buick Min/Mill

– 002 (para. 16) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 18) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 ( para. 20) Viburnum 28/28

– 002, 003 & 004 (para. 21) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 13) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.7/15/2010

Page 5 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

16 A single failed WET test should not be a permit violation, but should trigger accelerated testing and potentially the TIE/TRE process

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 18) West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 10) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 16) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 ( amended para. 20) No change to the permit. Appea l dismissed.

17 TIE or TRE should only be triggered after 3 consecutive WET failures, not simply after any 3 WET failures; TIE/TRE should be suspended after 3 consecutive passing WET tests

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Brushy Creek Mine/ Mill

– 001 (para. 18) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 18) Viburnum 28/29

– 002, 003 & 004 (para. 21) West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 11) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 17) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

18 WET testing frequency should be changed from quarterly to annually. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 (para. 18) Viburnum 28/29

– 002, 003 & 004 (para. 21) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 12) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

19 P ermit description includes design flo ws and actual flows, but not “flows dependent upon precipitation” as requested by Doe Run; flows are highly variable based on rainfall and groundwater infiltration

. Viburnum 28/29

– 004 (para. 14) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed. The permit as w ritten authorizes stormwater flows and does not impose a limit on flow.

20 P reparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of best management practices (BMPs) should not be required

. Global issue applica ble to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine/Mill (para. 18) Fletcher Mine/Mill (para. 20 / amended para. 25 ) Sweetwater Mine/Mill (para. 23) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed. Doe Run agrees, pursuant to the Consent Decree, to prepare and implement a SWP PP and implement BMPs at all CWA Facilities7/15/2010

Page 6 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

2 1 P ermit should authorize stormwater discharges in addition to wastewater discharges

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine/Mill (para. 9) Fletcher Mine/Mill (para. 11) Sweetwater Mine/Mill (para. 7) Viburnum 28/29 (para. 12) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed. Note that each outfall that is authorized to include stormwater discharges is specifically identified (usually on the second page of the permit).

2 2 Lat /Long coordinates for all three outfalls are incorrect; and should be in GPS format

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine/Mill (para. 10) Fletcher Mine/Mill (para. 12) Viburnum 28/29 (para. 13) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

2 3 N itrate as nit rogen, total nitrogen and phosphorus should be removed from the permit; Outfall 001 has only negligible nutrients and Outfalls 002 & 003 have not discharged since at least 2004

– no reasonable potential

. Applicable to West Fork Mine/Mill, also, which disch arges to the West Fork of the Black River Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 8) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

2 4 D raft TMDL for Courtois Creek and Indian Creek issued by MDNR but not final. DR has concerns with draft TMDL. Perm it should not be issued until TMDL is final

. Viburnum 28/29 (para. 16) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

25 S chedule of compliance should be extended to 5 years to allow DR adequate time to respond to drastically lower limits and conduct site

- s pecific water quality studies

. Globally issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine /Mill (para. 20 ) Fletcher Mine/Mill (para. 23 / amended 28) Viburnum 28/29 (para. 2 5 ) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

The Consent Decree provides a sched ule of compliance.

26 I n

- stream monitoring at Outfall 003 should be eliminated; such in

- stream monitoring was eliminated from other DR permits

. Buick Mine/Mill

– 003 (para. 17) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.7/15/2010

Page 7 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

27 B ecause the facility was not previously required to monitor for arsenic and nickel, the permit should not include limits, but rather monitoring only > Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 12) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

28 M onitoring data from Jan 2006 to July 2009 sho ws no potential for TSS to exceed permit limits; WQBEL for TSS should be removed and changed from monthly to annual monitoring

. Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 (para 13) Viburnum 28/29

– 002 & 004 (para. 18) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

29 R ecrea tion uses are not assigned to the unnamed tributary of Adair Creek; with in

- stream aeration, bacteria die

- off, and mixing, there will be no reasonable potential for discharges to cause or contribute to violations of the bacteria standard in Logan Creek. T herefore, bacteria limits should be removed from the permit

. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 10) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

3 0 L imits in prior permit for BOD, TSS and percent removal efficiency are protective of downstream uses and sh ould be maintained

. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 8) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.

3 1 N arrative WQBELs should not be in permit because they are not directly applicable to the discharges covered by the permit, a violation would not

neces sarily imply that one of the discharges was the cause, and there is no corresponding provision that proves an opportunity to assess or demonstrate compliance

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Buick Mine/Mill (para. 19) Fletcher Mine/Mill (para . 22 / amended para. 27 ) Sweetwater Mine/Mill (para. 24) Viburnum 28/29 (para. 24) West Fork Unit (para. 15) Viburnum Mine #35 (para. 20) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.7/15/2010

Page 8 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

3 2 Outfalls 001, 002 & 003 should be combined into one outfall; drainage pathway does not become waters of the State until it leaves Doe Run’s property; combined Outfall location should be on the east side of B Day Road with in

stream monitoring at Outfall 002

. Viburnum Mine #35

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 6) No change to the perm it. Appeal dismissed.

33 Numeric limits for lead, copper and zinc at Outfall 002 should be replaced with monitoring only; Outfall 002 is a domestic outfall that discharges no process wastewater; Outfall 002 discharges infrequently and at low volume

. Vib urnum Mine #35

– 002 (para. 11) No change to the permit. Appeal dismissed.7/15/2010

Page 9 of 22 

### TABLE 3

– Permit Appeal Issues Held In Abeyance

– Supporting Documentation for Permit Modification to be Filed and Issue Resolved Pursuant to Section VII, S ubs ection D ( See, Par agraph 79 .a. i. )

Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

34 F inal site

- specific limits for cadmium, lead and copper for Outfalls 001, 002 & 003 should have been calculated using the site

- specific translators provided by Doe Run in its July 29, 2009 comments

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 10) P ermittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitati ons

.

35 Site

- specific hardness data from Bill’s Creek should be used to re

- calculate the effluent limits for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 11) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or
p ermit

- specific limitations.

36 An allowance based on flow in the West Fork Black River should be considered when calculating effluent limitations if chronic criteria are required (legal issue of whether mixing zones are allowed) Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 22) Permittee may submit supporting information for interpretation of 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4) regarding the application of mixing zones in unclassified waters

.

37 MDNR should not have used default DMT to translate dissolved waste load allocations to total recoverable metals limits; DR’s data from the previous permit should be used to develop site

specific limits for metals

. Buick Mine/Mill (para. 1 1 ) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations

.

38 MDNR should not have used default DMT for Outfall 001 to translate dissolved waste load allocations to total recoverable metals limits; DR’s data from the previous permit should be used to develop site

- specific limits for lead and zinc

. Fletcher M ine/ Mill

– 001 (para. 14 / amended para. 15) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

39 E ffluent limits for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc should be calculated using site

- specific hardness data for 2006

- 2 009 collected by DR to recalculate the WQBELs

. Sweetwater Mine/ Mill

– 002 & 004 (para. 1 2) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.7/15/2010

Page 10 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

40 D efault DMT should not have been used to calculate WQBELs for lead and zinc at Outfalls 002 & 004; MDNR should recalculate limits for lead and zinc using site

- specific translators

. Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 & 004 (para. 1 3 ) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

41 E ffluent limits for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc for Outfalls 002 & 004 should be calculated using site

- specific hardness data for 2006

- 2009 collected by DR to recalculate the WQBELs

. Viburnum 28/29

– 00 2 (para. 1 7 ) Permittee may submit information for site

- spec ific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

42 MDNR should not have used default DMT f or Outfall 004 to translate dissolved waste load allocations to total recoverable metals limits; DR’s data from the previous permit should be used to develop site

- specif ic limits for lead and zinc

. Viburnum 28/29

– 00 4 (para. 1 9 ) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

43 D efault DMT should not have been used to translate the dissolved waste load allocations for lead, zin c, copper and cadmium to total recoverable limits for Outfalls 001, 002 & 003; MDNR should recalculate metals limits consistent with DMTs derived from site

- specific data

. Viburnum Mine #35

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 8 ) Permittee may submit information for sit e

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

44 E ffluent limits for cadmium, copper, lead, mercury and zinc, as well as conversion factors for cadmium and lead, for Outfalls 001, 002 & 003 should be calculated using the site

specific hardness data fo r 2006

- 2009 collected by DR, which is representative of the current discharge

. Viburnum Mine #35

– 00 1, 002 & 003 (para. 9 ) Permittee may submit information for site

- specific and/or permit

- specific limitations.

45 An allowance based on flow in Crooked Creek should be considered when calculating effluent limitations if chronic criteria are required (legal issue of whether mixing zones are allowed). Viburnum Mine #35

– 00 1, 002 & 003 (para. 10 ) Permittee may submit supporting information for interpretatio n of 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4) regarding the application of mixing zones in unclassified waters

.7/15/2010

Page 11 of 22 

### TABLE 4

– Permit Appeal Issues Held In Abeyance

– Supporting Documentation for Alternative WET Sampling and/or Testing Methodologies to be Filed and Issue Resolve d Pursuant to Section VII, S ubs ection E

Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

46 An alternative test species (e.g., daphnia magna) sho uld be used for chronic WET testing instead of Ceriodaphnia dubia because the latter is not endemic to the area and it is sensitive to the natural background levels of metals

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 002 & 004 (para. 16) Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 (para. 16) F letcher Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 18 / amended para. 19) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 (para. 19) Viburnum 28/29

– 002 & 004 (para. 21) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 14) West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 9) Permittee may submit an application for alternative WE T sampling and/or testing procedures.

47 In the event chronic WET testing is imposed on the facility, MDNR and EPA should approve an alternate WET test procedure, which may include, but not be limited to, employing a new test species, an endpoint or orga nism response, or a toxicity test concept that is not represented in EPA’s approved methods. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 002 & 004 ( supplement para. 25 ) Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 21 ) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 ( supplement para. 29 ) Sweetwater Mine /Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 26 ) Viburnum 28/29

– 002 & 004 ( supplement para. 2 6 ) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 ( supplement para. 21 ) West Fork Unit

– 001 ( supplement para. 17 ) Permittee may submit an application for alternative WET sampling and/or testin g procedures.7/15/2010

Page 12 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

48 When conducting accelerated WET testing upon failure of a WET test, only the species that failed in initial test should be subject to the additional multiple dilution testing

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 19) Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 23 ) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 ( amended para. 21) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 28 ) Viburnum 28/29

– 002 & 004 ( supplement para. 2 8 ) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 18) West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 12) Permittee may subm it an application for alternative WET sampling and/or testing procedures.

49 WET test samples should not have to be collected using a 24

- hour composite for logistical reasons

.

Neither mine dewatering source nor effluent quality vary significantly o ver a 40 hour period; more labor and equipment, creating an undue burden; vandalism and threat of expensive equipment because of lack of security in the rural area where sampler must be paced

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (para. 20) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 00 1 ( amended para. 22) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 & 003 (para. 19) West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 13)

Buick Mine/Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 24 ) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 002 ( supplement para. 29 ) Viburnum 28/29

– 002 & 004 ( supplement para. 2 9) Permittee may subm it an application for alternative WET sampling and/or testing procedures.7/15/2010

Page 13 of 22 

### TABLE 5

– Permit Appeal Issues Held In Abeyance

– Supporting Documentation for Permit Modification to be Filed and Issue Resolved Pursuant to Section VII, S ubs ection D ( See, Para graph 79

. a.ii.)

Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

50 The Clean Water Commission removed 4

- mile segment of Big Creek from 303(d) li st “because recent data indicated it is no longer impaired” after a TMDL was issued. Since Big Creek is no longer impaired, the TMDL is moot and any effluent limits based thereon for the 4

- mile segment of Big Creek are invalid.

Metals limits based on t he TMDL for lead, copper, cadmium, zinc, selenium and thallium are moot and must be recalculated

.

S elenium limits were added to the permit based on the recommendation of the TMDL, which is now moot

. Glover Facility (para 14)

( para. 15)

Outfall s 004 & 005 (para. 20) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

51 Permit effluent limits are based on waste load allocation in the TMDL for Big Creek, not for Scogg ins Branch, which is the actual receiving stream.

Since Scoggins Branch is an unclassified water, only acute metal water quality standards apply

. Since Scoggins Branch is the receiving stream, acute water quality standards for metals should be basis fo r WQBELs

. Glover Facility (para. 16)

(para. 17)

(para. 18) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

52 If effluent limits are calculated as chronic WQBEL for Big Creek, then they should be based on an upstream 7Q10 flow of 0.48 cfs and hardness level that accounts for hardness contributed by Scoggins Branch

. Glover Facility (para. 21) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.7/15/2010

Page 14 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

53 Metals WQBELs should be recalculated for TMDL and permit based on more reliable, site

- specific data

. Glover Facility

– 001, 002, 003 & 006 ( amended para. 11) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

54 Permit limits should be calculated for Scoggins Branch, not Big Creek, as the receiving stream

. Glover Facility

– 001, 002, 003 & 006 ( amended para. 12) No ch ange to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

55 WQBELs should be recalculated based on only acute metal water quality standards because Scoggins Branch is an unclassified wat er

. Glover Facility

– 001, 002, 003 & 006 ( amended para. 13) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

5 6 WQBELs for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc at outfalls 003 and 006 should be recalculated using site

- specific hardness values representative of low flow conditions

. Glover Facility

– 003 & 006 ( amended para. 14) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

5 7 Metals limits for Outfalls 003 and 006 should be recalculated using site

specific dissolved metals translators (DMTs)

. Glover Facility

– 003 & 006 ( amended para. 15) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modif ied, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

5 8 The TMDL and permit limits for Outfalls 003 and 006 should be recalculated using more recent 7Q10 values for Big Creek

. Glover Facility

– 003 & 006 ( amended para. 16) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

59

60 If effluent limits are calculated based on chronic WQBEL in Big Creek, then they should be segregated into 4 different WQBE Ls for different stream flows (as in previous permit)

.
Flow tiered limits in previous permit are allowable under 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(A)4.F and should be retained

. Glover Facility

– 003 (para. 22)

( amended para. 18) No change to the permit.

If the B ig Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.7/15/2010

Page 15 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

61 Doe Run has or will shortly submit an application to construct a pipeline to transport effluent from Outfall 003 to Big Creek; when the discharge is relocate d, the TMDL and permit should recalculated metals limits for Outfalls 003 and 006 using Big Creek and its 7Q10 value

. Glover Facility

– 003 & 006 ( amended para. 19) No change to the permit.

If the Big Creek TMDL is modified, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modification

.

62 If SWPPP is required for an industrial stormwater outfall, numeric limits for that outfall should be removed from the permit

. Global issue applicable to all CWA Facilities Sweetwater

– 004 (para. 23) No change t o the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

The permittee has agreed, pursuant to the Consent Decree, to prepare and implement a SWPPP and BMPs at all CWA Facilities. However, the permittee may submit

a r equest for a permit modification to either eliminate the discharge authorization/outfall or to limit the discharge authorization to high

- flow/wet weather events. MDNR would consider the data provided in the permit modification request in assessing reasona ble potential under possible alternative discharge conditions. (10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(A)4.F) 63 Non

- contact cooling water discharged through 002 is derived from groundwater, which contains natural background concentrations of metals that often exceed the an alytical detection limits. In lieu of setting limits at detection, they should be set at the water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL)

. Glover Facility

- 002 (para. 19) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a perm it modification.

The permittee may submit a request for a permit modification, with supporting documentation, to eliminate the outfall and limits from the permit demonstrating that the outfall has been closed.

64 An allowance based on the flow in West Fork Black River should be considered when calculating effluent limits if chronic criteria are required

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 22) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modificatio n.

The permit limits for chronic criteria are required by application of State law to protect the down

- stream classified water, the West Fork of the Black River

. The permittee may submit a request for a permit modification that provides supporting docum entation for site

- specific water quality based limitations consistent with 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)

.7/15/2010

Page 16 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

65 Because MDNR did not provide data to justify new limits for chlorides plus sulfates, and data are not available to evaluate reasonable potential, the chlorid e plus sulfate limits should be removed

. Buick Mine /Mill

– 002 (para. 14) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

This is a monitoring only requirement. Data regarding sulfates included in the permit application demonstrate the presence of sulfates. There were few data points available, which indicated a high degree of variability, therefore necessitating continued monitoring to assess potential impacts from the facility. If additional

sam pling indicates consistently lower levels of sulfates, the permittee may submit an application for a permit modif ication , with supporting documentation. 66 In the absence of data supporting reasonable potential for cadmium limits, the permit should contai n only monitoring requirements

. Buick Mine /Mill

– 002 (para. 15) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

In addition to being a WQBEL, the limit for cadmium is also required by the effluent guideline s (40 CFR Part 440, Subpart J) . Previous sample analysis showing “ non

detect ” at a detection limit of 5 micrograms per l iter was not a sensitive enough detection limit to indicate the
current water quality standard s for cadmium are being met. Th e permittee may submit a request for a permit modification, with supporting documentation, for site

specific water quality based limitations. 67 Outfall 003 was confirmed closed by EPA’s Apr 2009 inspection

– seep along or near plugged pipe; monitoring & limits for Outfall 003 should be removed from permit

. Viburnum 28/29

– 003 (para. 15) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

MDNR will entertain a request for a permit modification, with supporting documentation, to eliminate the outfall from the permit. 68 Outfalls are emergency discharge points or stormwater outfalls that do not regularly discharged except in extreme storm events; they should not have monthly monitoring and effluent lim its based on critical low flow conditions and should instead only have effluent event based monitoring requirements

. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 13) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 002 & 003 (para. 19 / amended para. 24 ) Viburnum 28/29

– 005 & 006 (par a. 22) No change to permit unless and until the permittee submits an application for a permit modification

.
Existing data is not sufficient to support a no

- reasonable potential determination. MDNR has require d that t he permit either prohibit discharge or specify limits based on low flow conditions

. The permittee may submit a request for a permit modification, with supporting documentation and discharge options and limitations, for consideration by the department.7/15/2010

Page 17 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

69 Special Condition 7 pertaining t o operational conditions for Outfalls 003 and 004 does not accurately reflect the ELG regulations at 40 CFR 441.100

- 440.104

. West Fork Unit

– 003 & 004 (para. 16) No change to permit unless and until the permittee submits an application for a permit modifi cation.

Existing data is not sufficient to support a no

- reasonable potential determination. MDNR has require d that t he permit either prohibit discharge or specify limits based on low flow conditions

. The permittee may submit a request for a permit mod ification, with supporting documentation and discharge options and limitations, for consideration by the department. 70 WQBELs should be calculated using acute and not chronic water quality criteria for Outfalls 001, 002 & 003; discharges are to an unc lassified segment 4.2 miles from Crooked Creek; MO wqs do not require chronic protections for unclassified streams

. Viburnum Mine #35

– 001, 002 & 003 (para. 10) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modif ication.

Both acute and chronic permit limits are required by application of State law to protect the down

- stream classified water, Crooked Creek

. The permittee may submit a request for a permit modification that provides supporting documentation for si te

- specific water quality based limitations consistent with 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4). 71 Outfall 002 should be deleted from the permit because the source of non

contact cooling water has been discontinued and will not discharge in the future

. Glover Facility

– 002 ( amended para. 17) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

MDNR will entertain a request for a permit modification, with supporting documentation, to eliminate the outfall from the permi t. 72 Outfall 006 is an emergency spillway from a stormwater flow basin that only discharges during heavy rain and extreme storm events; therefore numeric limits should be removed and monitoring only should be required

. Glover Facility

– 006 ( amended para . 20) No change to the permit under the current discharge scenario unless and until the permittee submits an application for a permit modification.

The permittee may submit a request for a permit modification to either eliminate the discharge authorizat ion/outfall or to limit the discharge authorization to high

- flow/wet weather events. MDNR would consider the data provided in the permit modification request in assessing reasonable potential under possible alternative discharge conditions. (10 CSR 20

- 7. 031(4)(A)4.F)7/15/2010

Page 18 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

73 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(a)4.F allows flow tiered limits, and are appropriate for small headwater streams. Flow tiered limits should be allowed for chronic effluent limits calculated for Bee Fork Creek

. Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001, 002 & 003 (par a. 2 1 / amended para. 26 ) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

74 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(A)4.F allows flow tiered limits, and sho ul d be allowed, taking into consideration the significant
up stream flows in Logan Creek. Sweetwater Mine/ Mill

– 001, 002 & 004 (para. 11 ) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

75 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(a)4.F allows flow tiered limits, and are approp riate for small headwater streams. Flow tiered limits should be allowed for chronic effluent limits calculated for Indian Creek

. Viburnum 28/29

– all outfalls (para. 23) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a per mit modification.

76 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4)(a)4.F allows flow tiered limits . Flow tiered limits were allowed in the previous permit and should be continued. West Fork Unit

– 001 (para. 14) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & infor mation for a permit modification.

77 B ecause of ammonia degradation in dry ditch and mixing in Adair Creek, there will be no measurable increase in ammonia levels in Adair or downstream in Logan Creek, therefore there is no reasonable potential for discha rges from Outfall 001 to impact aquatic life and the effluent limit should be removed from the permit

. Sweetwater Mine /Mill

– 001 (para. 9 ) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.

78 E xitin g effluent limits for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc at Outfall 002 should be maintained until an appropriate study has been conducted that considers site

- specific water quality criteria in streams receiving discharges from DR facilities, and site

- specific derivation of WQBELs

. Sweetwater Mine/ Mill

– 002 (para. 25 ) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.7/15/2010

Page 19 of 22 Permit Appeal Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in appeal document) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

79 In the event chronic WET testing is imposed on the facility, the permits should inclu de site

- specific WET testing requirements that take into account assimilative capacity of the receiving stream at varying receiving stream flows and varying discharge rates through the outfall that may be caused by precipitation events, site

- specific aquat ic life

, beneficial uses, or any other relevant and appropriate factors. Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

– 001 (supplement para. 26) Buick Min/Mill

– 002 (supplement para. 22) Fletcher Mine/Mill

– 001 (supplement para. 30) Sweetwater Mine/Mill

– 001 (supplement par a. 27) Viburnum 28/28

– 002, 003 & 004 (supplement para. 27) Viburnum Mine #35

– 001 (supplement para. 22) West Fork Unit

– 001 ( supplement para. 1 8 ) No change to the permit

- permittee may submit an application & information for a permit modification.7/15/2010

Page 20 of 22 

### TABLE 6

– F uture MSOP Potential Permit Appeal Issues

Future Permit Comment Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in comment letter ) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

80 Primary lead smelter allowan ces should be used in determining and defining pollutant sources and the associated mass loading. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 1 ) Under review by MDNR.

81 A schedule of compliance of more than one year should be granted to this facility. Bui ck Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 2 ) Under review by MDNR.

82 The default hardness used in the permit is inappropriate; DR’s site

- specific hardness should be used

. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 3 ) No change to the permit

– permittee may submi t an application & information for site

- specific limitations

.

83 There is no reasonable potential to violate water quality standards for Total Recoverable Chromium (III) and Dissolved Chromium (VI); quarterly sampling should be changed to annual samplin g of these parameters

. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 4 ) Under review by MDNR.

84 Acute water quality standards should apply, as this facility discharges to an unclassified stream

. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 5 ) No change to the permi t

– permittee may submit an application & informa tion for site

- specific limitations

.
MDNR interprets State law to require b oth acute and chronic permit limits to protect the down

- stream classified
water

. The permittee may submit a request for permit limi tations that provides supporting documentation for site

- specific water quality based limitations consistent with 10 CSR 20

- 7.031(4). 85 The monthly average limit for ammonia should be calculated differently; ammonia degradation should be accounted for in deriving chronic ammonia limits

. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 6 ) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit an application & information for site

- specific limitations.

86 Default DMTs should not have been used; site

- specific data for Sw eetwater Mine should be used while DR continues to collect data and formulate site

- specific DMTs Buick Resource Recycling

– 001 (comment 7 ) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit an application & information for site

- specific limitations

.7/15/2010

Page 21 of 22 Future Permit Comment Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in comment letter ) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

87 Doe Run requests that Outfalls 002 and 003 be re

- instated in the permit, or, in the alternative, requests the opportunity to conduct a no feasible alternatives analysis as to Outfalls 002 and 003. Buick Resource Recycling

– 002, 003 (comment 10) Under review by MDNR.

88 Special Condition 9 should be removed from the permit, as it is beyond the scope of federal and state clean water laws. Buick Resource Recycling

– 002, 003 (comment 1 2 ) Under review by MDNR.

89 Special Condition 10 should be removed from the permit, as hydrocarbon parameters are not contained in the draft permit. Buick Resource Recycling

– 002, 003 (comment 13) Under review by MDNR.

90 WET testing at Outfalls 002 and 003 should be removed from the permit. Buick Resource Recycling

– 002, 00 3 (comment 14) Under review by MDNR.

91 An alternative species, such as the daphnia magna, should be used in chronic WET testing. Buick Resource Recycling

– 001, 002 & 003 (comment 14) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit information to support an alternate WET methodology

.

92 Water quality based limits were calculated using an ambient hardness; site

- specific hardness is more appropriate

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001, 003, 004 & 005 (comment 2) No change to the permit

– permittee may submi t an application & information for site

- specific limitations

.

93 Water quality based effluent limitation should be calculated by first calculating a dissolved metal concentration, then translated using an appropriate dissolved metal translator, at which time the long

- term averages, average monthly limits, and maximum daily limits can be calculated using the EPA statistical method

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001, 003, 004 & 005 (comment 3) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit an application & in formation for site

- specific limitations.

94 Quarterly testing for silver is inappropriate as there is no reasonable potential to violate WQS and should be changed to annual monitoring

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001 (comment 6) Under review by MDNR.

9 5 Chemical Oxygen Demand should be a monitoring only requirement

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001 (comment 7) Under review by MDNR.

96 Three years is an appropriate compliance schedule for meeting final limits

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001 (comment 8) Under review by MDNR.7/15/2010

Page 22 of 22 Future Permit Comment Issue (summary of issue raised by permittee ) Applicable MSOP(s)

– Outfall(s) (paragraph in comment letter ) Resolution of Permit Appeal Issue

97 Monitoring requirement for sulfate at Outfall 003 should be removed from the permit

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 003 (comment 10) Under review by MDNR.

98 Default DMTs should not have been used to translate dissolved waste load allocations to total recoverable effluent limits

. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001, 003, 004 & 005 (comment 2) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit an application & information for site

- specific limitations

.

99 An alternative species, such as t he daphnia magna, should be used in chronic WET testing. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001 (comment 13) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit information to support an alternate WET methodology

.

100 Site

- specific mixing zones are appropriate

. He rculaneum Lead Smelter

– 001 (comment 14) No change to the permit

– permittee may submit an application & information for site

- specific limitations

. 101 Outfall 004 should be eliminated from the Permit. Herculaneum Lead Smelter

– 004

### APPENDIX F
TRUST AGREEMENT Herculaneum Facility Site Dated:

____________ __, 2010

T his T rust Agreement (this “Agreement” ) is entered into as of [date] by and between Doe Run Resources Corporation , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of t he State of New York (the “Grantor ” ), and [name of trustee], a [insert “corporation,” “banking organization,” “ association,” etc.] organized and existing under the laws of the State of [ _________] ( the “Trustee” ).

Whereas, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ( “EPA” ), an agency of the United States federal g overnment, the State of Missouri and the Grantor have entered into a Consent Decree

, United States of America v. the Doe Run Resources Corporation

, Civil Action No. [_________], addressing multiple Site s in Southeast Missouri (hereinafter the “ Consent Decree ”);

Whereas, the Consent Decree provides that the Grantor shall provide assurance that funds will be available as and when needed for performance of the Remedial Action at the Herculane um Facility as required by the Consent Decree ;

Whereas, in order to provide such financial assurance

, Grantor has agreed to establish and fund the trust created by this Agreement ; and

Whereas, the Grantor, acting through its duly authorized officers, has selected the Trustee to be the trustee under this Agreement, a nd the Trustee has agreed to
act as trustee hereunder.

Now, t herefore, the Grantor and the Trustee agree as follows:

Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement :

(a) The term “ Benefic iary ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement.

( b ) The term “Business Day” means any day, other than a Saturday or a Sunday, that banks are open for business in Herculaneum, Missouri , USA

. ( c ) The term “ Claim Certific ate ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 4(a) of this Agreement.

( d ) The term “ Fund ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement.

( e ) The term “Grantor” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in the first paragraph of this Agreement.

### 2 ( f

) The term “ Objection Notice ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 4(b) of this Agreement.

( g ) The term “ Site ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 2 of this Agreement.

( h ) The term “T rust” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement

. ( i ) The term “Trustee” shall mean the trustee identified in the first paragraph of this Agreement, along with any successor trustee appointed pursuant to the terms of this Agr eement

. ( j ) The term “Work” shall be the work to complete the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility Remedial Action as that is defined in Appendix E (Financial Assurance) of the Consent Decree

. Section 2. Identification of Facilities and Costs. This Agreem ent pertains to costs for Work required at the Herculaneum Lead Smelter Facility site in Herculaneum, Jefferson County, Missouri (the “Site”) , pursuant to the above referenced Consent Decree

. Section 3. Establishment of Trust Fund. The Grantor and the Tr ustee hereby establish a trust ( the “ Trust ” ), for the benefit of EPA and the State of Missouri (the “Beneficiar ies ” )

, to assure that funds are available to pay for performance of the Remedial Action in the event that Grantor fails to conduct or complete th e Remedial Action required by , and in accordance with the terms of, the Consent Decree

. The Grantor and the Trustee intend that no third party shall have access to monies or other property in the Trust except as expressly provided herein . The Trust is es tablished initially as consisting of funds in the amount of [_______] U.S. Dollars ( $ _________)

. Such funds , along with any other monies and/or other property hereafter deposited into the Trust, and together with all earnings and profits thereon, are refe rred to herein collectively as the “ Fund

. ” The Fund shall be held by the Trustee, IN TRUST, as hereinafter provided. The Trustee shall not be responsible nor shall it undertake any responsibility for the amount or adequacy of, nor any duty to collect fro m the Grantor, any payments necessary to discharge any liabilities o f the Grantor owed to the U nited States.

Section 4. Payment f or Work Required Under the Consent Decree

. The Trustee shall make payments from the Fund in accordance with the following pro cedures.

(a) From time to time, the Grantor and/or its representatives or contractors
may request that the Trustee make payment from the Fund for Remedial Action performed under the Consent Decree by delivering to the Trustee and EPA a written invoice an d certificate (together, a “Claim Certificate”) signed by an officer of the Grantor (or the relevant representative or contractor) and certifying :

(i) t h at th e invoice is for Remedial Action performed at the

### 3 Site in accordance with the Consent Decree; (ii) a description of the Remedial Action that has been performed, the amount of the claim, and the identity of the payee(s); and

(iii) that the Grantor has sent a copy of such Claim Certificate to EPA, both to the EPA attorney and the EPA Superfund Spe cial Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief , and the State attorney and project manager, at their respective addresses shown in this Agreement , the date on which such copy was sent , and the date on which such copy was received by EPA and the State as evidenced by a return receipt (which return receipt may be written, as in the case of overnight delivery, certified mail, or other similar delivery methods, or electronic, as in the case of e

- mail, facsimile, or other similar delivery methods)

. (b) EPA , after co nsultation with the State

, may object to any payment requested in a Claim Certificate submitted by the Grantor (or its representatives or contractors) , in whole or in part, by delivering to the Trustee a written notice (an “Objection Notice”) within thirt y (30) days after the date of EPA’s receipt of the Claim Certificate as shown on the relevant return receipt. An Objection Notice sent by EPA shall state (i) whether EPA objects to all or only part of the payment requested in the relevant Claim Certificat e ; (ii) t he basis for such objection, (iii) t hat EPA has sent a copy of such Objection Notice to the Grantor and the date on which such copy was sent ; and (iv) t he portion of the payment requested in the Claim Certificate, if any, which is not objected to by EPA, which undisputed portion the Trustee shall proceed to distribute in accordance with Section 4( d ) below. EPA , after consultation with the State, may object to a request for payment contained in a Claim Certificate only on the grounds that the
reque sted payment is not for the costs of Remedial Action under the Consent Decree or otherwise inconsistent with the terms and conditions of the Consent Decree.

( c ) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and does not receive an Objection Notice from EP A within the time period specified in Section 4(b) above, the Trustee shall, after the expiration of such time period, promptly make the payment from the Fund requested in such Claim Certificate.

(d) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and also receives an Objection Notice from EPA within the time period specified in Section 4(b) above, but which Objection Notice objects to only a portion of the requested payment, the Trustee shall, after the expiration of such time period, promptly make payment from the Fund of the uncontested amount as reque sted in the Claim Certificate. The Trustee shall not make any payment from the Fund for the portion of the requested payment to which EPA has objected in its Objection Notice.

(e) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and also receives an Objection Notice from EPA within the time period specified in Section 4(b) above, which Objection Notice objects to all of the requested payment, the Trustee shall not make any payment from the Fund for amounts requ ested in such Claim Certificate.

( f

) While this Agreement is in effect, disbursements from the Fund are

### 4 governed exclusively by the express terms of this Agreement.

Section 5. Trust Management. The Trustee shall invest and reinvest the principal and income of the Fund and keep the Fund invested as a single fund, without distinction between principal and income, in accordance with directions which the Grantor may communicate in writing to the Trustee from time to time, except that:

( a ) s ecurities , not es, and other obligations of any person or entity shall not be acquired or held by the Trustee with monies comprising the Fund , unless they are securities , notes, or other obligations of the U.S. f ederal government or any U.S. state government or as otherw ise permitted in writing by the EPA , after consultation with the State ;

( b ) t he Trustee is authorized to invest the Fund in time or demand deposits of the Trustee, to the extent such deposits are insured by an agency of the U.S. f ederal or any U.S. state g ov ernment; and

( c ) t he Trustee is authorized to hold cash awaiting investment or distribution uninvested for a reasonable time and without liability for the payment of interest thereon.

Section 6 . Commingling and Investment

. The Trustee is expressly auth orized in its discretion to transfer from time to time any or all of the assets of the Fund to any common, commingled, or collective trust fund created by the Trustee in which the Fund is eligible to participate, subject to all of the provisions hereof and thereof, to be commingled with the assets of other trusts participating therein.

Section 7 . Express Powers of Trustee

. Without in any way limiting the powers and discretion conferred upon the Trustee by the other provisions of this Agreement or by law, the Trustee is expressly authorized and empowered:

(a) t o make, execute, acknowledge, and deliver any and all documents of transfer and conveyance and any and all other instruments that may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the powers herein granted ;

(b) t o register any securities held in the Fund in its own name or in the name of a nominee and to hold any security in bearer form or in book entry, or to combine certificates representing such securities with certificates of the same issue held by the Trustee in other fiduciary capacities, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of such securities in a qualified central depositary even though, when so deposited, such securities may be merged and held in bulk in the name of the nominee of such depositar y with other securities deposited therein by another person, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of any securities issued by the U .S. f ederal g overnment or any U.S. state government, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, with a Federal Reserve ban k, but the books and records of the Trustee shall at all times show that all such securities are part of the Fund; and

(c) t o deposit any cash in the Fund in interest

- bearing accounts maintained

### 5 or savings certificates issued by the Trustee, in its separat e corporate capacity, or in any other banking institution affiliated with the Trustee, to the extent insured by an agency of the U.S. f ederal government

.

Section 8 . Taxes and Expenses

. All taxes of any kind that may be assessed or levied against or in re spect of the Fund shall be paid from the Fund. All other
expenses and charges incurred by the Trustee in connection with th e administration of the Fund and this Trust shall be paid by the Grantor.

Section 9 . Annual Valuation

. The Trustee shall annually, no more than thirty ( 30 ) days after the anniversary date of establishment of the Fund, furnish to the Grantor and to the Beneficiar ies a statement confirming the value of the Trust. Any securities in the Fund shall be valued at market value as of no more than 60 days prior to the anniversary date of establishment of the Fund. The a nnual v aluation shall include an accounting of any fees or expenses levied against the Fund. The Trustee shall also provide such information concerning the Fund and this Trus t as EPA , after consultation with the State, may request from time to time.

Section 1 0 . Advice of Counsel

. The Trustee may from time to time consult with counsel with respect to any question arising as to the construction of this Agreement or any action to be taken hereunder ; provided, however, that any counsel retained by the Trust ee for such purposes may not, during the period of its represenation of the Trustee , serve as counsel to the Grantor.

Section 1 1 . Trustee Compensation

. The Trustee shall be e ntitled to reasonable compensation for its services as agreed upon in writing with the Grantor and as notified in writing to the Beneficiar ies

.

Section 1 2 . Trustee and Successor Trustee

. The Trustee and any replacement Trustee must be approved in writing by EPA , after consultation with the State, and must not be affliliated with the Grantor

. The Trustee may resign or the Grantor may replace the Trustee, but such resignation or replacement shall not be effective until the Grantor has appointed a successor trustee approved in writing by EPA , after consultation with the State, and this successor accepts such appointment. The successor trustee shall have the same powers and duties as those conferred upon the Trustee hereunder. Upon the successor trustee’s a cceptance of the appointment, the Trustee shall assign, transfer, and pay over to the successor trustee the funds and properties then constituting the Fund. If for any reason the Grantor cannot or does not act in the event of the resignation of the Truste e, the Trustee may apply to EPA and the State, or a court of competent jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor trustee or for instructions. The successor trustee shall specify the date on which it assumes administration of the Fund and the T rust i n a writing sent to the Grantor, the Beneficiar ies , and the present Trustee by certified mail no less than 10 days before such change becomes effective. Any expenses incurred by the Trustee as a result of any of the acts contemplated by this Section shall be paid as provided in Section 8

.

### 6 Section 1 3 . Instructions to the Trustee

. All instructions to the Trustee shall be in writing, signed by such persons as are empowered to act on behalf of the entity giving such instructions . The Trustee shall be fully protected in acting without inquiry on such written instructions given in accordance with the terms of this Agreement . The Trustee shall have no duty to act in the absence of such written instructions , except as expressly provided for herein.

Section 1 4

. Amendment of Agreement

. This Agreement may be amended only by an instrument in writing executed by the Grantor and the Trustee , and with the prior written consent of EPA , after consultation with the State

.

Section 1 5 . Irrevocability and Termination

. T his Trust shall be irrevocable and shall continue until terminated upon the earlier to occur of ( a ) the written direction of EPA , after consultation with the State, to terminate , consistent with the terms of the Consent Decree and ( b ) the complete exhau stion of the Fund comprising the Trust as certified in writing by the Trustee to EPA

, the State and the Grantor . Upon termination of the Trust pursuant to Secti o n 15(a), all remaining trust property (if any)

, less final trust administration expenses, shal l be delivered to the Grantor.

Section 1 6 . Immunity and Indemnification

. The Trustee shall not incur personal liability of any nature in connection with any act or omission, made in good faith, in the administration of this Trust, or in carrying out any directions by the Grantor or the EPA , after consultation with the State, issued in accordance with this Agreement. The Trustee shall be indemnified and saved harmless by the Grantor from and against any personal liability to which the Trustee may be subje cted by reason of any act or conduct made by the Trustee in its official capacity, including all expenses reasonably incurred in its defense in the event the Grantor fails to provide such defense.

Section 1 7 . Choice of Law

. This Agreement shall be admini stered, construed, and enforced according to the laws of the State of Missouri.

Section 1 8 . Interpretation. As used in this Agreement, words in the singular include the plural and words in the plural include the singular. The descriptive headings for ea ch Section of this Agreement shall not affect the interpretation or the legal efficacy of this Agreement.

Section 19 . Notices. All notices and other communications given under this agreement shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the parties as follows or to such other address as the parties shall by written notice designate:

(a) If to the Grantor :

Name Title Address Address

(b) If to the Trustee :

### 7 Name Title Address Address

(c) If to EPA:

Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch U.S. EPA, Region 7 90 1 N. 5 th 

### Street Kansas City, Kanas 66101

Steven L. Sanders Office of Regional Counsel U.S. EPA, Region 7 901 N. 5 th 

### Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101 (913)551

- 7578

(d) If to the State:

Director Hazardous Waste Program Missouri Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 176 Jefferson City, MO 65102

### 8 In Witness Whereof , the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective officers duly authorized and attested as of the date first above written:

GRANTOR

[Signature of Grantor] [ 

### Name and Title]

State of _________________________ County of _______________________

On this [date], before me personally came [name of Grantor official], to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she/he is [title] of [corporation], t he corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; and that she/he signed her/his name thereto.

[Signature of Notary Public]

TRUSTEE

[Signature of Trustee] [Name and Title]

State of _________________________ County of ___________

____________ On this [date], before me personally came [name of Trustee official], to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she/he is [title] of [corporation], the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; and that she/he signed her/his name thereto.

[Signature of Notary Public]

### 1 APPENDIX G FINANCIAL ASSURANCE FOR MINE/MILL FACILITIES

I. Introduction

1. This Appendix sets forth the obligations of The Doe Run Resources Corporation and The Doe Run Resources Corporation d/b/a The Doe Run Company (“Doe Run”) to secure and maintain Financial Assurance as required under Paragraph 133 of the Consent Decree, including schedules and notice requirements. Submittals requiring EPA and State approval shall be submitted pursuant to Section XXIII (Notices) of the Consent D ecree. “EPA and State approval” or “determination” as used in this Appendix shall not be subject to judicial review but shall be subject to Dispute Resolution ( other than judicial review) pursuant to Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of the Consent Decree, unless specified otherwise in this Appendix. Any time period specified by this Appendix may be changed by written agreement of the Parties . Any proposed material modification to this Appendix will be agreed to in writing by the Parties pursuant to Secti on XXVI ( Modification ) of the Consent Decree

.

2. Doe Run currently owns and/or operates the Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Buick Mine/Mill, Fletcher Mine/Mill, Sweetwater Mine/ Mill, Viburnum Mine/Mill (Mine # 28 and 29), and West Fork Mine/Mill (collectively “Mine/ Mill Facilities”). These facilities contain tailings and tailings ponds, produced during the milling process, which contain lead and other heavy metals. Doe Run shall, according to the schedule provided in Section IV of this Appendix, provide Financial A ssurance for Remedial Actions for these Mine/Mill Facilities after Doe Run permanently ceases its ore and mine water production, ore milling, and tailings disposal at these Mine/Mill Facilities.

II. Definitions

3. Whenever the terms set forth below are u sed in this Appendix, the definitions set forth below shall apply. However, the definitions below only apply to matters relating to Financial Assurance for the Mine/Mill Facilities under this Consent Decree.

“Estimated Cost of Work” shall mean the EPA

- and State

- approved cost estimates for Remedial Actions at each individual Mine/Mill Facility, as necessary to allow for the future use of the properties as determined by Doe Run and comply with legal obligations including closure under the Metallic Mineral s Waste Management Act.

“Current Dollars” shall mean U.S. dollars in the year actually received or paid, unadjusted for price changes or inflation.

### 2 “Doe Run” shall mean The Doe Run Resources Corporation and The Doe Run Resources Corporation d/b/a The Do e Run Company.

“Financial Assurance” shall mean a written demonstration of financial capability, in compliance with the terms of this Appendix, to implement the Remedial Actions to address all contamination at each individual Mine/Mill Facility in an amo unt at least equal to the approved Estimated Cost of Work.

“Financial Mechanism” shall mean the mechanism or instrument specified in this Appendix used to secure funding for the Financial Assurance obligation under the Consent Decree.

“GAAP” shall mean U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

“Mine/Mill Facility” or collectively “Mine/Mill Facilities” shall mean Doe Run’s six mine and mill facility complexes at Brushy Creek, Buick, Fletcher, Sweetwater, Viburnum and West Fork. The six Mine/Mill F acilities are located in Southeast, Missouri and include hundreds of acres of property associated with the operation of each mine/mill facility.

“Remedial Actions” shall mean those actions required to comply with legal obligations to remediate each of th e Mine/Mill Facilities as necessary to allow for the future use of the property as determined by Doe Run and to comply with legal obligations including closure under the Missouri Metallic Minerals Waste Management Act, regulations, and applicable Metallic Minerals Waste Management Permits which include the remediation of tailings ponds, including draining if required, rock cover if required on tailings dams, remediation of mine water ponds, including draining if required, remediation of tailings, including grading to ensure positive drainage, and provision of soil, vegetative, and other cover as required and watering of vegetative cover as appropriate, sealing of service, production and ventilation shafts, removal of asbestos, PCBs and other regulated substa nces, environmental covenants established pursuant to the Missouri Environmental Covenants Act if required

, and all actions necessary to comply with State, local and Federal requirements.

### 3 III. Cost Estimates

4. Doe Run shall provide to the United States a nd the State for approval by December 31, 2010, a written estimate, in current dollars, of the cost of hiring a third party to perform all of the Remedial Actions at each of the individual Mine/Mill Facilities (hereafter “Estimated Cost of Work”). A third party is a party who (i) is neither a parent nor a subsidiary of Doe Run and (ii) does not share a common parent or subsidiary with Doe Run. A disapproval of the Estimated Cost of Work is subject to Dispute Resolution pursuant to Section XIX (Dispute Res olution) of the Consent Decree, including judicial review.

5. Contemporaneous with the submittal of the Estimated Cost of Work, Doe Run shall provide an estimate of the operating life of the individual Mine/Mill Facility.

6. The Estimated Cost of Work shall be calculated based on the point in time when the extent and manner of the operation of the individual Mine/Mill Facility would make the Mine/Mill Facility Remedial Action and the associated activities the most expensive, and based on what it would cost to h ire a Third Party to complete the Remedial Action. The Estimated Cost of Work pertaining to acquisition of soil and rock used for remediation shall be the third party cost to extract the soil and rock from property owned by Doe Run.

7. Doe Run shall not inc lude in the Estimated Cost of Work any credit for salvage value that may be realized with the sale of hazardous wastes or non

- hazardous wastes, facility structures or equipment, land or other assets associated with the Mine/Mill Facilities at the time the Mine/Mill Facilities close. Nor shall Doe Run incorporate a zero cost for handling hazardous waste with potential future value.

8. Doe Run shall submit annually to EPA and the State for approval, a revised written Estimated Cost of Work, together with suppo rting documentation, reflecting inflationary adjustments, significant cost adjustments and/or changes to the Remedial Action for each Mine/Mill Facility. The submissions shall be due sixty (60) days before the anniversary of the establishment of the Fina ncial Mechanism. In preparing the revised Estimated Cost of Work Doe Run shall use the most recently published Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.

9. Notwithstanding any provisions of the Consent Decree, Doe Run shall maintain the latest approved Estimated Cost of Work prepared in accordance with this Appendix at each Mine/Mill Facility for the duration of this Consent Decree.

### 4 IV. Financial Assurance for Mine/Mill Facility

10. Within thirty (30) days of the approval of the Estimated Cost of Work and the draft trust agreement for each Mine/Mill Facility Doe Run shall provide to EPA and the State an originally signed certification by Doe Run’s Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), together with supporting documentation, including a complete execu ted trust fund agreement, confirming that it has secured Financial Assurance for the Estimated Cost of Work. The required amount of the Financial Assurance for each mine/mill facility shall be based on the following formula [(1+n)/ TOLM] x ECW, where n is the total number of years since the first Estimated Cost of Work was approved, TOLM is the total remaining operating life of the Mine/Mill Facility and ECW is the Estimated Cost of Work. 1 

### Doe Run shall provide documentation of Financial Assurance each ye ar until Doe Run has provided documentation of Financial Assurance for 100% of the Estimated Cost of Work for each Mine/Mill Facility.

11. Doe Run shall establish separate Financial Assurance for each Mine/Mill Facility. The Financial Assurance shall be in the form of an interest bearing trust fund established for the benefit of EPA and the State, administered by a trustee who has the authority to act as a trustee under federal or State law, whose trust operations are regulated and examined by a federal or S tate agency, and that is acceptable in all respects to the EPA and the State.

12. Doe Run shall fund each trust fund, as specified in Paragraph 12 of this Appendix . The
trust fund agreement shall provide that the trustee shall make payments from the fund as directed by the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief , after consultation with the State, in writing (1) to reimburse Doe Run from the fund for expenditures made by Doe Run for Remedial Actions performed in accordance with the Consent D ecree and this Appendix, or (2) to pay any other person whom the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief, after consultation with the State, determines has performed or will perform the Remedial Actions in accordance with the Consent Decre e and this Appendix. The trust fund agreement shall further provide that if after completion of the Remedial Actions at the Mine/Mill Facility, money remains in the trust fund for that facility, the trustee shall not refund to Doe Run any amounts from the trust fund unless and until EPA, after consultation with the State, has advised the trustee that the Remedial Actions at the Mine/Mill Facility have been successfully completed.

13. Doe Run shall initially fund the trust established pursuant to Paragraph 10 of this Appendix within thirty (30) days of the approval of the Estimated Cost of Work and draft
trust fund agreement for each Mine/Mill Facility, and shall continue to fund the trust with the amount required pursuant to Paragraph 9 of this Appendix each y ear until the trust is fully funded at the completion of the operating life of each Mine/Mill Facility. Doe Run

1 For example, for a Mine/Mill Facility with a 20 year remaining operating life, Doe Run’ first certification of Financial Assurance shall amount to 1/20 the total Estimated Cost of Work; Doe Run second certification of Financial Assura nce shall amount to 2/20 of the Estimated Cost of Work; for year three, 3/20, on so on, until in year 20, the full amount of the Financial Assurance will be provided.

### 5 shall ensure that the amount of funds in the trust cover any increases in the Estimated Cost of Work, including inflationary adjustments, but m ay reduce the annual funding amount to reflect interest earned on monies in the trust.

14. After beginning implementation of the Remedial Actions, Doe Run or other person authorized to implement the Remedial Actions may request reimbursements for Remedial Act ion expenditures by submitting itemized bills to the trustee, the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief and the State. Doe Run may request reimbursement for Remedial Actions only if sufficient funds are remaining in the trust fund to co ver the maximum costs of the remaining Remedial Actions. Within thirty (30) days after receiving bills for Remedial Actions the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief, after consultation with the State, will instruct the trustee to make reimbursements in those amounts as the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief specifies in writing and/or shall file an Objection Notice pursuant to the trust agreement.

15. Doe Run shall use the exact wording specified in Appendix L for t he trust agreement, except for changes necessary to identify the specific Mine/Mill Facility. The trust fund agreement must be accompanied by a formal certification of acknowledgment 2 

### . Doe Run shall update the trust fund amount within sixty (60) days aft er a change in the amount of the Estimated Cost of Work. Doe Run shall ensure that the trustee provides to EPA and the State an annual accounting of the monies in the trust fund.

16. Doe Run shall pay all expenses incurred by the trustee in connection with t he administration of the trust fund, including fees for legal services rendered to the trustee and compensation of the trustee.

17. For the Financial Assurance provided under this Section, Doe Run shall submit a draft trust fund agreement and related document s to the EPA and the State for review and approval at the same time it submits the initial Estimated Cost of Work. Within thirty (30) days of approval of the initial Estimated Cost of Work and draft trust fund
agree m ent , Doe Run shall execute or otherwise finalize the trust fund agreement in order to make the Financial Assurance legally binding in a form substantially identical to the trust fund agreement reviewed and approved by EPA and the State. Doe Run shall submit the executed and/or otherwise finali zed trust fund agreement to EPA and the State within thirty (30) days after EPA’s and the State’s approval of the draft trust fund agreement and initial Estimated Cost of Work.

18. Doe Run shall submit all trust fund and related required documents by mail to the EPA Region 7 Financial Management Officer and the Director of the Hazardous Waste Program for the Missouri Department of Natural Resources at the addresses listed below. Copies shall also be sent to the EPA and State Project Officers.

For the EPA:

2 For an example see 40 CFR § 264.151(a)(2).

### 6 Re gion 7 Financial Management Officer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 901 North 5 th 

### Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

For the State:

Director Hazardous Waste Program Missouri Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 176 Jefferson City, MO 65102

19. Doe Run shall provide adequate Financial Assurance, in the form of a trust fund that conforms to the requirements of this Appendix. Doe Run shall make changes to the Financial Assurance if the following occurs:

a. If at any time EPA or the State determine that the trust fund provided pursuant to this Section is inadequate, or no longer satisfies the requirements set forth or incorporated by reference in this Appendix, whether due to an increase in the Estimated Cost of Work or for any other reason, EPA or the St ate shall so notify Doe Run in writing. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of notice of EPA’s or the State’s determination, Doe Run shall obtain and present to EPA and the State for approval an alternate or updated trust fund that satisfies all requiremen ts set forth or incorporated by reference in this Appendix. If Doe Run needs additional time to provide the alternate or updated trust fund, Doe Run shall request an extension, in writing, within ten (10) days of EPA’s or the State’s determination. Doe R un’s request shall include an explanation for the additional time and specify when the alternate or updated trust fund will be in place. Doe Run shall not rely upon the alternate or updated trust fund, nor shall Doe Run terminate the original trust fund, until EPA and the State, ha ve approved the alternate or updated trust fund.

b. If at any time Doe Run becomes aware of information indicating that the trust fund provided pursuant to this Section is inadequate or no longer satisfies the requirements set for th or incorporated by reference in the Appendix, whether due to an increase in the Estimated Cost of Work or for any other reason, then Doe Run shall notify EPA and the State in writing of such information within ten (10) days. Within thirty (30) days of Doe Run’s becoming aware of such information, Doe Run shall obtain and present to EPA and the State for approval an alternate or updated trust fund that satisfies all requirements set forth or incorporated by reference in this Appendix. If Doe Run needs a dditional time to provide the alternate or updated trust fund, Defendant shall request an extension, in writing, within ten (10) days of Doe Run’s becoming aware of such information. Doe Run’s request shall include an explanation for the additional time a nd specify when the alternate or updated trust fund will be in place. Doe Run shall not rely upon the alternate or updated trust fund, nor shall Doe Run terminate the original

### 7 trust fund, until EPA and the State, ha ve approved the alternate or updated tru st fund.

20. Doe Runs’ inability or failure to establish or maintain financial assurance for completion of the Remedial Actions at each Mine/Mill Facility shall in no way excuse performance of any other requirements of this Consent Decree.

21. Modification of Am ount, Schedule, and Form of Financial Assurance

a. .
Reduction of Amount and Schedule of Financial Assurance

b. . If Doe Run believes that the Estimated Cost to complete the remaining Remedial Actions has diminished below the amount covered by the existing Financ ial Assurance provided under this Consent Decree or if the operating life of the Mine/Mill Facilities is more than previously provided, Doe Run may, at the same time that Doe Run submits the annual revised Estimated Cost of Work and updated Mine/Mill Facil ities operating life estimate, pursuant to Paragraph 7 of this Appendix , or at any other time agreed to by EPA and the State, submit a written proposal to EPA and the State to reduce the amount of the Financial Assurance provided so that the amount of the Financial Assurance is equal to the estimated cost for the remaining Remedial Actions to be performed and/or the revised operating life of the Mine/Mill Facilities. The written proposal shall specify, at a minimum, the cost of the remaining Remedial Actio ns to be performed, the basis upon which such cost was calculated, and the basis for the revision in the estimated operating life of the Mine/Mill Facilities. In seeking approval of a revised Financial Assurance amount, Doe Run shall follow the procedures set forth in Paragraph 20.b of this Section. If EPA and the State, decide to accept such a proposal, EPA , after consultation with the State, shall notify Doe Run of the decision in writing. After receiving EPA’s written decision, Doe Run may reduce the amount of the Financial Assurance only in accordance with and to the extent permitted by such written decision. In the event of a dispute, Doe Run may reduce the amount of the Financial Assurance and schedule required hereunder only in accordance with the final EPA and State Dispute Decision resolving such dispute pursuant to Paragraph 1 of this Appendix and Section XIX (Dispute Resolution) of the Consent Decree. No change to the form or terms of any Financial Assurance provided under this Appendix, other than a reduction in amount or schedule for providing Financial Assurance, is authorized.

Release of Financial Assurance. Doe Run may submit a written request to the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief and the State that EPA and the State release Doe Run from the requirement to maintain Financial Assurance under this Appendix at such time as EPA and the State agree that all Remedial Actions at that particular Mine/Mill Facility are complete pursuant to Section XXVII (Termination) of t he Consent Decree. The EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief, after consultation with the State, shall notify both Doe Run and the provider(s) of the Financial Assurance that

### 8 Doe Run is released from the Financial Assurance obligations associated with that particular Mine/Mill Facility under this Consent Decree. In the event of a dispute, Doe Run may release, cancel, or terminate the Financial Assurance required hereunder only in accordance with the final EPA and State dispute decision.

c.

i. If Doe Run desires to change the form or terms of Financial Assurance, Doe Run may, at the same time that Doe Run submits the annual revised Estimated Cost of Work, pursuant to Paragraph 7 of this Appendix, or at
any other time agreed to by EPA and the State, submit a written proposal to EPA and the State to change the form of Financial Assurance. The submission of such proposed revised or alternative form of Financial Assurance shall be as provided in Paragraph 20.c (ii) below. The decision whether to approve a proposal submitted under this Paragraph 20.c shall be made in EPA’s and the State ’s , sole and unreviewable discretion and such decision shall not be subject to challenge by Doe Run pursuant to the dispute reso lution provisions of this Consent Decree or in any other form. Change of Form of Financial Assurance.

ii. A written proposal for a revised or alternative form of Financial Assurance shall specify, at a minimum, the cost of the remaining Remedial Actions for the Mine/Mill Facilities, the basis upon which such cost was calculated and the proposed revised form of Financial Assurance, including all proposed instruments or other documents required in order to make the proposed Financial Assurance legally binding. The proposed revised or alternative form of Financial Assurance shall satisfy all requirements of this Consent Decree. Any proposed alternative Financial Assurance other than a trust fund shall comply with the requirements set forth in 40 C

. F

. R

. Section 264.143. EPA , after consultation with th e State, shall notify Doe Run in writing of the decision to accept or reject a revised or alternative form of Financial Assurance submitted pursuant to this paragraph. Within ten (10) days after receiving a written decision approving the proposed revised or alternative Financial Assurance, Doe Run shall execute and/or otherwise finalize all instruments or other documents required in order to make the selected Financial Assurance legally binding in a form substantially identical to the documents submitted t o EPA and the State as part of the proposal, and such Financial Assurance, shall be fully effective. Doe Run shall submit all executed and/or otherwise finalized instruments or other documents required in order to make the selected Financial Assurance leg ally binding to EPA Region 7 Financial Management Officer within thirty (30) days of receiving a written decision approving the proposed revised or alternative Financial Assurance, with a copy to the EPA Project Officer and the State. EPA and the State sh all release, cancel, or terminate the prior existing Financial Assurance instruments only after Doe Run has submitted all executed and/or otherwise finalized

### 9 new Financial Assurance instruments or other required documents to EPA and the State

.
22. Incapacity o f Owners or Operators, or Financial Institutions. Doe Run shall notify the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief and the State by certified mail of the commencement of a voluntary or involuntary proceeding under Title 11 (Bankruptcy), U .S. Code, naming Doe Run as debtor, within ten (10) days after commencement of the proceeding, in accordance with 40 C

. F

. R

. § 264.148, incorporated by reference in 10 CSR 25

- 7.164(1). Doe Run will be deemed to be without the required Financial Assurance o r liability coverage in the event of bankruptcy of the trustee or issuing institution, or a suspension or revocation of the authority of the trustee institution to act as trustee. Doe Run must establish other Financial Assurance within sixty (60) days aft er such an event.

### Page 1 of 3 Appendix H – Enclosure of Lead Concentrate Storage and Handling

In accordance with, and in addition to, th e provisions of Section XIV of this Consent Decree (Additiona l Injunctive Relief), Doe Run shall comply with the provisions of this Appendix. Any submissions required of this Appendix shall be submitted to EPA and MDNR in accordance with Section XX III (Notices) of this Consent Decree.

A. Doe Run shall install and operate a building enclosure/ventilation system at the lead concentrate handling, storage and loading areas at the following mill facilities owned and operated by Doe Run: Buick Mine/Mill, Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Sweetwater Mine/Mill, and Fletcher Mine/M ill. The building en closure/ventilation system shall address the following specifi c components/areas: any interior lead concentrate conveyance system (i.e., conveya nce system located totally inside an enclosed storage/loading building), the lead concentrate storage stockpile, the area containing the scale, and the vehicle load ing zone (i.e., the area between the lead concentrate storage stockpile and the scale, within which the front-end loader or other loading equipment operates); and any exterior lead concentrate conveyance system (i.e., conveyance system located between the en closed mill building and the enclosed storage/loading building). The exterior conveyance enclosure system may be ventilated by sharing the negative pressu re ventilation system of th e enclosed storage/loading building connected thereto. The enclosure/ve ntilation systems shall meet the following requirements:

1. all subject areas shall be fully enclosed with limited openings to allow proper ventilation, and access and egress for people and vehicles, as necessary;

2. any enclosure shall be subject to general ventilation that maintains the interior of the building enclosure at a lowe r than ambient pressure to ensure in-draft through any openings at all times;

3. any enclosure shall be ventilat ed to a baghouse or other type of filter particulate collection equipment;

4. all connected enclosures may utilize the same shared ventilation system, provided that the required negativ e pressure level is maintained; and

5. any enclosure/ventilation system shall provide adequate enclosure and ventilation for any interior lead concen trate conveyance system without the need for a redundant enclosure/ventilation of the interior conveyance system.

B. Doe Run shall sequentially complete installation and begin operation of an enclosure/ventilation system at the respect ive mill facilities by September 1 of the following consecutive years: 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. The sequence of enclosure/ventilation system installation and operation at the respect ive mill facilities will be determined by Doe Run; provided however, that Doe Run shall complete installation and begin operation of an enclosure/ventilat ion system at the Buick Mine/Mill facility by

### Page 2 of 3 no later than September 1, 2013. If Doe R un chooses to substantially revise the engineering design of its encl osure/ventilation system based on comments received by EPA and/or MDNR and such revision require s delay of the finalization of the plans beyond December 1 of the year preceding the es tablished installation/operation date (i.e., less than nine (9) months prior to the esta blished completion/operation date), then such revisions shall be a basis for an extension of the compliance schedule equivalent to the actual period of delay and any related dela y due to seasonal cons truction limitations. Any extension of the compliance schedule sh all not be classifi ed as a “material modification” of the Consent Decree. If Doe Run revises the engineering design of its enclosure/ventilation system based on co mments received by EPA and/or MDNR, Doe Run shall submit the final plans to EPA and MD NR thirty (30) days prior to commencing construction on the enclosure/ventilation system.

C. In accordance with the schedule set forth in Section B of this Appendix, Defendants shall install and operate a differe ntial pressure gauge on the leeward wall of the enclosure at each facility to measure th e pressure difference between the inside and outside of the enclosure that meets the fo llowing requirements: (1) the pressure gauge shall be certified by the manufacturer to be capable of measuring pressure differential in the range of 0.02 to 0.2 mm Hg; (2 ) both the inside and outside taps shall be shielded to reduce the effects of wind; and (3) Defendants shall demonstrate that the inside of the building is maintained at negative pressure as compared to the outsi de of the building no less than 0.02 mm Hg when a ll doors are in the position they are in during normal operations. Doe Run may seek to implement an alternate method to that stated herein for monitoring negative pressure or in-draft, if such method is proven to be at least equivalent to or more accurate than the above described method. Any such alternate proposal shall be submitted to and reviewed by EPA in accordance with the schedule set forth in Section B of this Appendix.

D. No later than fourteen (14) months before the enclosure/ventilation system installation completion/operation commencemen t date for any enclosure/ventilation system required under Section A of this A ppendix, and consistent with the schedule established in Section B of this Appendi x, Doe Run shall submit to EPA and MDNR plans containing the specifications for the en closure/ventilation system that will be installed at the specific mill facility select ed by Doe Run. EPA will consult with MDNR and provide any comments on the proposed plans to Doe Run within sixty (60) days. If comments are not provided within the estab lished timeframe, it will be assumed that EPA and MDNR have no comments, and Doe Run will proceed with the plans as submitted. The plans shall include the following information:

1. A detailed description of the area and equipment to be enclosed at each facility listed above.

2. The engineering designs, drawings , and cost estimates created by or for Doe Run for the building enclos ure/ventilation system for the following areas: (a) the interior lead concentr ate conveyance system (i.e., conveyance system located totally inside an enclosed storage/loading build ing); (b) the lead

### Page 3 of 3 concentrate stockpile storage area; (c) th e area containing the scale; and (d) the vehicle loading zone. The plans shall also include a detailed description and design basis for the enclosure system th at will be used on any exterior lead concentrate conveyance system (i.e., conve yance located between exterior walls of the enclosed mill building and the enclosed storage/loading building), including enclosure opti ons designed to prevent spillage to the ambient environment. The plans shall be based on an evaluation of best industry practices and shall present to EPA and MDNR th e enclosure and ventilation technologies that are demonstrated to best minimize f ugitive emissions and/or spillage to the ambient environment, to the extent pract icable, and to best minimize the spillage of lead concentrate onto the exterior of the transport ve hicle during loading inside the enclosed/ventilated storage/loading building (prior to entering the vehicle wash station) to the extent practicable.

3. A description of the ventilation sp ecifications and design basis for maintaining negative pressure in the en closure, as well as the measurement equipment and the method that will be implemented to measure and confirm that negative pressure is being mainta ined in the building enclosure.

4. A description of the specifi cations and design basis for any pollution control equipment that will be employed.

5. The name and qualifications of a ny contractor candidates that may be used by Doe Run to complete the project, if not previously submitted to EPA and the State.

6. A schedule for completing each portion of the project.

7. A general description of the exp ected environmental benefits of the project, providing any data or calculati ons of the expected lead air emissions reductions.

E. Doe Run shall provide an update on the status of these projects as part of the six-month status reports required pursuant to Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree.7

- 30

- 2010



### 1 Appendix I

- Statement of Work for Bee Fork Creek Mitigation

I. Introduction : General Overview of Work and Statement of Purpose

This Statement of Work (SOW) contains a variety of elements required for a mitigation project in Bee Fork Creek located in Reyno lds County, Missouri. The project will occur within the 8.5 mile segment of Bee Fork Creek extending from the most upstream inputs from the Fletcher Mine/Mill c omplex to its confluence with the West Fork of the Black River (approximate coordinates: upstrea m latitude and longitude 37.4426,

- 91.0915; downstream latitude and longitude 37.4598,

- 90.9851) that is on the Missouri list of impaired waters under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act based on Pb in sediment. The objective of the work under this SOW is

, in general

, to ameliorate conditions harmful to aquatic life, an d specifically to mitigate sediment toxicity to benthic macroinvertebrates ; other sediment

- dwelling aquatic life ; and reduce risks due to trophic transfer in the aquatic ecosystem due to Pb, Zn, Cd

, and Ni discharged from the Fletcher Mine/Mill complex to Bee Fork Creek. The goals and methods described in this SOW are limited to this project and do not set a precedent for any other project or
program.

Any modifications to this SOW or a schedule proposed by Defendants and approved by MDNR pursuant to the requirements of this SOW shall not be considered “material modifications” within the meaning of Section XXVI (Modifications) of the Consent Decree. Any proposed modifications to this SOW or a schedule approved by MDNR pursuant to the requirements of this SOW must be submitted to MDNR for review and prior approval pursuant to Section XII (Approval of Deliverables). Defendants shall submit all proposed modifications to MDNR and EPA at leas t thirty ( 3 0 ) Days prior to the due date of the milestone for which the extension is sought , unless otherwise approved by MDNR

. Modification of this SOW or a schedule approved by MDNR pursuant to the requirements of this SOW shall not automatically extend any schedule to meet an interim or final compliance deadline under this Consent Decree.

In addition, if any review or analysis is conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”)

, any deadlines or schedules of this SOW affected by the NEP A review or analysis will be extended by written agreement of the P arties for such time as necessary to complete the obligations affected by the review or analysis

.

Doe Run shall commence implementation of t he MDNR

- approved Sampling and Analysis Plan and other mitigation work required under this Appendix and Section XIV (Additional Injunctive Relief) of the Consent Decree when all final permit conditions in the Fletcher Mine/Mill re

- iss u ed MSOP No. MO0001856 become effective or when the final permit condit ions become effective pursuant7

- 30

- 2010



### 2 to alternative compliance schedules provided under the Consent Decree, whichever is later.

II. General Description of Work Required

This SOW includes the following activities:

A. Environmental sampling and testing of sediment q uality, water quality, soil quality and other relevant conditions of the Bee Fork Creek channel and stream bank as described in a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for Stream Assessment in accordance with Section III of this SOW. The sediment mitigation go al (SMG) for this project will be the threshold

mean Probabl e Effects Concentration Quotient for Pb, Zn, Cd

, and Ni calibrated to Bee Fork Creek conditions, consistent with Ingersoll et al

. (2001), Ingersoll et al. (2009), Long et al. (2006), Besser et al. (2009b) and MacDonald et al. (2009) (hereinafter “threshold mean PEC

- Q) as provided in Section III. In addition, concentrations of sediment in Bee Fork Creek demonstrated to be toxic to sensitive organisms (e.g., crayfish and sculpins) from past and curr ent investigations shall be evaluated in determining the SMG (Allert et al. 2008).

B. Development of a Stream Assessment Report and Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan in accordance with Section IV of this SOW. The Assessment Report will describe the analytical results for surface
water , sediment pore

- water, and sediment sampling in Bee Fork Creek and soil sampling in vegetated and unvegetated areas of wetlands, creek banks, and floodplains adjacent to Bee Fork Creek. The Geomorphology Characterizati on Work Plan will describe the methods that will be used to characterize the hydrology and geomorphological conditions of the 8.5 miles of Bee Fork Creek on the 303(d) list. Detailed analysis of geomorphology will focus on areas with sediment at

or over t he threshold mean PEC

- Q, including erosional areas of the creek banks and floodplains

.

C. Following the Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ (MDNR) approval of the Stream Assessment Report and Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan, Doe Run shall cond uct the geomorphologic characterization.

D. Upon completion of the geomorphologic characterization, Doe Run shall develop a Mitigation Design Document (MDD) in accordance with Section V of this SOW. The MDD will consider the locations and geomorphological c haracteristics of the areas of sediment and soil at or over the threshold mean PEC

- Q ; identif y are a s of potential sediment removal or other mitigation approaches within Bee Fork Creek ; describe
any access issues ; and evaluate the cost of sediment mitigatio n7

- 30

- 2010



### 3 alternatives to meet the objectives of this SOW, and include detailed provisions governing any removal of sediment, including complying with applicable local, state and federal statutes and regulations covering these activities

, such as timely obtaining applicable permits.

E. As provided in Section V of this SOW , the MDD will consider the following actions to address sediments and soils at or over the SMG and to mitigate construction related impacts:

1. removal of sediment at or over the threshold mean PEC

- Q potentially including from

a. exposed bars in compliance with Missouri’s gravel bar mining regulations, or b. behind ( upstream ) of low

- water crossings.

2. stream bank or floodplain soil removal or stabilization in erodible areas with soil concentrations at o r over the threshold mean PEC

- Q that have the potential to cause sediment concentrations at or over the threshold mean PEC

- Q;

3. riparian corridor mitigation particularly in areas that are adversely affected by soil or sediment mitigation construction activi ties;

4. in

- stream habitat improvements (potentially including fish passage improvement, bridge re construction, bank reconfiguration and structure, and in

- stream structure) in areas that are adversely affected by sediment removal activities; and

5. environment al covenants where it is necessary to maintain restored riparian corridor areas on private property.

F. The MDD will include a description of proposed construction monitoring and maintenance measures, including submission of monthly progress reports.

G. Monito ring and maintenance of mitigation measures for a five (5) year period following completion will be performed by Doe Run under MDNR oversight.

Doe Run shall not be required to spend more than $5,500,000, in 2010 dollars, on implementation of the w ork se t forth in the approved MDD , approved Supplemental MDD, and item G, above. Doe Run shall have no obligation to undertake further actions to implement the work set forth in the approved MDD or Supplemental MDD or item G if, and at such time that, the costs incurred and documented to EPA and MDNR by Doe Run to implement such work are equal to

or exceed $5,500,000. In the event that the costs to implement such work are7

- 30

- 2010



### 4 expected to equal or exceed $5,500,000, Doe Run shall promptly provide notice to EPA, MDNR and the United States

, including a list of work set forth in the MDD

, Supplemental MDD or item G that has not been completed. However, in the event that such costs equal or exceed $5,500,000, nothing in the Consent Decree or this Appendix shall preclude Doe Run from voluntarily performing additional work or expending additional funds to complete the work , provided that such additional work has been approved by MDNR and comports with the requirements of the Consent Decree and this Appendix.

III. Sampling and Analysis Plan For Stream Assessment

Within one year after the Effective Date of the Consent Decree, Doe Run shall submit a SAP for Stream Assessment for review and approval by the MDNR that details sampling and analysis protocols for items II I .A. through H., discussed below. The SAP shall include quality assurance measures that identify analytical detection limits, toxicity test protocols (i.e., for development of the threshold mean PEC

- Q), quality assurance/quality control measures, decontamination
proc edures, sample numbers, and locations, etc. The SAP will include a Quality Assurance Program Plan (“QAPP”) that conforms to “EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations” (EPA QA/R5. EPA/240/B

- 01/003 (March, 2001) ) and “Guidance for Quality Assurance Plans” (EPA QA/G5. EPA/240/R

- 02/009 (December, 2002)). Doe Run shall plan and implement a sampling/survey regime that evaluates the following existing conditions:

A. Sediment Quality: Sediment sampling will be focused on deposit ional areas where fine sediment (i.e., sand, silt and clay) is expected to predominate , gravel bars, and areas impeded by low

- water crossings or other impediments to flow within the 8.5 stream miles. Sediment quality analyses will include analy sis of metal concentrations ( i.e., Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni) in sediments finer than gravel (i.e., the <2 mm size ) fraction as determined through wet sieving using site water ; the above metals in sediment pore water ; analysis of conventional analytes (e.g., mois ture content, grain size distribution and total organic carbon, etc.) ; acid volatile sulfide and simultaneously extra c ted metals in accordance with EPA guidance (EPA 2005a) ; and sediment toxicity testing at selected stations downstream and upstream of the Fletcher Mine/Mill complex to calibrate the threshold mean PEC

- Q. Sediment quality sampling and evaluation will include analyses of sediment pore

- water for Pb, Zn, Cd

, and Ni ;

B. Water Quality: Water quality sampling will include total and dissolved metals (Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni), hardness, dissolved organic carbon, other contaminants of concern discharged from the Fletcher Mine/Mill complex and s tandard water quality parameters (e.g. pH, specific conductance, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, etc.);7

- 30

- 2010



### 5 C. Biological integrity of the stream macrobenthic community shall be determined by using Rapid Bioassessment as modified by MDNR ( Sarver, R. 2001 ) within Bee Fork Creek, including mine

- affected areas within the 8.5 stream miles and appropriate reference lo cations, and other indices of biotic integrity as proposed by Doe Run and approved by MDNR . Biotic sampling shall also include an evaluation of aquatic endpoints demonstrated to be sensitive to metals in the Viburnum Trend such as crayfish (Allert et al. 2009 a ) and sculpin ( Allert et al. 2009b) ;

D. Soil Quality: soil sampling of wetlands, creek banks, and floodplains adjacent to Bee Fork Creek to determine whether those areas contain Pb, Zn, Cd

, and Ni that could be transported to the Creek bed and

r esult i n sediment that is equal to or exceeds the threshold mean PEC

Q ;

E. Potential locations for riparian corridor mitigation activities, to the extent foreseeable based on sediment and soil quality and likely access routes for sediment and/or soil removal or oth er mitigation construction activities;

F. Locations of wetlands, including Hines Emerald Dragonfly habitat (fens);

G. The SAP shall include an implementation schedule , which schedule shall be subject to approval by MDNR ; and

H. The raw data generated from the SAP shall be submitted to MDNR within thirty (30) days of receipt by Doe Run.

IV. Stream Assessment Report/Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan

Doe Run shall prepare and submit to MDNR for review and approval a Stream Assessment Report and Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan within four months of the date Doe Run receives all validated analytical results from the sampling performed pursuant to the SAP. The Stream Assessment Report will summarize the information collected pursuant to the SAP and prov ide information necessary for preparation of the MDD to address in

- stream sediments that are equal to or exceed the SMG . This information will include determination of the threshold mean PEC

- Q for Pb, Zn, Cd , and Ni calibrated to Bee Fork Creek using toxi city testing across a representative gradient of metals concentrations in sediments from selected stations downstream and upstream of the Fletcher Mine/Mill complex consistent with Ingersoll et al. (2001), Ingersoll et al. (2009), Long et al

. (2006) Besser et al

. (2009b), and MacDonald et al. (2009). This calculation will provide the threshold mean PEC

- Q at which site

- specific toxicity7

- 30

- 2010



### 6 to benthic macroinvertebrates is likely to occur. The Stream Assessment Report will consider existing literature on aquati c ecotoxicity specific to the Viburnum Trend, other sediment dwelling aquatic life, risks due to trophic transfer in the aquatic system, and incorporate this data as well as ecotoxicity data d iscussed under this Appendix in the development of the SMG. The SMG for this mitigation project is to attain sediment concentrations below the threshold mean PEC

- Q as determined by incorporating all Bee Fork Creek site

- specific ecotoxicity under the SAP.

Based on the soil concentrations that are equal to or exceed th e threshold mean PEC

- Q , the Stream Assessment Report will also identify any areas of wetlands, floodplains or overbank deposits, fens and special and critical habitats that warrant further evaluation of sediment erosion and remobilization potential in the Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan.

The Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan will describe the methods and schedule for evaluating geomorphologic characteristics including collection of the following information:

A. Hydrology of the Creek, inclu ding flow measurement if previous stream gauging information is not available.

B. Stream surface water elevations every 1⁄4 mile throughout the 8.5 stream miles in the areas of potential sediment mitigation identified in the Stream Assessment Report, includin g longitudinal and perpendicular to flow c ross sections

. S tream cross sections will be conducted in accordance with approved methodology (Rosgen 1996 or 1998).

C. Identification and description of locations to remove sediments based on either: 1. sediment con centrations equal to or exceeding the threshold mean PEC

- Q for Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni in sediment impounded behind low

- water crossings or other obstructions that serve to trap sediment and provide grade controls during excavation; or

2. sediment concentrations e qual to or exceeding the threshold mean PEC

- Q for Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni in gravel bar deposits (if access can be obtained without importation of fill material or significant habitat loss).

D. Identification of sediment quantities that can be removed and still

m aintain the stream in a manner that prevents “sediment starved” conditions (i.e., conditions that would require additions of clean sediment to maintain a geomorphically stable sediment balance. ) The7

- 30

- 2010



### 7 Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan will consider m ethods to evaluate quantity of sediment that could be removed from a given stream reach while avoiding head cuts or channel degradation in upstream locations.

E. Identification of areas that function as grade controls or conditions that prevent head

- cutti ng or significant downward erosion of the stream (e.g. bedrock bottom or low

- water crossings).

F. Identification of areas of sediment or soil in bank s , overbank s, or floodplain deposits equal to or over the threshold mean PEC

- Q that are located close to acc ess roads and are in areas that are: 1. likely to suffer damage by heavy equipment during construction; 2. that are susceptible to erosion , deeply incised or other sources of recontamination of in

- stream sediment; or 3. likely to suffer i mpacts to floodplains or b anks caused by the construction of roads to remove sediment.

G. Evaluation of the erosion and remobilization potential of the areas of wetlands, floodplains, or creek banks identified in the Stream Assessment Report as containing sediments equal to or in ex cess of the threshold mean PEC

- Q that could be remobilized by flood and high
water events.

H. An inventory of existing vegetation in the areas of potential sediment mitigation in order for the MDD to propose appropriate species for revegetation following an y mitigation construction activities.

I. I dentification of stream segments in areas of potential sediment mitigation that would benefit from potential in

- stream habitat enhancements, such as segments with straightened channels, lacking in woody structure in stream, poor riffle/pool development, or other aquatic habitat limitations.

V. Mitigation Design Document

Doe Run shall submit an MDD to MDNR for review and approval within six months of the approval date of the Stream Assessment Report and Geomorpholog y Characterization Work Plan. The MDD will consider the areas and geomorphological characteristics of the sediment and soils equal to or in excess of the SMG; identify locations for potential removal or other management of such materials; describe any acc ess issues; evaluate the costs of sediment mitigation alternatives to meet the objectives of this SOW; and present a prioritized inventory of sediment mitigation actions. T he MDD will provide design criteria and specifications for sediment removal, transp ortation, and7

- 30

- 2010



### 8 disposal, bank stabilization, riparian corridor mitigation and in

- stream habitat mitigation as applicable. Removal and mitigation methods that will be considered are described in sections A through I below:

A. Gravel Bar Mining : The Missouri na tural resource agencies (MDNR, Missouri Department of Conservation, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), have identified gravel bar mining as a method allowing removal of contaminated sediment within Ozark streams without seriously degrading other ecologic al and hydrologic functions of the stream. The gravel bar mining design should allow for periodic re

excavation of contaminated sediment, if necessary, from the same gravel bar with successive high water events. The following items shall be identified in the MDD and guide design and implementation of any gravel bar excavation to meet the SMG :

1. Gravel/sediment excavation detail, including the techniques and equipment used; 2. Restrictions on gravel bar excavation as identified within the Missouri Land Recla mation Act Sand and Gravel Mining Regulations (In

- Stream Gravel Removal Requirements are specifically found at 10 CSR 40

- 10.050 (14) and are on page 10 of the Sand and Gravel Rules (found at http://www.sos.mo.gov/adrules/csr/current/10csr/10c40

- 10.pdf). I n addition to these restrictions, Doe Run shall leave a 20 foot buffer of unexcavated deposits at the head (upstream end) of any gravel bar identified for excavation. This will increase stability of the bar and promote re

- deposition of sediment during hig h water events. 3. The estimated periodicity (frequency) of sediment removal based on high flow or flood events and re

- deposition of sediment; 4. An estimate of volume of sediment removal necessary to achieve the SMG in a specific gravel bar, not considering the unexcavated deposits at the head of the gravel bar; 5. Sediment transport and disposal methods, including opportunities for beneficial reuse or other management options consistent with Federal and State regulations; 6. Erosion/sediment migration controls (e.g., silt curtains); 7. Operational monitoring (e.g., water quality monitoring); 8. Mitigation of any constructed access roads; and 9. M aintenance and monitoring to ensure that mitigation measures are geomorphically stable over the long

- term and mitigated areas do not become re

- contaminated after construction completion.7

- 30

- 2010



### 9 B. In

- stream Excavation: The natural resource agencies have identified removal of contaminated sediment behind low

- water crossings as an effective method of removing contaminated sediment while minimi zing unintended negative ecological and hydrological consequences within the stream. Similar to gravel bar mining, this mitigation method could be designed to be repetitive in one location over a period of years depending on high flow or flood events,

con taminated sediment volume above the excavation p oint, and mobility of sediment. The first excavation of the sediment behind a low

- water crossing or stream obstruction enhances the depositional capacity of this location for upstream sediment. In

- stream se diment removal behind low

- water dams or other identified stream impoundments or grade controls may be planned for multiple iterations if such iterations are determined to be effective in decreasing sediment metal concentrations in a given stream reach belo w the SMG . As appropriate, the MDD will identify: 1. Sediment excavation detail, including the techniques and equipment used; 2. Permitting requirements as identified within the federal Clean Water Act and state Clean Water Law (land disturbance, sections 401 and 404 permits, etc.); 3. Periodicity (frequency) of sediment removal based on high flow or flood events and re

- deposition of contaminated sediment; 4. An estimate of volume of sediment removal necessary to achieve the SMG; 5. Sediment transport and disposal met hods, including opportunities for beneficial reuse or other management options consistent with Federal and State regulations; 6. Erosion/sediment migration controls (e.g., silt curtains); 7. Operational Monitoring (e.g., water quality monitoring); 8. Mitigation of constructed access roads; and/or 9. Maintenance and Monitoring.

C. In

- Stream Habitat Mitigation : The MDD will consider in

- stream habitat mitigation actions either in conjunction with or in lieu of sediment removal actions as determined by MDNR. In

- stream hab itat mitigation actions are a lower priority to MDNR than sediment mitigation actions, riparian corridor mitigation pursuant to Section V .F and monitoring and maintenance pursuant to Section V. G. The MDD must reserve adequate funding for post construction riparian corridor mitigation and monitoring and maintenance of the stream mitigation project. In

- stream habitat mitigation may include: 1. woody or rock structures that improve conditions for fish and other aquatic organisms;7

- 30

- 2010



### 10 2. fish passage improvements, incl uding low

- water bridge replacement; 3. construction of riffle/pool, or meander sequences; and/or 4. re

- directing the channel away from eroding banks (or sections of the stream under construction), etc.

D. Stream Bank and Floodplain Excavation : The MDD shall consi der options for stream bank or floodplain excavation or stabilization in areas identified in the Stream Assessment Report and Geomorphology Characterization as exhibiting a high potential for erosion and containing sediment equal to or exceeding the SMG th at may be remobilized and distributed to the stream bed in concentrations equal to or exceeding the SMG.

E. Riparian Corridor Mitigation : In general, forested canopy is the most beneficial watershed land cover for stream health. A healthy wooded watershed p rovides for the interception and infiltration of rainfall, filters leaf litter, and slows runoff, and the extensive interlocking root systems of forests provide resistance to erosion. The structure of the forested canopy provides shelter for a variety of wildlife, provides food for insects and other wildlife while growing, and provides the base of the food chain for stream systems after leaf

- fall. The roots of trees near stream channels provide resistance to erosion and downed wood supplies habitat within the stream. In addition, stream health is enhanced by easy (low gradient) transitions between the stream channel and floodplains. The MDD will consider riparian corridor mitigation activities to mitigate construction

- related impacts from sediment or soi l removal actions . Where deemed appropriate based on the results of the sediment evaluations in Bee Fork Creek, the MDD will give consideration to lowering banks to provide flood storage and riparian wetland habitat as a form of riparian corridor mitigati on . The riparian corridor mitigation design will include:

1. Construction

- related bank improvements where the bank or floodplain has been impacted by construction of roads necessitated for sediment removal actions. The MDD will identify bank re

- grading, h eight, slope details, re

- vegetation, and maintenance components. Low angles and low height banks are preferred over high banks and steep angles.

2. Heavy construction equipment, fertilizers, or pesticides will not be used within 100 feet of identified fens less than 400 square feet in area. For larger fens, the above activities are restricted to 500 feet on the upstream side and 300 feet on lateral and downstream sides. A greater set

- back distance7

- 30

- 2010



### 11 may be necessary depending on topography, geology, and rel ative velocity of potential storm water runoff. In addition to Best Management Practices for land disturbance [10 CSR 20

- 6.200(1)(C)] applicable to all riparian corridor restoration, adequate storm water controls must be in place to limit impacts to fens to the extent practicable, including but not limited to, temporary diversion of storm water associated with land disturbance activities or pesticide application around fens. Permanent vegetative cover must be restored/established as soon as possible after land disturbance activities cease in areas that drain to fens. In the case that a variance from these setbacks and requirements is considered necessary to complete other tasks of the MDD, written concurrence must be secured from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Se rvice prior to any activities. If concurrence is granted it may contain additional conditions. In the case of toxicological risk to fens, it may be desirable to waive construction restrictions. If toxicological risks are identified, written concurrence must be secured from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to any construction.

3. Site Preparation and Maintenance. Many cleared areas are hotspots for invasive species, and other species that may compete with trees planted along the riparian corridor. Spe cies of Conservation Concern, as determined by the Missouri Department of Conservation

, may exist and should not be disturbed. In areas where construction activities under this SOW have disturbed stream banks or floodplains, the MDD will identify the degr ee of maintenance needed after tree planting and other revegetation efforts. The MDD will describe the frequency and type of herbicide treatments, fire, and frequency of mowing or other cultural practices used to facilitate the success of tree planting or other revegetation efforts.

4. Revegetation. For areas to be reforested, the MDD will identify the native Missouri tree species to be planted, using the Terrestrial Natural Communities of Missouri (riverfront forest, mesic bottomland forest chapters) as a gu ide. Three gallon RPM (Root Production Method) trees shall be planted no closer than 30’ centers in rows that can accommodate future mowing to control competing vegetation. If invasive plants are problematic, an additional 50

- 100 native shrubs (such as gra y dogwood, Cornus obliqua ) per acre will be planted, and a7

- 30

- 2010



### 12 native cover crop (such as Virginia wild rye, Elymus virginicus ) seeded.

Trees will be planted in the fall or early spring, with appropriate site preparation to control competing vegetation and e radication of invasive species beforehand. Appropriate maintenance mowing and/or herbicide application will be implemented afterward.

5. Other Mitigation Measures. Doe Run will identify potential engineered or institutional controls to ensure long

- term pr otection of stream and riparian corridor mitigation areas such as fencing, alternative water supplies for livestock, temporary or permanent conservation easements including land

- owner payment, if necessary.

F. Construction monitoring measures to ensure wat er quality compliance and geomorphic stability during construction : Construction monitoring procedures will be outlined in the MDD and will include, at a minimum, the following: 1. Water quality parameters to be sampled during in

- stream or

near

- stream constr uction including, but not limited to, total and dissolved metals (Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni), sulfate, TP, nitrate, pore water metals, hardness, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, pH, conductivity, temperature, and total suspended solids. 2. Stability or mechanical inspe ction and maintenance procedures during and after construction of gravel bar mining, low

- water crossing, or in

- stream habitat mitigation. Inspections should , at a minimum, specifically monitor for head cutting upstream of areas of excavated sediment. 3. Du ring construction, water quality conditions shall be monitored and quantitatively measured twice daily depending on the amount of in

- stream activity. Measurements of dissolved oxygen (DO) and turbidity shall be taken and recorded at one location upstream and two locations downstream from the in stream construction activity. In an instance of turbidity from the construction activity greater than 100 NTU Doe Run shall notify MDNR immediately. If the turbidity level greater than 100 NTU continues for 6

cons ecutive hours at the first downstream sample site, Doe Run shall modify operations to reduce turbidity levels. If a turbidity threshold level of 200 NTU from the construction activity is exceeded for 6 consecutive hours at the first downstream station, Do e Run shall cease operations and shall7

- 30

- 2010



### 13 mitigate the source of turbidity prior to resuming in

- stream construction activities. 4. No equipment maintenance will be performed in the vicinity of the stream or riparian work areas. Equipment fueling and other main tenance shall be performed outside the stream channel and in a manner that prevents over filling, leaks, and spills. Equipment shall be maintained to minimize drips and leaks. Any accidental spills or leaks shall be immediately cleaned up and reported to MDNR. 5. The MDD shall identify a schedule of sampling and reporting of construction monitoring measures during active construction.

G. Long

- Term Monitoring and Maintenance

– Monitoring and maintenance measures shall continue for five years following complet ion of construction activities. Monitoring and maintenance

measures for this period will be outlined in the MDD and will include, at a minimum, the following: 1. Water quality parameters to be sampled include, but are not limited to, pH, conductivity, tempera ture, hardness, total and dissolved metals for Pb, Zn, Cd, and Ni, turbidity, total suspended solids; 2. Stability or mechanical inspection and maintenance procedures after construction of gravel bar mining, low

- water crossing, or in

- stream habitat mitigati on. Inspections should specifically monitor for head cutting upstream of areas of excavated sediment; 3. Inspection and maintenance procedures necessary to ensure long

- term vegetation success; and 4. Sampling to assess the biological integrity of the stream

m acrobenthic community conducted pre

- construction may be repeated to determine the degree of recovery one year after construction completion.

H. Schedule for Implementation : The MDD shall include a schedule for implementation of the mitigation work. The mi tigation work (exclu d ing monitoring and maintenance) shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, but no later than within one year of achieving the SMG.

I. Supplemental MDD: 1. Within three months after completion of the initial sediment removal effort (e.g., in

- stream sediment removal behind low water crossings and/or gravel bar mining) Doe Run shall submit a Supplemental MDD based on its experience with that effort . The Supplemental MDD shall include, but is not limited7

- 30

- 2010



### 14 to, an updated cost analysis

, a revision of the volume of contaminated sediment

, and/or anticipated frequency of in

stream sediment removal behind low water crossings

, and/or gravel bar mining. The Supplemental MDD shall identify the shortest possible timeframe sufficient to achieve t he SMG. 2. Based on the initial sediment removal, anticipated sediment removal volume

, frequency

, and resultant costs identified in the Supplemental MDD, Doe Run shall refine its design of sediment mitigation measures and any related riparian corridor and in

- stream improvement as needed to meet the objectives of this SOW. 3. The Supplemental MDD shall be submitted to MDNR for review and approval. Doe Run shall not commence the next sediment removal activity until the Supplemental MDD has been approved by MDNR , after consultation with the EPA.

VI. Implementation

A. Doe Run shall submit the required documents (SAP, Stream Assessment Report and Geomorphology Characterization Work Plan, MDD and Supplemental MDD) and implement the activities in accordance with al l approved documents and the schedules set forth therein, and in this Appendix.

B. Construction Start. Construction shall commence within two months of Doe Run receiving all necessary approvals and permits on the MDD. Approved activities shall proceed in the following general
sequence , to the extent applicable: 1. Excavation behind low

- water crossings concurrently with construction of haul roads for gravel bar mining; 2. Initial excavation of gravel bars; 3. Repeated excavation of re

- deposited contaminated sedime nt after high water events as identified in the MDD; 4. Identification of in

- stream habitat mitigation projects (if any); 5. C onstruct in

- stream habitat mitigation projects (if any); 6. R iparian corridor mitigation.

VII. Other Requirements

A. Any submission required b y this Appendix shall be submitted to EPA and MDNR in accordance with Section XXIII (Notices) of this Consent Decree. For any submission requiring approval, MDNR, after consultation with EPA, will be the approving authority in accordance with Section XII (Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables) of this Consent Decree.7

- 30

- 2010



### 15 B. During implementation of the MDD and until MDNR determines that the implementation activities are complete pursuant to Section VII. E. of this Appendix, Doe Run shall submit month ly progress reports to MDNR and EPA delineating the status of the project. The progress report for each month shall be submitted by the 10 th 

### day of the following month. The frequency of the progress reports may be reduced as agreed to by the EPA and MDNR . The progress report shall include, at a minimum, a description of:

1. Activities conducted during the reporting period; 2. Problems encountered during the reporting period; 3. Refined estimate of sediment mitigation (volume and/or frequency); 4. Schedule variances and corrective actions, if necessary; 5. Projected activities for the next reporting period and estimated costs (for Supplemental MDD and MDD implementation work); 6. Status of permits and applications; and 7. An accounting of costs incurred to date for the Supple mental MDD and MDD implementation work, including supporting documentation.

C. Doe Run shall use best efforts to obtain all necessary access agreements to conduct work required by this Appendix within three months of submitting the MDD to MDNR for review and approval. “Best efforts” shall include, at a minimum, a certified letter, a phone call, and a personal visit; it shall also include payment of reasonable sums of money in consideration of granting access. The access agreements shall also provide access for the State of Missouri, Missouri Department of Conservation (“MDC”), EPA, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ( “ USFWS ” ) , U.S. Forest Service (“Forest”)

, and their representatives to move freely in order to conduct oversight and monitoring actions they determin e necessary. The access agreements shall specify that Doe Run is not the State of Missouri’s, MDC’s, EPA’s, Forest’s, or US FWS’s agent with respect to any liabilities associated with activities to be performed. Doe Run shall provide MDNR with copies of a ll access agreements. Doe Run shall immediately notify MDNR if, after using best efforts, it is unable to obtain such agreements within the time required. Doe Run shall, within ten (10) days of its receipt of a denial of access, submit to MDNR a written description of its efforts to obtain access. MDNR may, in its discretion, assist Doe Run in obtaining access. In the event MDNR obtains access, Doe Run shall undertake the work on such property. Nothing in this Appendix shall be construed to limit the S tate of Missouri’s, MDC’s, EPA’s, Forest’s, and US FWS’s right of7

- 30

- 2010



### 16 access, entry, inspection, and information gathering pursuant to applicable law.

D. Doe Run shall perform all actions required by this Appendix in accordance with all applicable local, state an d federal laws and regulations. Doe Run shall obtain or cause its representatives to obtain all permits and approvals necessary under such laws and regulations in a timely manner so as not to delay the work required by this Appendix.

E. Construction Complet ion. Within thirty (30) days of completing work set forth in the approved MDD and Supplemental MDD Doe Run shall submit a final progress report to MDNR for approval and determination that the mitigation project is completed. Stream Mitigation Completion shall be determined by, among other considerations, evidence that the sediment excavation has achieved the SMG ; magnitude of sediment removal ; and completion of additional stream habitat or riparian corridor mitigation measures identified in the approved S upplemental MDD.

VIII. Oversight

The Missouri Department of Natural Resources shall oversee the stream mitigation project. The oversight will be provided in consultation with Missouri Department of Conservation, U.S. EPA, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition, where the stream mitigation project involves activities on, or that impact, National Forest System land, additional oversight will be provided by the U.S. Forest Service. Oversight activities shall include, but are not limited to , plan and d ocument review and approval, permitting, compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations, contracting costs, data review, and construction inspection and oversight.

MDNR will bill Doe Run on a periodic basis for oversight costs and such co sts, with the exception of oversight costs related to agency review or approval of the site specific PEC

- Q that will be used as the SMG, will be subtracted from Doe Run’s commitment to expend $5, 5 00,000 on implementation of the stream mitigation. Any othe r agency oversight costs billed to Doe Run in connection with the Bee Fork Creek mitigation project , with the exception of oversight costs related to any agency review or approval of the site specific PEC

- Q that will be used as the SMG, will also be subtra cted from Doe Run’s commitment to expend $5, 5 00,000 on implementation of the stream mitigation.

IX. References

Allert, A.L., Fairchild, J.F., DiStefano, R.J., Schmitt, C.J., Besser, J.M., Brumbaugh, W.G., & Poulton, B.C. (2008). Effects of lead

- zinc mining on crayfish (Orconectes hylas) in the Black River watershed, Missouri, USA. Freshwater Crayfish, 16

, 97

- 111

.7

- 30

- 2010



### 17 Allert, A.L., Fairchild, J.F., Schmitt, C.J., Besser, J.M., Brumbaugh, W.G., & Olson, S.J. (2009) Effects of mining

– derived metals on riffle

- dwe lling benthic fishes in Southeast Missouri, USA. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 72:1642

- 1651.

Besser, J.M., Brumbaugh, W. G., Allert, A. L., Schmitt, C. J. and Ingersoll, C. G. (2009a). Ecol o g ical impacts of lead mining on Ozark streams: Toxicity of sediment a nd pore water. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 72(2): 516

- 526.

Besser, J.M., Brumbaugh, W. G., Hardesty, D. K., Hughes, J.P., and Ingersol, C.G. (2009b). Assessment of metal

- contaminated sediments from the Southeast Missouri (SEMO) mining district using sedime nt toxicity tests with amphipods and freshwater mussels. Administrative Report 08

- NRDAR

- 02. Columbia Environmental Research Center, U.S., Geological Survey, Columbia, MO.

Ingersoll, C.G., MacDonald, D.

, Wang, N ., Crane, J.L. , Field, L.J., Haverland, P.S.

, Kemble, N.E., Lindskoog, R.A., Severn, C.

, and Smorong , D. E. ( 2001). Predictions of sediment toxicity using consensus

- based freshwater sediment quality guidelines. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol 41:8

- 21.

Ingersoll, C.G., Kemble, N.E., Kunz, J.L., Br umbaugh, W.G., MacDonald, D. , and Smorong, D. (2009) Toxicity of sediment cores collected from the Ashtabula River in northeastern Ohio USA to the amphipod Hyalella azteca . Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 57

- 315

- 329.

Long, E.R., Ingersoll, C.G., and MacDo nald, D. (2006). Calculation and uses of mean sediment quality guidelines quotients: a critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40: 1726

- 1736.

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G. and Berger, T.A. ( 2000 ) . Development and Evaluation of Consensus

- Based Sedimen t Quality Guidelines for Freshwater Ecosystems. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 39 : 20

- 31

.
Nelson, P.W et al . ( 2005 ) . The Terrestrial Natural Communities of Missouri. Revised ed. The Missouri Natural Areas Committee. Jeffereson City, MO 550pg

.
Rosgen, D.L. (1996). Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.

Rosgen, D.L. (1998). Stream Classification Field Guide. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.

Sarver, R. ( 2001 ) . Semi

- quantitative Macroinvertebrate Stream Bioassessment. Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Quality, Environmental Services Program Project Procedure. 24 pp.7

- 30

- 2010



### 18 EPA. (2001). Methods for collection, storage and manipulation of sediments for chemical and toxicological analyses: Tec hnical manual. EPA

- 823

- B

- 01

- 002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington D.C.

EPA. (2005a). Procedures for derivation of equilibrium partitioning sediment benchmarks (ESBs) for the protection of benthic organism s: Metals mixtures (cadmium,
cop per, lead, nickel, silver and zinc). EPA

- 600

- R

- 02

- 011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington D.C.

EPA. (2005b). Contaminated Sediment Remediation Guidance for Hazardous Waste Sites, EPA

- 540

- R

- 0 5

- 012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington D.C.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 1 of 10 Appendix J

– Environmental Mitigation Projects

In accordance with, and in addition to, the provisions of Section X V of this Consent Decree (Environmental Mitigation Projects), Defendants shall comply with the provisions of this Appendix to ensure that th e benefits of $2 million in federally directed Environmental Mitigation Projects are achieved.

I. Overall Environmental Mitigation Projects Schedule and Budget

A. Within 10 months of the Effective Date of this Consent Decree, unless extended by EPA and as further described below, Defendants shall submit plans to EPA for review and approval for completing $2 million in the federally directed Environmental Mitigation Projects specified in this Appendix, spread out over the course of, but within

, four (4) years from the Effective Date of this Consent Decree. The plans may include any of the seven (7) projects listed below, but must include the following 4 (four) projects: Provision II. (Clean Diesel Retrofit Project), IV. (School Laboratory Clean

- Out), V . (School Energy Efficiency Projects), and VI. (Ground Source Heat Pumps). The minimum and maximum amounts listed for each project herein, if specified, will apply unless alternative amounts are approved by EPA. In addition, Defendants may submit to EPA additional projects to those listed herein within 6 months of the Effective Date of the Consent Decree. Defendants must submit the details of any alternative projects and proposed cost with an explanation of environmental benefit and the manner in which t he proposed additional project will mitigate the effect of Defendants' prior actions. EPA will consult with MDNR before approving or commenting on any plans or proposed additional projects in accordance with Section XII of this Consent Decree (Compliance Requirements: Approval of Deliverables). The decision whether to approve an additional project submitted by Defendants under this Paragraph shall be made in EPA’s, after consultation with the State, sole and unreviewable discretion and such decision shall not be subject to challenge by Defendants pursuant to the dispute resolution provisions of this Consent Decree or in any other form. The purpose of the Environmental Mitigation Projects shall be to mitigate the effects of Defendants’ actions in the perio d during which the allegations set forth in the Complaint transpired. As part of each plan submitted, Defendants shall explain the manner in which the Project will mitigate the effect of the Defendants' prior actions.

B. Defendants may, at their electio n, consolidate the plans established by this Appendix into a single plan.

C. Within 90 days of the approval of the plans by EPA and thereafter as part of the six

- month status reports required pursuant to Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Conse nt Decree until completion of each Project (including any applicable periods of demonstration or testing), Defendants shall provide the United States and the MDNR with written reports detailing the progress of each Project, including Project Dollars.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 2 of 10 D. As part of the next six

- month status report required pursuant to Section XVI (Reporting Requirements) of this Consent Decree that is due following the completion of each Project agreed to under this Consent Decree (including any applicable periods of demo nstration or testing), Defendants shall submit to the United States and MDNR a report that documents the date the Project was completed, the results of implementing the Project, including the emissions reductions or other environmental benefits achieved, a nd the Project Dollars expended by Defendants in implementing the Project.

E. Upon EPA’s approval of the plans proposed in this Appendix, Defendants shall complete the Environmental Mitigation Projects according to the approved plans. Nothing in the Con sent Decree or this Appendix shall be interpreted to prohibit Defendants from completing the Environmental Mitigation Projects before the deadlines specified in the schedule of an approved plan. Nothing in this Consent Decree or Appendix shall prohibit th e modification of the plans

, projects

, or schedules , if approved by EPA. Any modifications approved by EPA are not “ material modifications ” to the Consent Decree.

II. Clean Diesel Retrofit Project

A. Defendants shall submit a plan for EPA review and ap proval, in consultation with MDNR, to retrofit in

- service diesel engines with emission control equipment further described in this Section, designed to reduce emissions of particulates and/or ozone precursors and fund operation and maintenance of the retro fit equipment for the time

- period described below (the “Clean Diesel Retrofit Project”). Eligible vehicles, engines, and equipment may be owned or operated by or on behalf of a public entity. Preference shall be given to school buses. Eligible vehicles c ould also include vehicles owned or operated by Defendants’ contract haulers. Defendants use contractors to haul lead concentrate and other materials throughout Missouri. These contractor vehicles use diesel gasoline

- powered vehicles. The retrofit of the se diesel engines and the use of hybrid engine technologies in these contractor vehicles will improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions of NO x 

### , PM, VOCs, and other air pollutants. This Project shall include, where necessary, techniques, administration and infrastructure needed to support the Clean Diesel Retrofit Project. Defendants shall spend no less than $300,000 in Project Dollars on the Diesel Retrofits.

B. The plan shall also satisfy the following criteria:

1. Involve public fleets based in a nd equipment located in Jefferson County, Missouri; if sufficient projects cannot be found in Jefferson County, projects may involve public fleets and equipment located in Dent County, Iron County, Washington County, Scott County, or Reynolds County, Misso uri. If Defendants cannot find a public fleet(s) appropriate for the Diesel Retrofit Project or cannot use all of the Project Dollars on a public fleet, Defendants may spend Project Dollars to retrofit their contractor fleets and equipment. If Defendants use6 / 29 /2010



### Page 3 of 10 Project Dollars on retrofits for contractor fleets and equipment, Defendants shall state why those Project Dollars were not allocated to a public fleet(s).

2. Provide for the retrofit of diesel engines with EPA verified emissions control technolog ies to achieve the greatest measurable mass reductions of particulates and/or ozone precursors for the fleet that participate(s) in this project. Depending upon the particular EPA

- verified emissions control technology selected, the retrofit diesel engines must achieve emissions reductions of particulates and/or ozone precursors by 30%

- 90%, as measured from the pre

retrofit emissions for the particular diesel engine.

3. Describe the process Defendants will use to determine the most appropriate emissions c ontrol technology for each diesel engine that will achieve the greatest mass reduction of particulates and/or ozone precursors. In making this determination, Defendants must take into account the particular operating criteria for the EPA

- verified emission s control technology to achieve the verified emissions reductions.

4. Provide for the retrofit of diesel engines with either: (a) diesel particulate filters, (b) diesel oxidation catalysts and closed crankcase ventilation systems, or (c) EPA

- verified idl ing reduction technologies; cleaner fuel use; EPA

verified aerodynamics technologies and low rolling resistance tires; and engine re

powering (i.e. replacing older engines with newer, clean engines).

5. Describe the process Defendants will use to notify fleet operators and owners that their fleet may be eligible to participate in the Clean Diesel Retrofit Project and to solicit their interest in participating in the project.

6. Describe the process and criteria Defendants will use to select the particul ar fleet to participate in this project, consistent with the requirements of this Section.

7. For each of the recipient fleet owners and operators describe the amount of Project Dollars that will cover the costs associated with: (a) purchasing the verifi ed emissions control technology; (b) installation of the verified emissions control technology (including data logging); and (c) training costs associated with repair and maintenance of the verified emissions control technology (including technology cleani ng and proper disposal of waste generated from cleaning). This project shall not include costs for normal repair or operation of the retrofit diesel fleet.

8. Describe the process Defendants will use for determining which diesel engines in a particular f leet will be included in the Clean Diesel Retrofit Project with the verified emissions control technology, consistent with the criteria specified in Section II. B. 2., above.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 4 of 10 9. Ensure that recipient fleet owners and/or operators, or their funders, do no t otherwise have a legal obligation to reduce emissions through the retrofit of diesel engines.

10. For any outside party with whom Defendants might contract to carry out this Project, establish minimum standards that include prior experience in a Clean Diesel Retrofit Project and a record of prior ability to interest and organize fleets and community groups to join a clean diesel program.

11. Ensure that the recipient fleets comply with local, state, and federal requirements for the disposal of the was te generated from the verified emissions control technology.

12. Include a schedule and budget for completing each portion of the Project.

C. In addition to the information required to be included in the report pursuant to Section I. C. above, Defendan ts shall also describe the fleet owner/operator; where they implemented this project; the particular types of verified emissions control technology (and the number of each type) that they installed pursuant to this Project; the type, year, and horsepower o f each retrofit; an estimate of the number of citizens affected (if applicable) by this project and the basis for this estimate; and an estimate of the emission reductions for each project or engine, as appropriate (using the manufacturer’s estimated reduc tions for the particular verified emissions control technology), including particulates, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides.

D. Defendants shall complete the retrofit projects required by this paragraph within four (4) years from the date entry of the Consent Decree.

III. Purchase and Retirement of SO 2 

### Allowances

A. If this project is selected, Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for review and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to purchase and retire SO 2 

### allowances. Defendants sh all spend no more than $200,000 in Project Dollars on the project. Although the Defendants’ Herculaneum Lead Smelter is not required to purchase SO 2 

### allowances under Title IV of the Clean Air Act, the smelter contributes significant amounts of SO 2 

### to the atmosphere. SO 2 

### is a criteria pollutant that, when emitted into the air, can adversely impact human health and the environment. SO 2 

### interacts with other chemicals in the atmosphere to form sulfate aerosols, which can be transported long distances. In th e eastern United States, sulfate aerosols make up about 25 percent of all inhalable particles, and according to recent studies, high levels of sulfate aerosols in the air are associated with increased sickness and mortality from lung disorders, such as
ast hma and bronchitis.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 5 of 10 B. Defendants’ proposed plan shall also satisfy the following criteria:

1. Include a description of the transfer of any allowances purchased and retired directly to a non

- profit third party

. The plan shall: (i) identify the non

p rofit third party recipient(s) of the SO 2 

### allowances and list the serial numbers of the transferred allowances; and (ii) include a certification by the non

- profit third

party recipient(s) stating that the recipient(s) will not sell, trade, or otherwise

exc hange any of the allowances and will not use any of the SO 2 

### allowances to meet any obligation imposed by environmental law. Defendants shall include a statement that the non

- profit third

- party recipient(s) surrendered the SO 2 

### allowances for permanent surr ender to EPA in accordance with the plan within one (1) year after Defendants transferred allowances to them. Defendants shall not have completed this Project until all third party recipient(s) have actually surrendered the transferred SO 2 

### allowances to E PA.

2. Provide, for all SO 2 

### allowances to be retired by Defendants or the third party transferee, an SO 2 

### allowance transfer request to EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation’s Clean Air Markets Division directing the transfer of such SO 2 

### allowances to the EPA Enforcement Surrender Account or to any other EPA account that EPA may direct in writing. As part of submitting these transfer requests, Defendants or the third party recipient(s) shall irrevocably authorize the transfer of these SO 2 

### allowances and ident ify by name of account and any applicable serial or other identification numbers or station names the source and location of the SO 2 

### allowances being retired.

3. Include a schedule for completing each portion of the project.

4. Describe generally the expected environmental benefits of the project.

E. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defendants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved plan and schedule, but in no event later than four (4) years from the date entry of the Con sent Decree.

IV. School Laboratory Clean

- Out

A. Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for review and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to clean out local school laboratories. Defendants shall spend no less than $200,000 in Project Dollars on the project. Hazardous waste management in high schools is a growing concern in Region 7. In many instances, hazardous chemical wastes are stored for lengthy periods far in excess of RCRA’s regulatory limits. This project will not only result in the remova l of currently existing hazardous waste stored, but will also provide an excellent opportunity to provide training to school personnel who manage the laboratories.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 6 of 10 B. Defendants’ proposed plan shall also satisfy the following requirements:

1. Involve a school(s) in Jefferson County; if such school(s) are not available, the plan may involve a school(s) in Dent County, Iron County, Washington County, Scott County, or Reynolds County, Missouri to receive the services described herein and name such school in the proposed plan. If an appropriate school cannot be found in those counties, Defendants shall propose another appropriate school or schools in the proposed plan and the reason for proposing that school(s).

2. Provide for Defendants to retain a thi rd

- party contractor to perform a laboratory assessment that will identify laboratory materials that need to be managed properly and/or disposed. Laboratory materials that need to be disposed of will be removed and disposed of in accordance with regulatory requirements

. The services described in this subparagraph shall be performed by a third

- party contractor at Defendants’ cost

.

3. Provide chemical management training for school personnel responsible for managing the laboratory that will focus on, at a minimum, RCRA regulatory requirements, hazardous waste determinations, classification, segregation, management control

, and disposal processes for spent chemical waste. Defendants shall place an emphasis on waste minimization and pollution prevention.

4. Describe how Defendants will assist the school in developing a chemical management plan that includes a basic process to properly identify, segregate, store and dispose of waste chemicals in accordance with regulatory requirements and best management pr actices. Part of this chemical management plan will include a spreadsheet or other system for tracking chemical inventory and training associated with the tracking program.

5. Include a schedule for completing each portion of the project.

6. Describe g enerally the expected environmental benefits of the project.

7. Provide that Defendants are not obligated to complete the manifests and generator, transporter or facility reports associated with implementation of this Project, but shall train and assist t he high school personnel in the proper completion of any documents required by applicable regulatory requirements that are necessary for proper disposal of the waste removed during performance of the Project.

C. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defe ndants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved plan and schedule, but in no event later than four (4) years from the date of entry of the Consent Decree.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 7 of 10 V. School Energy Efficiency Projects

A. Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for review and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to improve energy efficiency in area schools. Defendants shall spend no less than $300,000 in Project Dollars on this project. Schools spend more money on energy than any other expense except perso nnel. Energy efficient schools can lower a school district's operating costs by up to 30%. Schools are a great place to teach the nation ’ s children about energy and resource conservation.

B. Defendants’ proposed plan shall also satisfy the following r equirements:

1. Involve a school(s) in Jefferson County; if school(s) are not available in Jefferson County, the plan may involve school(s) in Dent County, Iron County, Washington County, Scott County, or Reynolds County, Missouri to receive the services described herein and name such school in the proposed plan. If an appropriate school cannot be found in those counties, Defendants shall propose another appropriate school or schools in the proposed plan.

2. Provide a baseline of energy use for the se lected school(s), if possible, which will allow the school to measure the project’s success and to identify problem areas.

3. Describe the need for retrofits and consider what new equipment and/or energy

- efficient technology the selected school(s) might n eed (e.g. lighting retrofits, motion sensors, LED exit lights, updating or upgrading HVAC systems, insulation upgrades, or energy efficient office equipment) or develop one or more demonstration projects that would reduce the school’s energy costs and serv e as an educational tool for students and the community (e.g. photovoltaics project, micro wind turbines, or fuel cell technology).

4. Describe the nature and cost of each energy efficiency measure or demonstration project to be implemented at the select ed school(s).

5. Include a training program for school officials or personnel who will be involved in implementing the energy efficiency projects.

6. Include a schedule for completing each portion of the project.

7. Describe generally the expected en vironmental benefits of the project.

D. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defendants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved plan and schedule, but in no event later than four (4) years from the date entry of the Consent Decre e.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 8 of 10 VI. Ground Source Heat Pumps

A. Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for review and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to install ground source heat pumps to improve heating and cooling efficiency of buildings. Defendants shall spend no less th an $300,000 in Project Dollars on this project. Ground source heat pumps (GSHP) are electrically powered systems that tap the stored energy of the earth. These systems use the relatively consistent earth’s temperature to provide heating, cooling and hot water to homes and commercial buildings. The GSHP is one of the most efficient residential heating and cooling systems available today, with heating efficiencies 50 to 70% higher than other heating systems and cooling efficiencies 20 to 40% higher than av ailable air conditioners.

B. Defendants’ proposed plan shall also satisfy the following requirements:

1. Describe the buildings at which Defendants will install the GSHP. Defendants may install GSHP on commercial buildings owned or operated by Defendant s or Defendants may work with a public entity (e.g. city, county) to install GSHP on buildings owned or operated by that public entity. The buildings or public entity shall be located in Jefferson County; if such building or entity(ies) is not available i n Jefferson County, the project may involve a building or public entity in Dent County, Iron County, Washington County, Scott County, or Reynolds County, Missouri.

2. Provide for the construction and installation of GSHP with established technologies.

3. Account for hardware procurement and installation costs at the recipient location. For any outside party with whom Defendants might contract to carry out this Project, establish minimum standards that include prior experience in installing GSHP.

4. I nclude a schedule for completing each portion of the project.

5. Describe generally the expected environmental benefits of the project.

C. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defendants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved p lan and schedule, but in no event later than four (4) years from the date entry of the Consent Decree.

VII. Wastewater Infrastructure for the City of Herculaneum, Missouri

A. If this project is selected, Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for revi ew and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to improve the wastewater6 / 29 /2010



### Page 9 of 10 infrastructure for the City of Herculaneum, Missouri. The purpose of improving the City’s infrastructure is to improve water quality on a watershed basis.

B. Defendants’ proposed pl an shall also satisfy the following requirements:

1. Describe in detail the proposed improvements and upgrades to the wastewater infrastructure of the City of Herculaneum, which may, but is not required to include, closure of the wastewater sludge lagoon, if not already completed; and long

- term treatment and/or sludge management options for the City of Herculaneum.

2. Describe the involvement of the City of Herculaneum, if any, in the Project.

3. For any outside party with whom Defendants might contra ct to carry out this Project, establish minimum standards that include prior experience in improving or upgrading wastewater infrastructure.

4. Include a schedule for completing each portion of the project.

5. Describe generally the expected environmen tal benefits of the project.

C. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defendants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved plan and schedule, but in no event later than five (5) years from the date entry of the Consent Decree.

VII I. Environmental Management System for Doe Run Facilities

A. If this projects is selected, Defendants shall submit a plan to EPA for review and approval, in consultation with MDNR, to implement or update environmental management systems for the Defendants ’ facilities. An environmental management system (EMS) is a set of processes and practices that enable an organization to reduce its environmental impacts and increase its operating efficiency.

B. Defendants proposed plan shall satisfy the following requ irements:

1. Describe how Defendants will establish an EMS in accordance with EPA guidance 1

1 EPA Guidance can be fou nd at http://cfpub.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/incentives/ems/

. 

### for the following facilities: Buick Mine/Mill, Buick Resource Recycling, Glover Lead Smelter, Brushy Creek Mine/Mill, Sweetwater Mine/Mill, Viburnum Mine/Mill, Vi burnum Mine #35, and the West Fork Unit. If any or all of such facilities currently have an EMS that has been implemented, Defendants shall revise and update their EMS and shall state what actions have been taken to revise and update the EMS.6 / 29 /2010



### Page 10 of 10 2. Describ e the steps that will be taken to establish and implement or update an EMS at each facility listed above.

3. Provide whether Defendants intend to apply for ISO14001 certification for any or all of the facilities listed above. If Defendants do not intend to apply for ISO14001 certification, Defendants shall state their reason for not applying.

4. Describe generally the expected environmental benefits of the project.

C. Upon completion of each EMS, Defendants shall submit a copy of each EMS to MDNR and E PA.

D. Upon approval of the plan by the EPA, Defendants shall complete the mitigation project according to the approved plan and schedule, but in no event later than four (4) years from the date entry of the Consent Decree.8/19/2010

No.
1

C. dubia P. promelas
001 8/31/2005 Acute F P
001 9/14/2005 Acute F P
001 10/12/2005 Acute F P
001 Jul-06 7/26/2006 Acute F P

001 8/21/2006 Acute F P Sampling event during EPA inspection of August
2006

001 9/20/2006 Acute F P

001 10/4/2006 Acute F P Test Procedure Violation: should have been multiple dilution test

001 11/1/2006 Acute F P
001 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute F P
001 9/19/2007 Acute F P
001 10/3/2007 Acute F P
001 10/17/2007 Acute F P
001 Jul-08 7/30/2008 Acute F P
001 8/20/2008 Acute F P
001 9/3/2008 Acute F P
001 9/17/2008 Acute F P
001 10/1/2008 Acute F P
001 10/15/2008 Acute F P
001 11/12/2008 Acute F P
001 12/3/2008 Acute F P
001 12/17/2008 Acute F P
001 1/7/2009 Acute F none 001 1/21/2009 Acute F none 001 2/4/2009 Acute F none 001 2/18/2009 Acute F P
001 3/4/2009 Acute F P
001 3/18/2009 Acute F P
001 3/18/2009 Acute F F MDNR split sample analysis
001 4/1/2009 Acute F P
001 4/15/2009 Acute F P
001 4/29/2009 Acute F P
001 5/12/2009 Acute F P
001 5/20/2009 Acute F P
001 6/3/2009 Acute F P
001 6/17/2009 Acute F P
001 6/30/2009 Acute F P
001 7/14/2009 Acute F F MDNR split sample analysis

001 7/28/2009 Acute F P MDNR split sample analysis
001 8/11/2009 Acute F P
001 Mar-10 3/23/2010 Chronic F P
001 Apr-10 4/19/2010 Chronic F P
001 5/17/2010 Chronic F P
001 6/1/2010 Chronic F P

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE TYPE OF TEST 10/2004 - 2/25/2010 July Acute / Grab 2/26/2010 - present March, April, August, October Chronic / Composite PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment 

### Brushy Creek Mine/Mill - MSOP MO0001848 Doe Run WET Violations

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results8/19/2010

No.

2

D. magna P. promelas

002 4th Q 2004 No record of testing

002 1st Q 2005 No record of testing

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Oct-09 Chronic No test was completed in October 2009

002 12/17/2009 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 1/25/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 2/9/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 2/23/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 Mar-10 Chronic No test was completed in March 2010

002 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE SAMPLE TYPE TEST SPECIES 10/2004 - 9/24/2009 Quarterly Grab D. magna & P. promelas 9/25/2009 - present March, April, August, October Composite C. dubia & P. promelas PERMIT CONDITIONS Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment 

### Doe Run WET Violations


## BUICK MINE / MILL - MSOP MO002003

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/27/2010

No.

3

C. dubia P. promelas
001 Nov-04 11/11/2004 Acute F P Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F P Second failure during accelerated testing; tests should be multiple dilution

001 1/13/2005 Acute F F Test Procedure Violation: grab sample & single dilution

001 Feb-05 2/17/2005 Acute F P No record of accelerated testing after failure

001 11/17/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 11/29/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 12/20/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 9/14/2006 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: should have been a multiple dilution test

001 5/23/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 6/5/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 6/18/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 1/8/2008 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 Nov-08 11/18/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: grab sample, should have been a composite

001 Feb-09 2/26/2009 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded & grab sample

001 6/18/2009 Acute P P Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 7/2/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 7/20/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing; should have been multiple dilution

001 9/14/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 9/29/2009 Acute F F Third failure during accelerated testing

001 10/19/2009 Acute F F Fourth failure during accelerated testing

001 12/17/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 3/23/2010 Acute F P Second failure during accelerated testing

001 4/6/2010 Acute F P Third failure during accelerated testing

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

002 1/13/2005 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing; should be multiple dilution

002 Feb-08 2/18/2008 Acute F P No record of follow-up testing

002 9/6/2008 Acute F F Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

002 9/14/2008 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

002 6/19/2009 Acute F F
002 10/29/2009 Acute F P
002 Nov-09 No record of testing

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Nov-04 11/11/2004 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated test; should be multiple dilution

003 1/5/2005 Acute F F Third failure during accelerated testing; test should be multiple dilution

003 1/13/2005 Acute F P Fourth failure during accelerated testing; test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-05 No record of testing

003 Nov-06 11/16/2006 Acute F F Scheduled test; no record of accelerated testing

003 2/18/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

003 9/6/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

003 4/13/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 4/19/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-09 No record of testing

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - present February, May, August, November Comment Results

Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Doe Run WET Violations



### Buick Resource Recycling - MSOP MO0000337

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic)8/19/2010

No.

4

C. dubia P. promelas
001 Aug-06 10/11/2006 Acute Pass Pass Testing not conducted in August as required by permit

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 11/12/2009 August 11/13/2009 - present August PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Fletcher Mine - MSOP MO0001856

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.

5

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Oct-05 11/9/2005 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: 20 degrees C, not
25

003 Jun-07 No Record of Testing

003 Nov-07 No test completed in November 2007

003 Mar-08 4/16/2008 Acute Pass Pass Permit requires testing in March

003 9/12/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 9/26/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 10/10/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 9/30/2009 Acute Pass Fail Second failure during retesting period

003 Nov-09 12/2/2009 Acute Pass Pass Permit requires testing in November

003 Mar-10 4/28/2010 Acute Fail Pass No discharge in March; sampled in April

003 Jun-10 6/9/2010 Acute Pass Fail

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/22/2007 October 3/23/2007 - present March, June, August, November PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Glover Smelter - MSOP MO0001121

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/27/2010

No.
6

C. dubia P. promelas

001 3/5/2008 Acute Fail Fail

001 10/14/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 11/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - present January, August PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Herculaneum Smelter - MSOP MO0000281

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.

7

D. magna P. promelas
002 4th Q 2004 No Record of Testing

002 1st Q 2005 No Record of Testing

002 2nd Q 2005 No record of testing in 2nd Q 2005

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Jan-10 Permit requires testing in January; not tested until March

002 3/10/2010 Chronic Fail Fail Test species changed with new permit

002 Apr-10 Permit requires testing in April

002 5/25/2010 Chronic Fail Fail Accelerated testing not initiated within 14 days of 3/10/2010 test failure

002 6/7/2010 Chronic Fail Fail

002 Jun-10 6/22/2010 Chronic Pass Fail

D. magna P. promelas

004 4th Q 2004 No Record of Testing

004 1st Q 2005 No Record of Testing

C. dubia P. promelas

004 Jan-10 Permit requires testing in January; not tested until March

004 Jan-10 3/10/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
004 Apr-10 Permit requires testing in April

004 5/24/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Accelerated testing not initiated within 14 days of 3/10/2010 test failure

004 6/7/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
004 Jun-10 6/22/2010 Chronic Fail Pass

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE TEST SPECIES 10/2004 - 12/3/2009 Quarterly D. magna & P. promelas 12/4/2009 - present January, April, July, October C. dubia & P. promelas PERMIT CONDITIONS Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Viburnum 28 & 29 - MSOP MO0000086

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.
8

C. dubia P. promelas

001 Jul-06 7/6/2005 Acute Fail Pass Bi-weekly testing required after failure
001 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: collected in August, not July as required

001 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: collected in August, not July as required

003 Jul-08 7/30/2008 Acute Fail Pass
003 9/3/2008 Acute Pass Pass Accelerated tests should commence within 14 days after violation

003 9/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
003 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/18/2010 July 3/19/2010 - present March, April, August, October Scheduled

Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Viburnum No. 35 (Casteel) - MSOP MO0100226

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment (EPA)8/19/2010

No.
9

C. dubia P. promelas
001 11/28/2007 Acute Fail Pass Follow-up testing should be biweekly

001 12/12/2007 Acute Fail Pass
001 8/20/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 9/3/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 9/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 Oct-08 10/1/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 10/15/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 11/12/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 12/3/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 12/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 1/7/2009 Acute Invalid Toxicity in control invalidated C. dubia results

001 1/21/2009 Acute Fail

-- 001 2/4/2009 Acute Fail

-- 001 2/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 3/4/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 3/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/1/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/15/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/29/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 5/13/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 5/20/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 6/3/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 6/17/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 7/15/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 7/29/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 8/12/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 Apr-10 4/19/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
001 7/20/2010 Chronic pending pending Accelerated testing should have been initiated within 30 days of 4/19/10 failure

C. dubia P. promelas
003 2005 No WET test conducted
003 2006 No WET test conducted
003 2008 No WET test conducted
003 2009 No WET test conducted

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/11/2010 October 3/12/2010 - present March, April, August, October Scheduled

Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall 

### Doe Run WET Violations


## West Fork Mine / Mill - MSOP MO0100218

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 1 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Issued: 09/05/2003 Reissued: 02/26/2010 Revised: 07/28/2010

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

1.621 /

0.99
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

dis.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.057
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0024 /

0.0012
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in
July



### *

March 2005 0.814 ma

April 2005 9.3 dm

Oct 2005 0.785 ma

Aug 2006 0.838 ma **

Nov 2006 0.8360 ma

May 2008 0.862 ma

June 2008 0.796 ma

Sept 2008 0.878 ma

Nov 2008 0.758 ma

Dec 2008 0.866 ma

Feb 2009 0.785 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 2 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

1.621 /

0.99
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

dis.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.057
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0024 /

0.0012
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in
July



### *

Feb 2010 0.859 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.

** V alue includes one Doe Run sample and three EPA samples8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 3 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff ( Reissued : 02/26/2010 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.05
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 /

0.001
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/quart

er in Mar,
Apr, Aug,

Oct.



### *

Mar 2010 0.185 ma 1.22 dm

1.025 ma

Apr 2010 0.659 ma

May 2010 1.011 dm

0.762 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 4 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff ( Re vised: 07/13/2010 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.08 8 /

0.05 3
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0. 417 /

0. 256
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.100 /

0.05
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 /

0.001
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/quart

er in Mar,
Apr, Aug,

Oct.



### *

July 2010 0 .936 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 004

- Instream monitoring

Date pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.047 / 0.029
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA
0.417 /0.255 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.557 / 0.340
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.019 / 0.012 mg/L

once/mo

April 28, 2005 9.23 dm8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Issued: 03/09/1990 Reissued: 09/25/2009 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Domestic waste discharged to tailings basin

Date pH

DM

Above 6

annual BOD

WA / MA
65 / 45 mg/L

annual TSS

WA / MA
120 / 80 mg/L

annual

Dec 8, 2006 121.7 (dm & ma)

F eb 2007 49 ma 86.67 ma

Mar 22, 2007 84.24 (dm & ma) 230 (dm & ma)



### Outfall: 002

- Mine, Mill, Stormwater and water from 001

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

o nce/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

526 / 263
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l
once/yr in July Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo

Jan 26, 2005 433 ma

March 2005 280 ma

Jul y 2006 10.9 ma

Jan 25, 2007 437 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

o nce/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

526 / 263
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l
once/yr in July Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo

March 2008 495 ma

Jan 30, 2009 613 ma

Feb 25, 2009 546 ma

Mar 26, 2009 490 ma

Jun 26, 2009 219 dm, 112 ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 002

- Mine, Mill, Stormwater and water from 001 (Reissued: 09/25/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA
526 / 263 ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo Chlorides plus Sulfates
monitoring only

once/mo

Dec 2009 782 ma

Jan 2010 616 ma

Feb 2010 721 ma

Mar 2010 676 ma

Jun 2010 No analysis conducted



### Outfall 003

– in stream monitoring point

Date Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
54 / 37 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
490/ 440 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

190 / 29

ug/l

onc e/mo

March 4, 2009 479 ma 30 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Issued: 08/23/2002 Modified: 02/23/2007 Reissued: (pending)

Outfall: 001 ( with 002 & 003, when discharging)

- Treatment of stormwater, wash water, granulation water, laboratory, sanitary, non

contact cooling water

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

11/ 11 /04 5.74* * dm 0. 389

dm

11/30/04 11.15 * *

dm

12/01/04 11.1 5 * *

dm

01/05/05 5.51 * * dm

01/13/05 837.6* *

dm 6.41 * * dm 2.08 * *

dm 61.80 * *

dm 24.08 * *

dm8/17/2010 Page 2 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

05/03/05 17 dm

11/15/ 05 297.5 * *

dm 12.59 * *

dm

3/12/06 10.86 * *

dm

10/31/06 0.21 dm

11/15/06 4.78
(003) 0

. 22 dm 10.55* *

dm

1/15/07 16.35 * *

dm

02/07/07 58.32

dm

37.66

ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

2/13/07 10.2
(003) 6.31 * * dm

2/19/07 6.2
(003)

2/6/08 8.58 * * dm

2/15/08 Failed to sample outfall 003 discharge event

2/17/08 57.61 * *

dm

03/18/08 9771.6 * *

dm 27.75 * *

dm 126.04 * *

dm 2.222

ma 0.48 dm 45.40 * *

dm

3/19/08 7.0
(002)8/17/2010 Page 4 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

4/1/08 6.96
(00 2) 9.78 * * dm

4/2/08 7.48
(002)

4/4/08 6.8
(003)

04/09/08 0.28 dm

04/10/08 6.1
(002) 7889 * *

dm 12.89 * *

dm 6.52* *

dm 39.51 * *

dm 1326.6 * *

dm 0.27 dm 48.28 * *

dm

4/15/08 7.0
(003)

9/4/08 1207.3 * *

dm 5.24 * * dm 2.78 * *

dm 4.56 * *

dm 70.41 * *

dm 19.38 * *

dm

9/14/08 3.66 * * dm 9.40 * * dm8/17/2010 Page 5 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

12/28/08 6.6
(002) 7.98 * * dm

02/11/09 4.07* * dm 72 dm,

ma

03/12/09 0.099

dm

04/03/09 0.095

dm

4/13/09 6.34 * * dm

4/19/09 6.7
(003) 2.81 * * dm

05/13/09 74.8 dm,

ma8/17/2010 Page 6 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

06/03/09 932.5 * *

dm 6.88 * * dm 27.21 * *

dm 0. 3 07

dm

6/15/09 6.5
(002) 3.39 * * dm 31.38 * *

dm

08/2009 130.05

dm, ma

10/29/09 3125 * *

dm 15.84 **

dm 5.04 * *

dm 216.4 * *

dm 9.89 * * dm

11/1/09 1156 * *

dm 70.87**

dm

11/16/09 3.94 * * dm 9.736 * *

dm

Nov 2009 2.048 ma 128.85

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 7 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

Feb 2010 49.9 dm,

ma

Apr 2010 0.236

dm

5/6/2010 60.5 dm,

ma

6/15/2010 140.33

dm, ma

07/19/10 754.05 **

dm 6.95 ** dm 3.49 **

dm 50.07 **

dm 9.19 **

dm

* WET results not addressed in this table.

* * A discharge event at Outfall 002 and/or Outfall 003 occurred and the value represents the c ombined load from all outfalls discharging.8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Issued: 07/30/2002 Reissued: 11/13/2009 Revised: 07/28/2010

Outfall: 001

- Mine water and Stormwater Runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

01/25/05 5.9

01/23/07 0.1330 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 001

- Mine water and Stormwater Runoff (Reissued: 11/13/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t. r

. DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

. r

. DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r

. DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

Nov 2009 0.179 ma

Dec 2009 0.051 ma 0.140 ma 0.259 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t. r

. DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

. r

. DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r

. DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

0.092 dm 0.372 dm

Jan 2010 0.163 ma

Mar 2010 0.194 ma 0.209 ma

Apr 2010 0.159 ma

May 2010 0.169 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 004

- Instream Compliance

Date Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.017 / 0.008
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.016 / 0.008
mg/L

once/mo

02/26/2007 <0.010 ma <0.010 ma

08/13/2007 <0.010 ma

10/09/2007 0.010 ma

11/05/2007 0.013 ma

12/05/2007 0.015 ma

01/07/2008 0.014 ma

Dec 2008 0.014 ma

Feb 2009 0.014 ma

Sep 2009 0.011 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Issued: 11/06/1998 Reissued: 03/23/2007

Outfall: 001

- Sanitary wastewater (Reissued: 03/23/2007)

Date Chlorine

DM &

MA

0.019
mg/l

once/mo TSS

DM / MA

1.467 /

0.930

lbs/d

once/mo TSS

WA / MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0046

0.0019

lb s/d

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

80 / 60

ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0169

0.00578

lbs/d

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

1,180
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.0033

0.0013

lbs/d

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM & MA
46 ug/l

once/mo BOD5

WA / MA

45 / 30

mg /l

once/

quarter pH

DM

6

- 10 SU

once/

quarter Fecal

Coliform

DM / MA

1000 /

400

#/100

ml Copper,

t.r.

DM & MA
46 ug/l

once/

quarter Thallium,

t.r.

DM & MA
58 ug/l

once/

quarter

Sep 2007 61.7 wa

61.7 ma

Dec 2007 3 2.7 ma

Jun 2009 440 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/wk Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.673/0.264

lbs/d

once/wk Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

flow >8cft

0.080/0.080

flow<8cfs

0. 027/0.027

once/wk Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

2.452/0.745

lbs/d

once/wk Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

2.05/1.4

flow<8cfs

0.34/0.34

once/wk Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.481/0.192

lbs/d

once/wk Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.046/0.046

flow<8cfs

0.013/0.013

once/w k Thallium, t.r.mg/l

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.176/0.176

flow<8cfs

0.011/0.011

once/wk WET

1/year in October



### *

10/20/04 0.024 dm

05/03/05 49.00 dm

05/09/05 47.112 dm

23.556 ma 11.00 dm

5.5 ma 32.00 dm

40.5 ma

07/19/05 0.325 dm, ma 1.882 ma 3.58 dm, ma 0.33 dm, ma

08/16/05 0.091 dm, ma

09/08/05 .061dm 0.451 dm 0.028 dm 0.020 dm

09/23/05 0.012 dm

12/27/05 0.038 dm, ma

06/05/06 0.014 dm

06/26/06 0.017 dm

08/01/06 0.013 dm

*WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 3 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water ( Reissued: 03/2 3 / 20 0 7 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0. 673/0.264

lbs/d

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

flow >8cft

0.080/0.080

flow<8cfs

0.027/0.027

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

2.452/0.745

lbs/d

once/ mo Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

2.05/1.4

flow<8cfs

0.34/0.34

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.481/0.192

lbs/d

onc e/ mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.046/0.046

flow<8cfs

0.013/0.013

once/mo Thallium, t.r.mg/l

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.176/0.176

flow<8cfs

0.011/0.011

once/mo WET

4 /year



### *

10/01/07 0.018 dm, ma

Aug 2008 0.031 dm, ma

Sept 2008 0.036 dm, ma

Oct 2008 0.035 dm & ma

July 2009 0.022 dm, ma

Sep 2009 0.023 dm, ma

*WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 4 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water ( f inal e ffluent l imits effective 0 3/2 3 / 20 10 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM

0. 012 lbs/d

DM / MA
6.0 / 2.9 μg/L

once/ mo Zinc, t.r.

DM

0

. 512 lbs/d

MD / MA
218 /189 μg/L

once/ mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM

0. 001 lbs/d

DM / MA
0.52 / 0.26 μg/L

once/ mo Thallium, t.r.

DM / MA

10.3 / 5.1 μg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11

. 8 / 5. 9 μg/L

once/mo Selenium, t.r.

DM / MA

8

. 1 / 4

. 0 μg/L

once/mo pH, SU

DM / MA

7.5

– 9.0

once/mo WET

4 /year



### *

Apr 2010 5.9 ma

11.8 dm

July 2010 0.30 ma 5.68 ma

*WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 006

- Emergency overflow (Reissued: 03/23/2007)

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

09/08/07 1.002 dm 834 dm, ma 4.135 dm 3440 dm, ma 0.401 dm, ma 334 dm, ma 58 dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 5 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

03/18/08 45 dm 10 dm 1300 dm 130 dm 17400 dm 4 dm 482 dm 31 dm

03/19/08 204 dm 26 dm 1270 dm 360 dm 17600 dm 10 dm 475 dm 30 dm

March 2008 124.7 ma 1285 ma 17500 ma 7 ma 479 ma 31 ma

04/03/08 2.877 dm 861 dm 87.545 dm 26200 dm 2.102 dm 629 dm 32 dm

04/10/08 66.88 dm 4.177 dm 1250 dm 192.464 dm 57600 dm 1.621 dm 485 dm 28 dm

April 2008 33.4 ma 1056 ma 41900 ma 1.862 ma 557 ma 30 ma

06/15/09 0.914 dm 175 dm 9.196 dm 1760 dm 0.606 dm 116 dm 33 dm

06/16/09 0.920 dm 176 dm 9.196 dm 1760 dm 118 dm 33 dm

June 2009 175.5 ma 1760 ma 0.303 ma 58 ma 75.5 ma 16.5 ma

10/29/09 113.8 dm 15.0 dm 1190 dm 175.6 dm 13900 dm 4.274 dm 338 dm 22 dm8/17/2010 Page 6 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

10/30/09 176.9 dm 32.1 dm 1270 dm 353.96 dm 14000 dm 8.217 dm 325 dm 21 dm

Oct 2009 145.4 ma 1230 ma 13950 ma 6.246 ma 332 ma 22 ma8 / 23 /2010 Page 1 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Issued: 02/28/2003 Reissued: (pending)

Outfall: 001

– Process water

- lead smelting and acid plant

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

11/8/2004 3. 580 dm 2.43 dm

Jan 2005 1.28 ma 3.63 ma

01/07/2005 4.345 dm

Feb 2005 102 ma

02/11/2005 142 dm

06/05/2005 No Samples Taken for the Week

Feb 2006 No Data

May 2006 No Data

10/10/2006 127 dm

02/1/2007 7.35 dm

Mar 2007 1.62 ma 4. 52 ma 105 ma

03/14/07 2.147 dm8 / 23 /2010 Page 2 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

03/20/2007 2. 794 dm 149 dm

03/21/2007 2 977 dm 131 dm

03/22/2007 2.212 dm

03/23/2007 1.971dm

4/5/2007 2.888 dm

4/27/2007 3.337 dm 1.18 dm

M ay 2007 1.18 ma

5/4/2007 4.014 dm 0.80 dm 4.716 dm

5/7/2007 3.962 dm 1.28 dm

July 2007 95 ma

Sep 200 7 102 ma

Oct 2007 95 ma

Nov 2007 102 ma

Feb 2008 1.20 ma 3.37 ma

0 6 / 1 8/2008 7.12 dm

0 7/8/2008 7.26 dm8 / 23 /2010 Page 3 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

0 8/5/2008 7.24 dm

10/10/08 124 dm

10/31/08 1.03 dm

11/19/08 2.148 dm

Nov 2008 1.39 ma

April 2009 97 ma

June 2009 1

. 14 ma

07/21/09 127 dm

Aug 2009 94 ma

09/11/09 3.035 dm 1.36 dm 4. 9 09 dm 2

. 20 dm

09/22/2009 9.65 dm

Sept 2009 1.441 ma 2.08 ma

Dec 2009 91.4 ma

Jan 2010 0.91 ma 1.2 ma

Feb 2010 2.502 ma 1.904 ma 105.5 ma8 / 23 /2010 Page 4 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

02/5/20 1 0 2.89 dm

02/10/20 1 0 2.500 dm 4.213 dm

02/19/20 1 0 2.384 dm

02/25/20 1 0 2.236 dm

Apr 2010 131 dm

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall 003

– Primary Lead Smelter

Date pH

DM

6.0

- 9.0 SU

once/W Oil and Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10.

mg/L

once/W

Jan 2005 No Samples
Report ed

Week of June 5, 2005 No sample reported

03/9/2006 19.5 dm

Week of April 23, 2007 No sample reported

09/22/2009 9.65 dm8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 1 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Issued: 06/30/1989 Reissued: 12/04/2009 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfalls: 002 & 004

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

12/11/04 002 2.15 dm & ma

01/26/05 002 1.45 ma

02/23/05 002 1.32 ma

03/30/05 004 0.308 ma

12/13/05 002 0.798 ma

03/14/06 002 87.80 dm & ma

04/18/06 002 38 dm & ma

07/18/06 004 10.8 ma

12/13/06 002 1.45 ma

01/24/07 002 1.33 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 2 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

02/21/07 002 1.36 ma

03/13/07 002 0.811 ma

09/12/07 002 13.3 ma

09/12/07 004 11.75 ma

02/20/08 002 1.38 ma

03/12/08 002 1.268 ma

04/17/08 002 1.196 ma

05/06/08 002 1.117 ma

09/17/08 002 52 dm, ma

12/04/08 002 62 dm

12/17/08 002 71 dm

Dec 2008 002 45 ma

03/04/09 002 0.793 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 3 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

04/09/09 002 186 dm

04/14/09 002 20 dm

April 2009 002 70 ma

05/04/09 002 29.7 dm

May 2009 002 15 ma

05/04/09 004 526.9 dm

May 2009 004 264 ma

06/04/09 002 329 dm

June 2009 002 168 ma

July 2009 002 21 dm, ma

Nov 2009 002 0.829 ma

Dec 2009 002 0.997 ma8/ 26 /2010 Page 4 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Outfalls: 002 & 004 (Reissued: 12/ 0 4/2009 )

Date all outfalls Mercury, t .r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t .r.

DM / MA

3 00 / 15 00

μ g/L

once/mo Lead, t .r.

DM / MA

6 00 / 3 00 μ g/L

once/mo Zinc, t,

DM / MA
1000 / 500 ug/l

once / mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA

10 0 / 5 0 μ g/L

once/mo

Jan 2010 002 1418 ma

1372 dm

1464 dm

Feb 2010 002 93 dm, ma 1710 ma

1679 dm

1740 dm

Mar 2010 002 1546 ma

1683 dm

1495 dm

1515 dm

1490 dm

Apr 2010 002 23 dm, ma 653 ma

1153 dm8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 5 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Outfall: 007

Date Copper, t

DM / MA
58 / 37 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
190 / 29 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
490 / 440 ug/l

once/mo

02/16/2006 31 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Issued: 08/08/2003 Reissued : 03/19/2010 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin; mine water and stormwater runoff

Date pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 / 0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.432 / 0.264
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 / 0.057
mg/L

once/mo

Jan 24, 2007 0.596 dm, ma

February 2007 0.4230 ma

Sep 2007 11.5 ma

July 2008 13 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 002

- Domestic wastewater

Date Biochemical Oxygen

Demand

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L
once/yr TSS

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L
once/yr pH

DM

6

- 9 SU
once/yr

July 2005 43.77 ma

9/19/2006 57.92 dm, ma 62 dm, ma

09/30/09 37 ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 003

- Settling basin; mine water and stormwater runoff

Date pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 / 0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.432 / 0.264
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 / 0.057
mg/L

once/mo

December 2004 0.065 ma

July 2005 0.290 ma

12/14/2006 9.03 dm

Jan 24, 2007 0.80 dm, ma

September 2007 11.82 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Issued: 08/02/1996 Modified: 09/25/1998 Reissued: 03/12/2010 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Treatment of mine water

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

11/06/04 2.4

dm, ma

12/11/04 4.8

dm, ma 0.63 dm,

ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/25/05 3.308

dm, ma

02/24/05 0.054 ma 5.407

dm, ma

03/23/05 4.91

dm, ma

10/20/05 3.409

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/12/06 0.655

dm, ma 2.411

dm, ma

10/11/06 0.048 ma 2.026

dm, ma

03/14/07 0.561

dm, ma

05/10/07 520 ma8/17/2010 Page 4 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

07/16/07 4.505

dm, ma

01/07/08 0.586

dm, ma

04/14/08 0.822

dm, ma

05/05/08 0.727

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 5 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

07/02/08 15.1

dm, ma

8/13/08 0.502

dm, ma 0.62

dm, ma

03/06/09 0.772

dm, ma

04/07/09 0.671 dm

05/13/09 47 dm8/17/2010 Page 6 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

05/28/09 344 dm

May 2009 196 ma

09/03/09 2.3

dm, ma 418 ma

10/07/09 0.75 dm

10/13/09 0.892 dm8/17/2010 Page 7 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

Oct 2009 0.821 ma

Nov 2009
(11/11/09) 0.683

dm, ma

12/15/09 0.862 dm8/17/2010 Page 8 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

12/21/09 0.862 dm

Dec 2009 0.862 ma

01/14/10 0.875 dm 2.6 dm8/17/2010 Page 9 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/28/10 0.687 dm

Jan 2010 0.781 ma 2.6 ma

02/11/10 0.680 dm 5.1 dm8/17/2010 Page 10 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

02/26/10 0.902 dm

Feb 2010 0.791 ma 5.1 ma8/17/2010 Page 11 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

OUTFALL 001

- Treatment of Mine Water (Reissued: 03/ 12/2010)

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

03/03/10 833 dm 401 dm

03/15/10 800 dm 43 dm

Mar 2010 817 ma 222 ma

04/01/10 598 dm 188 dm

04/07/10 536 dm 221 dm

04/09/10 598 dm 212 dm

04/14/10 538 dm8/17/2010 Page 12 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

04/19/10 223 dm

04/20/10 233 dm

04/21/10 101 dm

04/23/10 65 dm

04/26/10 253 dm

04/30/10 316 dm

Apr 2010 171 ma8/17/2010 Page 13 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

May 2010 Duplicate
sample

not
reported

06/03/10 0.78

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 14 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Outfall: 003

- 

### Stormwater Runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity
once/yr

*

02/24/05 1.24

dm, ma

06/07/2005 1.44

dm, ma

10/31/05 1.61

dm, ma

11/15/2005 0.508 ma 3.46

dm, ma

03/15/2006 1.56

dm, ma

June 2006 2005 data

submitted

07/21/2006 3.36

dm, ma

02/18/08 6.349

dm, ma

09/04/08 31

dm, ma 2.302

dm, ma 5.66

dm, ma 1.183

dm, ma 0.112

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 15 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity

once/yr

*

10/16/08 3.6

dm, ma 554.7

dm, ma no test

01/08/09 2.856

dm, ma

05/14/09 1.935

dm, ma

06/05/09 24 ma 0.354 ma 4.651

dm, ma 0.075 ma

07/ 0 8/09 2.474

dm, ma 14 ma

09/03/09 1.875

dm, ma

10/07/09 2.343

dm, ma

11/11/09 2.618

dm, ma

12/15/09 2.454

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 16 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity

once/yr

*

01/14/10 1.975

dm, ma

* WET results not addressed in this table8/17/2010 Page 17 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

OUTFALL 003

- Stormwater Runoff (Reissued: 03/12/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L
1/ day disch Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

170 / 84.6

u g/L
1/ day disch Zinc t.r.

DM / MA

195 / 97 ug/l
1/ day disch Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

23.9 / 11.9

u g/L
1/ day disch Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

9.0 / 4.5 u g/L

1/ day disch pH

DM

> 6 SU
1/ day disch Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

2.0 / 1.0

u g/L
1/ day disch

04/22/10 1904 dm

04/23/10 1832 dm

Apr 2010 1868 ma

06/03/10 1639 dm

06/04/10 1809 dm

06/11/10 1561 dm

June 20 10 94 ma 1670 ma 5.1 ma

07/08/10 853 dm 1843 dm

. 13 dm8/17/2010 Page 18 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L
1/ day disch Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

170 / 84.6

u g/L
1/ day disch Zinc t.r.

DM / MA

195 / 97 ug/l
1/ day disch Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

23.9 / 11.9

u g/L
1/ day disch Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

9.0 / 4.5 u g/L

1/ day disch pH

DM

> 6 SU
1/ day disch Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

2.0 / 1.0

u g/L
1/ day disch

07/10/10 977 dm 40 69 dm 40 dm 25 dm

07/14/10 234 dm 1955 dm

07/15/10 405 dm 2139 dm 11 dm

July 2010 617 ma 2502 ma 17 ma 15 ma



### OUTFALL 002

– Sanitary Waste (Reissued: 03/12/2010)

Date BOD

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter TSS

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter pH

DM

6

– 9 SU

once/quarter Fecal Coliform

DM / MA

1000 / 400

#/100ml

once/quarter

04/14/10 TNTC* dm8/17/2010 Page 19 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date BOD

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter TSS

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter pH

DM

6

– 9 SU

once/quarter Fecal Coliform

DM / MA

1000 / 400

#/100ml

once/quarter

04/23/10 TNTC* dm

April 20 1 0 TNTC* ma

*Too numerous to count8/19/2010

No.
1

C. dubia P. promelas
001 8/31/2005 Acute F P
001 9/14/2005 Acute F P
001 10/12/2005 Acute F P
001 Jul-06 7/26/2006 Acute F P

001 8/21/2006 Acute F P Sampling event during EPA inspection of August
2006

001 9/20/2006 Acute F P

001 10/4/2006 Acute F P Test Procedure Violation: should have been multiple dilution test

001 11/1/2006 Acute F P
001 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute F P
001 9/19/2007 Acute F P
001 10/3/2007 Acute F P
001 10/17/2007 Acute F P
001 Jul-08 7/30/2008 Acute F P
001 8/20/2008 Acute F P
001 9/3/2008 Acute F P
001 9/17/2008 Acute F P
001 10/1/2008 Acute F P
001 10/15/2008 Acute F P
001 11/12/2008 Acute F P
001 12/3/2008 Acute F P
001 12/17/2008 Acute F P
001 1/7/2009 Acute F none 001 1/21/2009 Acute F none 001 2/4/2009 Acute F none 001 2/18/2009 Acute F P
001 3/4/2009 Acute F P
001 3/18/2009 Acute F P
001 3/18/2009 Acute F F MDNR split sample analysis
001 4/1/2009 Acute F P
001 4/15/2009 Acute F P
001 4/29/2009 Acute F P
001 5/12/2009 Acute F P
001 5/20/2009 Acute F P
001 6/3/2009 Acute F P
001 6/17/2009 Acute F P
001 6/30/2009 Acute F P
001 7/14/2009 Acute F F MDNR split sample analysis

001 7/28/2009 Acute F P MDNR split sample analysis
001 8/11/2009 Acute F P
001 Mar-10 3/23/2010 Chronic F P
001 Apr-10 4/19/2010 Chronic F P
001 5/17/2010 Chronic F P
001 6/1/2010 Chronic F P

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE TYPE OF TEST 10/2004 - 2/25/2010 July Acute / Grab 2/26/2010 - present March, April, August, October Chronic / Composite PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment 

### Brushy Creek Mine/Mill - MSOP MO0001848 Doe Run WET Violations

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results8/19/2010

No.

2

D. magna P. promelas

002 4th Q 2004 No record of testing

002 1st Q 2005 No record of testing

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Oct-09 Chronic No test was completed in October 2009

002 12/17/2009 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 1/25/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 2/9/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 2/23/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Failure to take composite sample

002 Mar-10 Chronic No test was completed in March 2010

002 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE SAMPLE TYPE TEST SPECIES 10/2004 - 9/24/2009 Quarterly Grab D. magna & P. promelas 9/25/2009 - present March, April, August, October Composite C. dubia & P. promelas PERMIT CONDITIONS Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment 

### Doe Run WET Violations


## BUICK MINE / MILL - MSOP MO002003

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/27/2010

No.

3

C. dubia P. promelas
001 Nov-04 11/11/2004 Acute F P Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F P Second failure during accelerated testing; tests should be multiple dilution

001 1/13/2005 Acute F F Test Procedure Violation: grab sample & single dilution

001 Feb-05 2/17/2005 Acute F P No record of accelerated testing after failure

001 11/17/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 11/29/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 12/20/2005 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 9/14/2006 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: should have been a multiple dilution test

001 5/23/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 6/5/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 6/18/2007 Acute none P Test Procedure Violation: should have sampled both species.

001 1/8/2008 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 Nov-08 11/18/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: grab sample, should have been a composite

001 Feb-09 2/26/2009 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded & grab sample

001 6/18/2009 Acute P P Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 7/2/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

001 7/20/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing; should have been multiple dilution

001 9/14/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 9/29/2009 Acute F F Third failure during accelerated testing

001 10/19/2009 Acute F F Fourth failure during accelerated testing

001 12/17/2009 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing

001 3/23/2010 Acute F P Second failure during accelerated testing

001 4/6/2010 Acute F P Third failure during accelerated testing

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

002 1/13/2005 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated testing; should be multiple dilution

002 Feb-08 2/18/2008 Acute F P No record of follow-up testing

002 9/6/2008 Acute F F Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

002 9/14/2008 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

002 6/19/2009 Acute F F
002 10/29/2009 Acute F P
002 Nov-09 No record of testing

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Nov-04 11/11/2004 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-04 11/30/2004 Acute F F Second failure during accelerated test; should be multiple dilution

003 1/5/2005 Acute F F Third failure during accelerated testing; test should be multiple dilution

003 1/13/2005 Acute F P Fourth failure during accelerated testing; test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-05 No record of testing

003 Nov-06 11/16/2006 Acute F F Scheduled test; no record of accelerated testing

003 2/18/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

003 9/6/2008 Acute P P Test Procedure Violation: holding time exceeded

003 4/13/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 4/19/2009 Acute F F Accelerated test should be multiple dilution

003 Nov-09 No record of testing

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - present February, May, August, November Comment Results

Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Doe Run WET Violations



### Buick Resource Recycling - MSOP MO0000337

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic)8/19/2010

No.

4

C. dubia P. promelas
001 Aug-06 10/11/2006 Acute Pass Pass Testing not conducted in August as required by permit

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 11/12/2009 August 11/13/2009 - present August PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Fletcher Mine - MSOP MO0001856

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.

5

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Oct-05 11/9/2005 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: 20 degrees C, not
25

003 Jun-07 No Record of Testing

003 Nov-07 No test completed in November 2007

003 Mar-08 4/16/2008 Acute Pass Pass Permit requires testing in March

003 9/12/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 9/26/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 10/10/2008 Acute

-- Pass Did not complete testing for C. dubia

003 9/30/2009 Acute Pass Fail Second failure during retesting period

003 Nov-09 12/2/2009 Acute Pass Pass Permit requires testing in November

003 Mar-10 4/28/2010 Acute Fail Pass No discharge in March; sampled in April

003 Jun-10 6/9/2010 Acute Pass Fail

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/22/2007 October 3/23/2007 - present March, June, August, November PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Glover Smelter - MSOP MO0001121

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/27/2010

No.
6

C. dubia P. promelas

001 3/5/2008 Acute Fail Fail

001 10/14/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 11/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - present January, August PERMIT CONDITIONS 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Herculaneum Smelter - MSOP MO0000281

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.

7

D. magna P. promelas
002 4th Q 2004 No Record of Testing

002 1st Q 2005 No Record of Testing

002 2nd Q 2005 No record of testing in 2nd Q 2005

C. dubia P. promelas

002 Jan-10 Permit requires testing in January; not tested until March

002 3/10/2010 Chronic Fail Fail Test species changed with new permit

002 Apr-10 Permit requires testing in April

002 5/25/2010 Chronic Fail Fail Accelerated testing not initiated within 14 days of 3/10/2010 test failure

002 6/7/2010 Chronic Fail Fail

002 Jun-10 6/22/2010 Chronic Pass Fail

D. magna P. promelas

004 4th Q 2004 No Record of Testing

004 1st Q 2005 No Record of Testing

C. dubia P. promelas

004 Jan-10 Permit requires testing in January; not tested until March

004 Jan-10 3/10/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
004 Apr-10 Permit requires testing in April

004 5/24/2010 Chronic Fail Pass Accelerated testing not initiated within 14 days of 3/10/2010 test failure

004 6/7/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
004 Jun-10 6/22/2010 Chronic Fail Pass

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE TEST SPECIES 10/2004 - 12/3/2009 Quarterly D. magna & P. promelas 12/4/2009 - present January, April, July, October C. dubia & P. promelas PERMIT CONDITIONS Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

Comment 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Viburnum 28 & 29 - MSOP MO0000086

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/19/2010

No.
8

C. dubia P. promelas

001 Jul-06 7/6/2005 Acute Fail Pass Bi-weekly testing required after failure
001 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: collected in August, not July as required

001 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

C. dubia P. promelas

003 Jul-07 8/29/2007 Acute Pass Pass Test Procedure Violation: collected in August, not July as required

003 Jul-08 7/30/2008 Acute Fail Pass
003 9/3/2008 Acute Pass Pass Accelerated tests should commence within 14 days after violation

003 9/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
003 Apr-10 Chronic No test was completed in April 2010

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/18/2010 July 3/19/2010 - present March, April, August, October Scheduled

Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall 

### Doe Run WET Violations



## Viburnum No. 35 (Casteel) - MSOP MO0100226

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment (EPA)8/19/2010

No.
9

C. dubia P. promelas
001 11/28/2007 Acute Fail Pass Follow-up testing should be biweekly

001 12/12/2007 Acute Fail Pass
001 8/20/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 9/3/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 9/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 Oct-08 10/1/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 10/15/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 11/12/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 12/3/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 12/17/2008 Acute Fail Pass
001 1/7/2009 Acute Invalid Toxicity in control invalidated C. dubia results

001 1/21/2009 Acute Fail

-- 001 2/4/2009 Acute Fail

-- 001 2/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 3/4/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 3/18/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/1/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/15/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 4/29/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 5/13/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 5/20/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 6/3/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 6/17/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 7/15/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 7/29/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 8/12/2009 Acute Fail Pass
001 Apr-10 4/19/2010 Chronic Fail Pass
001 7/20/2010 Chronic pending pending Accelerated testing should have been initiated within 30 days of 4/19/10 failure

C. dubia P. promelas
003 2005 No WET test conducted
003 2006 No WET test conducted
003 2008 No WET test conducted
003 2009 No WET test conducted

TIME FRAME TESTING SCHEDULE 10/2004 - 3/11/2010 October 3/12/2010 - present March, April, August, October Scheduled

Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results

PERMIT CONDITIONS Comment Outfall 

### Doe Run WET Violations


## West Fork Mine / Mill - MSOP MO0100218

Outfall Scheduled
Tests Actual Dates Test Type (Acute/Chronic) Results Comment8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 1 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Issued: 09/05/2003 Reissued: 02/26/2010 Revised: 07/28/2010

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

1.621 /

0.99
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

dis.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.057
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0024 /

0.0012
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in
July



### *

March 2005 0.814 ma

April 2005 9.3 dm

Oct 2005 0.785 ma

Aug 2006 0.838 ma **

Nov 2006 0.8360 ma

May 2008 0.862 ma

June 2008 0.796 ma

Sept 2008 0.878 ma

Nov 2008 0.758 ma

Dec 2008 0.866 ma

Feb 2009 0.785 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 2 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

1.621 /

0.99
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

dis.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.057
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0024 /

0.0012
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in
July



### *

Feb 2010 0.859 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.

** V alue includes one Doe Run sample and three EPA samples8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 3 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff ( Reissued : 02/26/2010 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 /

0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.295 /

0.181
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 /

0.05
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 /

0.001
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/quart

er in Mar,
Apr, Aug,

Oct.



### *

Mar 2010 0.185 ma 1.22 dm

1.025 ma

Apr 2010 0.659 ma

May 2010 1.011 dm

0.762 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 4 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Brushy Creek Mine/Mill

- MO0001848

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin containing mine water and stormwater runoff ( Re vised: 07/13/2010 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.08 8 /

0.05 3
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0. 417 /

0. 256
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.5 / 0.75

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.100 /

0.05
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 /

0.001
mg/L
once/yr Whole

Effluent
Toxicity
once/quart

er in Mar,
Apr, Aug,

Oct.



### *

July 2010 0 .936 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 004

- Instream monitoring

Date pH

DM

6.5

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.047 / 0.029
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA
0.417 /0.255 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.557 / 0.340
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.019 / 0.012 mg/L

once/mo

April 28, 2005 9.23 dm8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Issued: 03/09/1990 Reissued: 09/25/2009 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Domestic waste discharged to tailings basin

Date pH

DM

Above 6

annual BOD

WA / MA
65 / 45 mg/L

annual TSS

WA / MA
120 / 80 mg/L

annual

Dec 8, 2006 121.7 (dm & ma)

F eb 2007 49 ma 86.67 ma

Mar 22, 2007 84.24 (dm & ma) 230 (dm & ma)



### Outfall: 002

- Mine, Mill, Stormwater and water from 001

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

o nce/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

526 / 263
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l
once/yr in July Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo

Jan 26, 2005 433 ma

March 2005 280 ma

Jul y 2006 10.9 ma

Jan 25, 2007 437 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

o nce/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

526 / 263
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l
once/yr in July Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo

March 2008 495 ma

Jan 30, 2009 613 ma

Feb 25, 2009 546 ma

Mar 26, 2009 490 ma

Jun 26, 2009 219 dm, 112 ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Buick Mine/ Mill

- MO0002003

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 002

- Mine, Mill, Stormwater and water from 001 (Reissued: 09/25/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
300 / 150 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
860 / 430 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA
526 / 263 ug/l

once/mo Cadmium

DM / MA

100 / 50

ug/l

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA
2 / 1 ug/l

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo Chlorides plus Sulfates
monitoring only

once/mo

Dec 2009 782 ma

Jan 2010 616 ma

Feb 2010 721 ma

Mar 2010 676 ma

Jun 2010 No analysis conducted



### Outfall 003

– in stream monitoring point

Date Copper, t.r.

DM / MA
54 / 37 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
490/ 440 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

190 / 29

ug/l

onc e/mo

March 4, 2009 479 ma 30 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Issued: 08/23/2002 Modified: 02/23/2007 Reissued: (pending)

Outfall: 001 ( with 002 & 003, when discharging)

- Treatment of stormwater, wash water, granulation water, laboratory, sanitary, non

contact cooling water

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

11/ 11 /04 5.74* * dm 0. 389

dm

11/30/04 11.15 * *

dm

12/01/04 11.1 5 * *

dm

01/05/05 5.51 * * dm

01/13/05 837.6* *

dm 6.41 * * dm 2.08 * *

dm 61.80 * *

dm 24.08 * *

dm8/17/2010 Page 2 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

05/03/05 17 dm

11/15/ 05 297.5 * *

dm 12.59 * *

dm

3/12/06 10.86 * *

dm

10/31/06 0.21 dm

11/15/06 4.78
(003) 0

. 22 dm 10.55* *

dm

1/15/07 16.35 * *

dm

02/07/07 58.32

dm

37.66

ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

2/13/07 10.2
(003) 6.31 * * dm

2/19/07 6.2
(003)

2/6/08 8.58 * * dm

2/15/08 Failed to sample outfall 003 discharge event

2/17/08 57.61 * *

dm

03/18/08 9771.6 * *

dm 27.75 * *

dm 126.04 * *

dm 2.222

ma 0.48 dm 45.40 * *

dm

3/19/08 7.0
(002)8/17/2010 Page 4 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

4/1/08 6.96
(00 2) 9.78 * * dm

4/2/08 7.48
(002)

4/4/08 6.8
(003)

04/09/08 0.28 dm

04/10/08 6.1
(002) 7889 * *

dm 12.89 * *

dm 6.52* *

dm 39.51 * *

dm 1326.6 * *

dm 0.27 dm 48.28 * *

dm

4/15/08 7.0
(003)

9/4/08 1207.3 * *

dm 5.24 * * dm 2.78 * *

dm 4.56 * *

dm 70.41 * *

dm 19.38 * *

dm

9/14/08 3.66 * * dm 9.40 * * dm8/17/2010 Page 5 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

12/28/08 6.6
(002) 7.98 * * dm

02/11/09 4.07* * dm 72 dm,

ma

03/12/09 0.099

dm

04/03/09 0.095

dm

4/13/09 6.34 * * dm

4/19/09 6.7
(003) 2.81 * * dm

05/13/09 74.8 dm,

ma8/17/2010 Page 6 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

06/03/09 932.5 * *

dm 6.88 * * dm 27.21 * *

dm 0. 3 07

dm

6/15/09 6.5
(002) 3.39 * * dm 31.38 * *

dm

08/2009 130.05

dm, ma

10/29/09 3125 * *

dm 15.84 **

dm 5.04 * *

dm 216.4 * *

dm 9.89 * * dm

11/1/09 1156 * *

dm 70.87**

dm

11/16/09 3.94 * * dm 9.736 * *

dm

Nov 2009 2.048 ma 128.85

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 7 of 7



### N PDES Permit Violation History from DMRs
Buick Resource Recycling

- MO0000337

- Outfall 001 (with 002 & 003, when discharging)

Date pH

DM &

MA

7.5

-

10.0

SU

once/M TSS

DM / MA

283 / 162

lbs/d

once/M Arsenic,

t.r.

DM / MA

3.34 /

1.70

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM /

MA

1.84 /

0.74

lbs/d

once/M Cadmium

, t.r.

DM

0.100
mg/L

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM /

MA

2.420 /

1.550

lbs/d

once/M Copper,

t.r.

DM

0.088
mg/L

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.58 /

1.05

lbs/d

once/M Lead, t.r.

DM

0.190
mg/L

once/M Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

9.38 /

3.07

lbs/d

once/M Zinc,

t.r.

DM

2.12
mg/L

once/

M Antimony,

t.

DM/MA

6.900 /

4.600

lbs/d

once/M Ammonia

DM

16.1
mg/l

once/Q BOD

WA /

MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/Q Silver, t.r.

DM

0.013
mg/l

once/Q Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

%

Survival

once/Q



### *

Feb 2010 49.9 dm,

ma

Apr 2010 0.236

dm

5/6/2010 60.5 dm,

ma

6/15/2010 140.33

dm, ma

07/19/10 754.05 **

dm 6.95 ** dm 3.49 **

dm 50.07 **

dm 9.19 **

dm

* WET results not addressed in this table.

* * A discharge event at Outfall 002 and/or Outfall 003 occurred and the value represents the c ombined load from all outfalls discharging.8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Issued: 07/30/2002 Reissued: 11/13/2009 Revised: 07/28/2010

Outfall: 001

- Mine water and Stormwater Runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

01/25/05 5.9

01/23/07 0.1330 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 001

- Mine water and Stormwater Runoff (Reissued: 11/13/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t. r

. DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

. r

. DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r

. DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

Nov 2009 0.179 ma

Dec 2009 0.051 ma 0.140 ma 0.259 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

6 9 SU

once/mo Copper, t. r

. DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

. r

. DM / MA

0.270 / 0.130
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r

. DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.049 / 0.024
mg/L

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001
mg/L

once/mo Whole Effluent
Toxicity
once/yr in Aug

*

0.092 dm 0.372 dm

Jan 2010 0.163 ma

Mar 2010 0.194 ma 0.209 ma

Apr 2010 0.159 ma

May 2010 0.169 ma

* WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Fletcher Mine/Mill

- MO0001856

- Outfall 001 & 004

Outfall: 004

- Instream Compliance

Date Copper, dis.

DM / MA

0.043 / 0.021
mg/L

once/mo Lead, dis.

DM / MA

0.017 / 0.008
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, dis.

DM / MA

0.371 / 0.184
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, dis.

DM / MA

0.016 / 0.008
mg/L

once/mo

02/26/2007 <0.010 ma <0.010 ma

08/13/2007 <0.010 ma

10/09/2007 0.010 ma

11/05/2007 0.013 ma

12/05/2007 0.015 ma

01/07/2008 0.014 ma

Dec 2008 0.014 ma

Feb 2009 0.014 ma

Sep 2009 0.011 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Issued: 11/06/1998 Reissued: 03/23/2007

Outfall: 001

- Sanitary wastewater (Reissued: 03/23/2007)

Date Chlorine

DM &

MA

0.019
mg/l

once/mo TSS

DM / MA

1.467 /

0.930

lbs/d

once/mo TSS

WA / MA

45 / 30

mg/l

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0046

0.0019

lb s/d

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

80 / 60

ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

0.0169

0.00578

lbs/d

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

1,180
ug/l

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

0.0033

0.0013

lbs/d

once/mo Cadmium,

t.r.

DM & MA
46 ug/l

once/mo BOD5

WA / MA

45 / 30

mg /l

once/

quarter pH

DM

6

- 10 SU

once/

quarter Fecal

Coliform

DM / MA

1000 /

400

#/100

ml Copper,

t.r.

DM & MA
46 ug/l

once/

quarter Thallium,

t.r.

DM & MA
58 ug/l

once/

quarter

Sep 2007 61.7 wa

61.7 ma

Dec 2007 3 2.7 ma

Jun 2009 440 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/wk Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.673/0.264

lbs/d

once/wk Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

flow >8cft

0.080/0.080

flow<8cfs

0. 027/0.027

once/wk Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

2.452/0.745

lbs/d

once/wk Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

2.05/1.4

flow<8cfs

0.34/0.34

once/wk Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.481/0.192

lbs/d

once/wk Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.046/0.046

flow<8cfs

0.013/0.013

once/w k Thallium, t.r.mg/l

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.176/0.176

flow<8cfs

0.011/0.011

once/wk WET

1/year in October



### *

10/20/04 0.024 dm

05/03/05 49.00 dm

05/09/05 47.112 dm

23.556 ma 11.00 dm

5.5 ma 32.00 dm

40.5 ma

07/19/05 0.325 dm, ma 1.882 ma 3.58 dm, ma 0.33 dm, ma

08/16/05 0.091 dm, ma

09/08/05 .061dm 0.451 dm 0.028 dm 0.020 dm

09/23/05 0.012 dm

12/27/05 0.038 dm, ma

06/05/06 0.014 dm

06/26/06 0.017 dm

08/01/06 0.013 dm

*WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 3 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water ( Reissued: 03/2 3 / 20 0 7 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0. 673/0.264

lbs/d

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

flow >8cft

0.080/0.080

flow<8cfs

0.027/0.027

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

2.452/0.745

lbs/d

once/ mo Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

2.05/1.4

flow<8cfs

0.34/0.34

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.481/0.192

lbs/d

onc e/ mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.046/0.046

flow<8cfs

0.013/0.013

once/mo Thallium, t.r.mg/l

DM & MA

flow >8cft

0.176/0.176

flow<8cfs

0.011/0.011

once/mo WET

4 /year



### *

10/01/07 0.018 dm, ma

Aug 2008 0.031 dm, ma

Sept 2008 0.036 dm, ma

Oct 2008 0.035 dm & ma

July 2009 0.022 dm, ma

Sep 2009 0.023 dm, ma

*WET results not addressed in this table.8/17/2010 Page 4 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Outfall: 003

- Stormwater and process water ( f inal e ffluent l imits effective 0 3/2 3 / 20 10 )

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L

once/ mo Lead, t.r.

DM

0. 012 lbs/d

DM / MA
6.0 / 2.9 μg/L

once/ mo Zinc, t.r.

DM

0

. 512 lbs/d

MD / MA
218 /189 μg/L

once/ mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM

0. 001 lbs/d

DM / MA
0.52 / 0.26 μg/L

once/ mo Thallium, t.r.

DM / MA

10.3 / 5.1 μg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11

. 8 / 5. 9 μg/L

once/mo Selenium, t.r.

DM / MA

8

. 1 / 4

. 0 μg/L

once/mo pH, SU

DM / MA

7.5

– 9.0

once/mo WET

4 /year



### *

Apr 2010 5.9 ma

11.8 dm

July 2010 0.30 ma 5.68 ma

*WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall: 006

- Emergency overflow (Reissued: 03/23/2007)

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

09/08/07 1.002 dm 834 dm, ma 4.135 dm 3440 dm, ma 0.401 dm, ma 334 dm, ma 58 dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 5 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

03/18/08 45 dm 10 dm 1300 dm 130 dm 17400 dm 4 dm 482 dm 31 dm

03/19/08 204 dm 26 dm 1270 dm 360 dm 17600 dm 10 dm 475 dm 30 dm

March 2008 124.7 ma 1285 ma 17500 ma 7 ma 479 ma 31 ma

04/03/08 2.877 dm 861 dm 87.545 dm 26200 dm 2.102 dm 629 dm 32 dm

04/10/08 66.88 dm 4.177 dm 1250 dm 192.464 dm 57600 dm 1.621 dm 485 dm 28 dm

April 2008 33.4 ma 1056 ma 41900 ma 1.862 ma 557 ma 30 ma

06/15/09 0.914 dm 175 dm 9.196 dm 1760 dm 0.606 dm 116 dm 33 dm

06/16/09 0.920 dm 176 dm 9.196 dm 1760 dm 118 dm 33 dm

June 2009 175.5 ma 1760 ma 0.303 ma 58 ma 75.5 ma 16.5 ma

10/29/09 113.8 dm 15.0 dm 1190 dm 175.6 dm 13900 dm 4.274 dm 338 dm 22 dm8/17/2010 Page 6 of 6



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Glover Smelter

- MO0001121

- Outfall 001, 003 & 006

Date TSS

DM / MA

36.056 /

24.036 lbs/d

once/ discharge
/day Lead, t.r.

DM

0.012

lb s/d

once/
discharge/
day Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

6.0 / 2.90
micrograms/l

once/ discharge
/day Zinc, t.r.

DM

0.512

lbs/d

once/
discharge/
day Zinc, t.r.

DM & MA

218 / 109
micrograms/l

once/ discharge/
day Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.001 / 00.192

lbs/d

once/ d ischarge
/day Cadmium, t.r.

DM & MA

0.52 / 0.260
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Thallium, t.r

DM & MA

10.3 / 5.1
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day Selenium, t.r

DM/MA

8.1 / 4.0
micrograms/l

once/
discharge/
day

10/30/09 176.9 dm 32.1 dm 1270 dm 353.96 dm 14000 dm 8.217 dm 325 dm 21 dm

Oct 2009 145.4 ma 1230 ma 13950 ma 6.246 ma 332 ma 22 ma8 / 23 /2010 Page 1 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Issued: 02/28/2003 Reissued: (pending)

Outfall: 001

– Process water

- lead smelting and acid plant

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

11/8/2004 3. 580 dm 2.43 dm

Jan 2005 1.28 ma 3.63 ma

01/07/2005 4.345 dm

Feb 2005 102 ma

02/11/2005 142 dm

06/05/2005 No Samples Taken for the Week

Feb 2006 No Data

May 2006 No Data

10/10/2006 127 dm

02/1/2007 7.35 dm

Mar 2007 1.62 ma 4. 52 ma 105 ma

03/14/07 2.147 dm8 / 23 /2010 Page 2 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

03/20/2007 2. 794 dm 149 dm

03/21/2007 2 977 dm 131 dm

03/22/2007 2.212 dm

03/23/2007 1.971dm

4/5/2007 2.888 dm

4/27/2007 3.337 dm 1.18 dm

M ay 2007 1.18 ma

5/4/2007 4.014 dm 0.80 dm 4.716 dm

5/7/2007 3.962 dm 1.28 dm

July 2007 95 ma

Sep 200 7 102 ma

Oct 2007 95 ma

Nov 2007 102 ma

Feb 2008 1.20 ma 3.37 ma

0 6 / 1 8/2008 7.12 dm

0 7/8/2008 7.26 dm8 / 23 /2010 Page 3 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

0 8/5/2008 7.24 dm

10/10/08 124 dm

10/31/08 1.03 dm

11/19/08 2.148 dm

Nov 2008 1.39 ma

April 2009 97 ma

June 2009 1

. 14 ma

07/21/09 127 dm

Aug 2009 94 ma

09/11/09 3.035 dm 1.36 dm 4. 9 09 dm 2

. 20 dm

09/22/2009 9.65 dm

Sept 2009 1.441 ma 2.08 ma

Dec 2009 91.4 ma

Jan 2010 0.91 ma 1.2 ma

Feb 2010 2.502 ma 1.904 ma 105.5 ma8 / 23 /2010 Page 4 of 4



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Herc ulaneum Smelting Division

- MO0000281

- Outfall 001 & 003

Date pH

DM

7.5

- 10.0

SU

once/W TSS

DM / MA

350.15/

193.1

lbs/d

once/W Arsenic, t.r.

DM / MA

12.861 /

5.216

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM / MA

1.96 4 /

0.785

lbs/d

once/W Cadmium,

t.r.

DM

0.720
mg/L

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

11.839 /

4.750

lbs/d

once/W Copper, t.r.

DM

0.580
mg/L

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

2.749 /

1.127

lbs/d

once/W Lead, t.r.

DM

1.500
mg/L

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

10.016 /

3 .307

lbs/d

once/W Zinc, t.r.

DM

4.900
mg/L

once/W Silver, t.r.

YA

0.130
mg/L
once/yr in

Sep. Whole

Effluent
Toxicity

% Survival
Twice/yr in Jan.&Aug.

* Chemical
Oxygen

Demand

120 DM /

90 MA
mg/L

once/W

02/5/20 1 0 2.89 dm

02/10/20 1 0 2.500 dm 4.213 dm

02/19/20 1 0 2.384 dm

02/25/20 1 0 2.236 dm

Apr 2010 131 dm

* WET results not addressed in this table.



### Outfall 003

– Primary Lead Smelter

Date pH

DM

6.0

- 9.0 SU

once/W Oil and Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10.

mg/L

once/W

Jan 2005 No Samples
Report ed

Week of June 5, 2005 No sample reported

03/9/2006 19.5 dm

Week of April 23, 2007 No sample reported

09/22/2009 9.65 dm8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 1 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Issued: 06/30/1989 Reissued: 12/04/2009 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfalls: 002 & 004

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

12/11/04 002 2.15 dm & ma

01/26/05 002 1.45 ma

02/23/05 002 1.32 ma

03/30/05 004 0.308 ma

12/13/05 002 0.798 ma

03/14/06 002 87.80 dm & ma

04/18/06 002 38 dm & ma

07/18/06 004 10.8 ma

12/13/06 002 1.45 ma

01/24/07 002 1.33 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 2 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

02/21/07 002 1.36 ma

03/13/07 002 0.811 ma

09/12/07 002 13.3 ma

09/12/07 004 11.75 ma

02/20/08 002 1.38 ma

03/12/08 002 1.268 ma

04/17/08 002 1.196 ma

05/06/08 002 1.117 ma

09/17/08 002 52 dm, ma

12/04/08 002 62 dm

12/17/08 002 71 dm

Dec 2008 002 45 ma

03/04/09 002 0.793 ma8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 3 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Date Out fall No. Mercury, t

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t

DM / MA
0.3 / 0.15 mg/L

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
0.6 / 0.3 mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA
0.10 / 0.05 mg/L

once/mo

04/09/09 002 186 dm

04/14/09 002 20 dm

April 2009 002 70 ma

05/04/09 002 29.7 dm

May 2009 002 15 ma

05/04/09 004 526.9 dm

May 2009 004 264 ma

06/04/09 002 329 dm

June 2009 002 168 ma

July 2009 002 21 dm, ma

Nov 2009 002 0.829 ma

Dec 2009 002 0.997 ma8/ 26 /2010 Page 4 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Outfalls: 002 & 004 (Reissued: 12/ 0 4/2009 )

Date all outfalls Mercury, t .r.

DM / MA

0.002 / 0.001

mg/l 1/yr TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t .r.

DM / MA

3 00 / 15 00

μ g/L

once/mo Lead, t .r.

DM / MA

6 00 / 3 00 μ g/L

once/mo Zinc, t,

DM / MA
1000 / 500 ug/l

once / mo Cadmium, t

DM / MA

10 0 / 5 0 μ g/L

once/mo

Jan 2010 002 1418 ma

1372 dm

1464 dm

Feb 2010 002 93 dm, ma 1710 ma

1679 dm

1740 dm

Mar 2010 002 1546 ma

1683 dm

1495 dm

1515 dm

1490 dm

Apr 2010 002 23 dm, ma 653 ma

1153 dm8/ 2 6 /2010 Page 5 of 5



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

Viburnum Mine 28 & 29

- MO0000086

- Outfall 002, 004 & 007

Outfall: 007

Date Copper, t

DM / MA
58 / 37 ug/l

once/mo Lead, t

DM / MA
190 / 29 ug/l

once/mo Zinc, t

DM / MA
490 / 440 ug/l

once/mo

02/16/2006 31 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Issued: 08/08/2003 Reissued : 03/19/2010 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Settling basin; mine water and stormwater runoff

Date pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 / 0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.432 / 0.264
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 / 0.057
mg/L

once/mo

Jan 24, 2007 0.596 dm, ma

February 2007 0.4230 ma

Sep 2007 11.5 ma

July 2008 13 ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 002

- Domestic wastewater

Date Biochemical Oxygen

Demand

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L
once/yr TSS

WA / MA
45 / 30 mg/L
once/yr pH

DM

6

- 9 SU
once/yr

July 2005 43.77 ma

9/19/2006 57.92 dm, ma 62 dm, ma

09/30/09 37 ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 3



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs Viburnam Mine # 35 (Casteel)

- MO0100226

- Outfall 001, 002 & 003

Outfall: 003

- Settling basin; mine water and stormwater runoff

Date pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo TSS

DM / MA
30 / 20 mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA
15 / 10 mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.084 / 0.051
mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.432 / 0.264
mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA
1.5 / 0.75 mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.094 / 0.057
mg/L

once/mo

December 2004 0.065 ma

July 2005 0.290 ma

12/14/2006 9.03 dm

Jan 24, 2007 0.80 dm, ma

September 2007 11.82 ma8/17/2010 Page 1 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Issued: 08/02/1996 Modified: 09/25/1998 Reissued: 03/12/2010 Revised: 07/13/2010

Outfall: 001

- Treatment of mine water

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

11/06/04 2.4

dm, ma

12/11/04 4.8

dm, ma 0.63 dm,

ma8/17/2010 Page 2 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/25/05 3.308

dm, ma

02/24/05 0.054 ma 5.407

dm, ma

03/23/05 4.91

dm, ma

10/20/05 3.409

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 3 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/12/06 0.655

dm, ma 2.411

dm, ma

10/11/06 0.048 ma 2.026

dm, ma

03/14/07 0.561

dm, ma

05/10/07 520 ma8/17/2010 Page 4 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

07/16/07 4.505

dm, ma

01/07/08 0.586

dm, ma

04/14/08 0.822

dm, ma

05/05/08 0.727

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 5 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

07/02/08 15.1

dm, ma

8/13/08 0.502

dm, ma 0.62

dm, ma

03/06/09 0.772

dm, ma

04/07/09 0.671 dm

05/13/09 47 dm8/17/2010 Page 6 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

05/28/09 344 dm

May 2009 196 ma

09/03/09 2.3

dm, ma 418 ma

10/07/09 0.75 dm

10/13/09 0.892 dm8/17/2010 Page 7 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

Oct 2009 0.821 ma

Nov 2009
(11/11/09) 0.683

dm, ma

12/15/09 0.862 dm8/17/2010 Page 8 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

12/21/09 0.862 dm

Dec 2009 0.862 ma

01/14/10 0.875 dm 2.6 dm8/17/2010 Page 9 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

01/28/10 0.687 dm

Jan 2010 0.781 ma 2.6 ma

02/11/10 0.680 dm 5.1 dm8/17/2010 Page 10 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.64

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.56

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.49

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.442

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Copper, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.074

DM&MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.066

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.057

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.04

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.10 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.083 DM

0.05 MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.059 DM

0.05 MA

<20 cfs

0.045

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Lead, tot.

Streamflow

>40 cfs

0.124

DM & MA

≥ 30 to <40

cfs

0.097

DM & MA

≥ 20 to <30

cfs

0.069

DM & MA

<20 cfs

0.053

DM & MA

mg/L

once/mo Oil &

Grease

15 DM

10 MA
mg/L

once/mo pH

6

- 9

SU

once/M BOD

15 DM

15 MA
mg/L

once/M TSS

15

DM & MA

mg/L

once/M NH3 as

N

5 DM

5 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Color

15 DM

15 MA

Pt

- Co

Units

once/M Fecal

Coliform

1000 DM

400 MA

#/100ml

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Hydro

gen

Sulfide

0.2 DM

0.2 MA
mg/L

once/M

02/26/10 0.902 dm

Feb 2010 0.791 ma 5.1 ma8/17/2010 Page 11 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

OUTFALL 001

- Treatment of Mine Water (Reissued: 03/ 12/2010)

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

03/03/10 833 dm 401 dm

03/15/10 800 dm 43 dm

Mar 2010 817 ma 222 ma

04/01/10 598 dm 188 dm

04/07/10 536 dm 221 dm

04/09/10 598 dm 212 dm

04/14/10 538 dm8/17/2010 Page 12 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

04/19/10 223 dm

04/20/10 233 dm

04/21/10 101 dm

04/23/10 65 dm

04/26/10 253 dm

04/30/10 316 dm

Apr 2010 171 ma8/17/2010 Page 13 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date Zinc, t.r.

DM/ MA

442 /
442 ug/l,

1 / m Copper

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

40 / 40

ug/l,

1 / y Cadmium

,

t.r.

DM/ MA

45 / 45

ug/l,

1 / m Lead , t.r.

DM/ MA

53 / 4 5

ug/l,

1 / m O&G

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg / l

1/mo pH

6 .5

- 9

SU

once/M TSS

30 DM

20 MA
mg/L

once/M Nitrate &

Nitrite as

N

2 DM

2 MA
mg/L

once/M Phos

phorus,

tot.

0.5 DM

0.5 MA
mg/L

once/M Mercury

,
t.r.

DM/ MA

2 / 1 ug/l,

1 / y

May 2010 Duplicate
sample

not
reported

06/03/10 0.78

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 14 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Outfall: 003

- 

### Stormwater Runoff

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity
once/yr

*

02/24/05 1.24

dm, ma

06/07/2005 1.44

dm, ma

10/31/05 1.61

dm, ma

11/15/2005 0.508 ma 3.46

dm, ma

03/15/2006 1.56

dm, ma

June 2006 2005 data

submitted

07/21/2006 3.36

dm, ma

02/18/08 6.349

dm, ma

09/04/08 31

dm, ma 2.302

dm, ma 5.66

dm, ma 1.183

dm, ma 0.112

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 15 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity

once/yr

*

10/16/08 3.6

dm, ma 554.7

dm, ma no test

01/08/09 2.856

dm, ma

05/14/09 1.935

dm, ma

06/05/09 24 ma 0.354 ma 4.651

dm, ma 0.075 ma

07/ 0 8/09 2.474

dm, ma 14 ma

09/03/09 1.875

dm, ma

10/07/09 2.343

dm, ma

11/11/09 2.618

dm, ma

12/15/09 2.454

dm, ma8/17/2010 Page 16 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L

once/mo Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

0.6 / 0.3

mg/L

once/mo Zinc, t.r.

DM / MA

1.0 / 0.5

mg/L

once/mo Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

0.30 / 0.15
mg/L

once/mo Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

0.10 DM / 0.05

MA
mg/L

once/mo Oil & Grease

DM / MA

15 / 10
mg/L

once/mo pH

DM

6

- 9 SU

once/mo Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

0.002 DM / 0.001

MA
mg/L
once/yr Whole Effluent Toxicity

once/yr

*

01/14/10 1.975

dm, ma

* WET results not addressed in this table8/17/2010 Page 17 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

OUTFALL 003

- Stormwater Runoff (Reissued: 03/12/2010)

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L
1/ day disch Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

170 / 84.6

u g/L
1/ day disch Zinc t.r.

DM / MA

195 / 97 ug/l
1/ day disch Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

23.9 / 11.9

u g/L
1/ day disch Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

9.0 / 4.5 u g/L

1/ day disch pH

DM

> 6 SU
1/ day disch Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

2.0 / 1.0

u g/L
1/ day disch

04/22/10 1904 dm

04/23/10 1832 dm

Apr 2010 1868 ma

06/03/10 1639 dm

06/04/10 1809 dm

06/11/10 1561 dm

June 20 10 94 ma 1670 ma 5.1 ma

07/08/10 853 dm 1843 dm

. 13 dm8/17/2010 Page 18 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date TSS

DM / MA

30 / 20

mg/L
1/ day disch Lead, t.r.

DM / MA

170 / 84.6

u g/L
1/ day disch Zinc t.r.

DM / MA

195 / 97 ug/l
1/ day disch Copper, t.r.

DM / MA

23.9 / 11.9

u g/L
1/ day disch Cadmium, t.r.

DM / MA

9.0 / 4.5 u g/L

1/ day disch pH

DM

> 6 SU
1/ day disch Mercury, t.r.

DM / MA

2.0 / 1.0

u g/L
1/ day disch

07/10/10 977 dm 40 69 dm 40 dm 25 dm

07/14/10 234 dm 1955 dm

07/15/10 405 dm 2139 dm 11 dm

July 2010 617 ma 2502 ma 17 ma 15 ma



### OUTFALL 002

– Sanitary Waste (Reissued: 03/12/2010)

Date BOD

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter TSS

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter pH

DM

6

– 9 SU

once/quarter Fecal Coliform

DM / MA

1000 / 400

#/100ml

once/quarter

04/14/10 TNTC* dm8/17/2010 Page 19 of 19



### NPDES Permit Violation History from DMRs

West Fork

- MO0100218

- Outfalls 001, 003, & 002

Date BOD

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter TSS

WA / MA

45 / 3 0

mg/L

once/quarter pH

DM

6

– 9 SU

once/quarter Fecal Coliform

DM / MA

1000 / 400

#/100ml

once/quarter

04/23/10 TNTC* dm

April 20 1 0 TNTC* ma

*Too numerous to count

### APPENDIX L

TRUST AGREEMENT

___________ Facility Site Dated:

____________ __, 2010

T his T rust Agreement (this “Agreement” ) is entered into as of [date] by and between Doe Run Resources Corporation , a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York (the “Grantor ” ), and [name of trustee], a [insert “corporation,” “banking organization,” “ association,” etc.] organized and existing under the laws of the State of [ _________] ( the “Trustee” ).

Whereas, the United States Environmental P rotection Agency ( “EPA” ), an agency of the United States federal g overnment, the State of Missouri and the Grantor have entered into a Consent Decree

, United States of America v. the Doe Run Resources Corporation

, Civil Action No. [_________], addressing m ultiple Site s in Southeast Missouri (hereinafter the “ Consent Decree ”);

Whereas, the Consent Decree provides that the Grantor shall provide assurance that funds will be available as and when needed for performance of the Remedial Action at the

________ Fa cility as required by the Consent Decree ;

Whereas, in order to provide such financial assurance

, Grantor has agreed to establish and fund the trust created by this Agreement ; and

Whereas, the Grantor, acting through its duly authorized officers, has selec ted the Trustee to be the trustee under this Agreement, a nd the Trustee has agreed to
act as trustee hereunder.

Now, t herefore, the Grantor and the Trustee agree as follows:

Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement :

(a) The term “ Beneficiary ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement.

( b ) The term “Business Day” means any day, other than a Saturday or a Sunday, that banks are open for business in [_____________,_________] , USA

. ( c ) The term “ Claim Certifica te ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 4(a) of this Agreement.

( d ) The term “ Fund ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement.

( e ) The term “Grantor” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in the first p aragraph of this Agreement.

### 2 ( f

) The term “ Objection Notice ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 4(b) of this Agreement.

( g ) The term “ Site ” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 2 of this Agreement.

( h ) The term “Tr ust” shall have the meaning assigned thereto in Section 3 of this Agreement

. ( i ) The term “Trustee” shall mean the trustee identified in the first paragraph of this Agreement, along with any successor trustee appointed pursuant to the terms of this Agre ement

. ( j ) The term “Work” shall be the work to complete the Remedial Action as that is defined in Appendix G (Financial Assurance for the Mines/Mills ) of the Consent Decree

. Section 2. Identification of Facilities and Costs. This Agreement pertains to costs for Work required at the

__________________ Facility site in

______________ ,

__________ County, Missouri (the “Site”) , pursuant to the above referenced Consent Decree

. Section 3. Establishment of Trust Fund. The Grantor and the Trustee hereby estab lish a trust ( the “ Trust ” ), for the benefit of EPA and the State of Missouri (the “Beneficiar ies ” )

, to assure that funds are available to pay for performance of the Work in the event that Grantor fails to conduct or complete the Work required by , and in

ac cordance with the terms of, the Consent Decree

. The Grantor and the Trustee intend that no third party shall have access to monies or other property in the Trust except as expressly provided herein . The Trust is established initially as consisting of fun ds in the
amount of [_______] U.S. Dollars ( $ _________) . Such funds , along with any other monies and/or other property hereafter deposited into the Trust, and together with all earnings and profits thereon, are referred to herein collectively as the “ Fund

. ” The Fund shall be held by the Trustee, IN TRUST, as hereinafter provided. The Trustee shall not be responsible nor shall it undertake any responsibility for the amount or adequacy of, nor any duty to collect from the Grantor, any payments necessary to discharge any liabilities o f the Grantor owed to the U nited States.

Section 4. Payment f or Work Required Under the Consent Decree

. The Trustee shall make payments from the Fund in accordance with the following procedures.

(a) From time to time, the Gr antor and/or its representatives or contractors
may request that the Trustee make payment from the Fund for Work performed under the Consent Decree by delivering to the Trustee and EPA a written invoice and certificate (together, a “Claim Certificate”) sig ned by an officer of the Grantor (or the relevant representative or contractor) and certifying :

(i) t h at th e invoice is for Work performed at the Site in accordance with the Consent Decree;

### 3 (ii) a description of the Work that has been performed, the amount of the claim, and the identity of the payee(s); and

(iii) that the Grantor has sent a copy of such Claim Certificate to EPA, both to the EPA attorney and the EPA Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch Chief , and the State attorney and proj ect manager, at their respective addresses shown in this Agreement , the date on which such copy was sent , and the date on which such copy was received by EPA and the State as evidenced by a return receipt (which return receipt may be written, as in the cas e of overnight delivery, certified mail, or other similar delivery methods, or electronic, as in the case of e

- mail, facsimile, or other similar delivery methods)

. (b) EPA , after consultation with the State

, may object to any payment requested in a Clai m Certificate submitted by the Grantor (or its representatives or contractors) , in whole or in part, by delivering to the Trustee a written notice (an “Objection Notice”) within thirty (30) days after the date of EPA’s receipt of the Claim Certificate as shown on the relevant return receipt. An Objection Notice sent by EPA shall state (i) whether EPA objects to all or only part of the payment requested in the relevant Claim Certificate ; (ii) t he basis for such objection, (iii) t hat EPA has sent a copy of such Objection Notice to the Grantor and the date on which such copy was sent ; and (iv) t he portion of the payment requested in the Claim Certificate, if any, which is not objected to by EPA, which undisputed portion the Trustee shall proceed to distribute in accordance with Section 4( d ) below. EPA , after consultation with the State, may object to a request for payment contained in a Claim Certificate only on the grounds that the requested payment is not for the costs of Work under the Consent Decree or ot herwise inconsistent with the terms and conditions of the Consent Decree.

( c ) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and does not receive an Objection Notice from EPA within the time period specified in Section 4(b) above, the Trustee shall, after the expiration of such time period, promptly make the payment from the Fund requested in such Claim Certificate.

(d) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and also receives an Objection Notice from EPA within the time period specified in Section 4 (b) above, but which Objection Notice objects to only a portion of the requested payment, the Trustee shall, after the expiration of such time period, promptly make payment from the Fund of the uncontested amount as reque sted in the Claim Certificate. The Trustee shall not make any payment from the Fund for the portion of the requested payment to which EPA has objected in its Objection Notice.

(e) If the Trustee receives a Claim Certificate and also receives an Objection Notice from EPA within the time period specified in Section 4(b) above, which Objection Notice objects to all of the requested payment, the Trustee shall not make any payment from the Fund for amounts requested in such Claim Certificate.

( f

) While this Agreement is in effect, disbursem ents from the Fund are

### 4 governed exclusively by the express terms of this Agreement.

Section 5. Trust Management. The Trustee shall invest and reinvest the principal and income of the Fund and keep the Fund invested as a single fund, without distinctio n between principal and income, in accordance with directions which the Grantor may communicate in writing to the Trustee from time to time, except that:

( a ) s ecurities , notes, and other obligations of any person or entity shall not be acquired or held by the Trustee with monies comprising the Fund , unless they are securities , notes, or other obligations of the U.S. f ederal government or any U.S. state government or as otherwise permitted in writing by the EPA , after consultation with the State ;

( b ) t he Tru stee is authorized to invest the Fund in time or demand deposits of the Trustee, to the extent such deposits are insured by an agency of the U.S. f ederal or any U.S. state gov ernment; and

( c ) t he Trustee is authorized to hold cash awaiting investment or di stribution uninvested for a reasonable time and without liability for the payment of interest thereon.

Section 6 . Commingling and Investment

. The Trustee is expressly authorized in its discretion to transfer from time to time any or all of the assets of the Fund to any common, commingled, or collective trust fund created by the Trustee in which the Fund is eligible to participate, subject to all of the provisions hereof and thereof, to be commingled with the assets of other trusts participating therein.

S ection 7 . Express Powers of Trustee

. Without in any way limiting the powers and discretion conferred upon the Trustee by the other provisions of this Agreement or by law, the Trustee is expressly authorized and empowered:

(a) t o make, execute, acknowledg e, and deliver any and all documents of transfer and conveyance and any and all other instruments that may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the powers herein granted;

(b) t o register any securities held in the Fund in its own name or in the name of a nominee and to hold any security in bearer form or in book entry, or to combine certificates representing such securities with certificates of the same issue held by the Trustee in other fiduciary capacities, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of such securities in a qualified central depositary even though, when so deposited, such securities may be merged and held in bulk in the name of the nominee of such depositary with other securities deposited therein by another person, or to deposit or arran ge for the deposit of any securities issued by the U .S. f ederal g overnment or any U.S. state government, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, with a Federal Reserve bank, but the books and records of the Trustee shall at all times show that all such s ecurities are part of the Fund; and

(c) t o deposit any cash in the Fund in interest

- bearing accounts maintained

### 5 or savings certificates issued by the Trustee, in its separate corporate capacity, or in any other banking institution affiliated with the Trust ee, to the extent insured by an agency of the U.S. f ederal government

.

Section 8 . Taxes and Expenses

. All taxes of any kind that may be assessed or levied against or in respect of the Fund shall be paid from the Fund. All other
expenses and charges incu rred by the Trustee in connection with th e administration of the Fund and this Trust shall be paid by the Grantor.

Section 9 . Annual Valuation

. The Trustee shall annually, no more than thirty ( 30 ) days after the anniversary date of establishment of the F und, furnish to the Grantor and to the Beneficiar ies a statement confirming the value of the Trust. Any securities in the Fund shall be valued at market value as of no more than 60 days prior to the anniversary date of establishment of the Fund. The a nn ual v aluation shall include an accounting of any fees or expenses levied against the Fund. The Trustee shall also provide such information concerning the Fund and this Trust as EPA , after consultation with the State, may request from time to time.

Section 1 0 . Advice of Counsel

. The Trustee may from time to time consult with counsel with respect to any question arising as to the construction of this Agreement or any action to be taken hereunder ; provided, however, that any counsel retained by the Trust ee for such purposes may not, during the period of its represenation of the Trustee , serve as counsel to the Grantor.

Section 1 1 . Trustee Compensation

. The Trustee shall be entitled to reasonable compensation for its services as agreed upon in writing with the Grantor and as notified in writing to the Beneficiar ies

.

Section 1 2 . Trustee and Successor Trustee

. The Trustee and any replacement Trustee must be approved in writing by EPA , after consultation with the State, and must not be affliliated with the Gr antor

. The Trustee may resign or the Grantor may replace the Trustee, but such resignation or replacement shall not be effective until the Grantor has appointed a successor trustee approved in writing by EPA , after consultation with the State, and this su ccessor accepts such appointment. The successor trustee shall have the same powers and duties as those conferred upon the Trustee hereunder. Upon the successor trustee’s acceptance of the appointment, the Trustee shall assign, transfer, and pay over to t he successor trustee the funds and properties then constituting the Fund. If for any reason the Grantor cannot or does not act in the event of the resignation of the Trustee, the Trustee may apply to EPA and the State, or a court of competent jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor trustee or for instructions. The successor trustee shall specify the date on which it assumes administration of the Fund and the T rust in a writing sent to the Grantor, the Beneficiar ies , and the present Trustee by cert ified mail no less than 10 days before such change becomes effective. Any expenses incurred by the Trustee as a result of any of the acts contemplated by this Section shall be paid as provided in Section 8

.

### 6 Section 1 3 . Instructions to the Trustee

. All i nstructions to the Trustee shall be in writing, signed by such persons as are empowered to act on behalf of the entity giving such instructions . The Trustee shall be fully protected in acting without inquiry on such written instructions given in accordanc e with the terms of this Agreement . The Trustee shall have no duty to act in the absence of such written instructions , except as expressly provided for herein.

Section 1 4 . Amendment of Agreement

. This Agreement may be amended only by an instrument in wr iting executed by the Grantor and the Trustee , and with the prior written consent of EPA , after consultation with the State

.

Section 1 5 . Irrevocability and Termination

. T his Trust shall be irrevocable and shall continue until terminated upon the earl ier to occur of ( a ) the written direction of EPA , after consultation with the State, to terminate , consistent with the terms of the Consent Decree and ( b ) the complete exhaustion of the Fund comprising the Trust as certified in writing by the Trustee to EP A

, the State and the Grantor . Upon termination of the Trust pursuant to Secti o n 15(a), all remaining trust property (if any)

, less final trust administration expenses, shall be delivered to the Grantor.

Section 1 6 . Immunity and Indemnification

. The Trus tee shall not incur personal liability of any nature in connection with any act or omission, made in good faith, in the administration of this Trust, or in carrying out any directions by the Grantor or the EPA , after consultation with the State, issued in accordance with this Agreement. The Trustee shall be indemnified and saved harmless by the Grantor from and against any personal liability to which the Trustee may be subjected by reason of any act or conduct made by the Trustee in its official capacity, including all expenses reasonably incurred in its defense in the event the Grantor fails to provide such defense.

Section 1 7 . Choice of Law

. This Agreement shall be administered, construed, and enforced according to the laws of the State of Missouri.

Sec tion 1 8 . Interpretation. As used in this Agreement, words in the singular include the plural and words in the plural include the singular. The descriptive headings for each Section of this Agreement shall not affect the interpretation or the legal effic acy of this Agreement.

Section 19 . Notices. All notices and other communications given under this agreement shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the parties as follows or to such other address as the parties shall by written notice designate:

(a) If to the Grantor :

Name Title Address Address

(b) If to the Trustee :

### 7 Name Title Address Address

(c) If to EPA:

Superfund Special Emphasis and Remedial Branch U.S. EPA, Region 7 901 N. 5 th 

### Street Kansas City, Kanas 66101

Steven L. Sanders Office of Regional Cou nsel U.S. EPA, Region 7 901 N. 5 th 

### Street Kansas City, Kansas 66101 (913)551

- 7578

(d) If to the State:

Director Hazardous Waste Program Missouri Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 176 Jefferson City, MO 65102

### 8 In Witness Whereof , the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective officers duly authorized and attested as of the date first above written:

GRANTOR

[Signature of Grantor] [ 

### Name and Title]

State of _________________________ County of _______________________

On this [date], before me personally came [name of Grantor official], to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she/he is [title] of [corporation], the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; and that she /he signed her/his name thereto.

[Signature of Notary Public]

TRUSTEE

[Signature of Trustee] [Name and Title]

State of _________________________ County of _______________________

On this [date], before me personally came [name of Trustee official ], to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that she/he is [title] of [corporation], the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; and that she/he signed her/his name thereto.

[Signature of Notary Public]