The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-01-19 PACKET 08.B.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # DATE 01/19/2011 .. •. - Engineering ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT Jennifer Levitt STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Direct staff to draft a letter to the MPCA incorporating the four comments described in the attached memo for submittal prior to the February 2, 2011 deadline for the Mayor's Signature. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend directing staff to draft a letter to the MPCA incorporating the four comments described in the attaches memo for submittal prior to the February 2, 2011 deadline for the Mayor's Signature. ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ❑ MEMO /LETTER: Jennifer Levitt and Howard Blin, January 14, 2011. ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ❑ OTHER: 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treat 'enYFacility NPDES /SDS Permit. ` . City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: WAPPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER DATE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ❑ PLANNING ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ ❑ ❑ ® Environmental Commission 1/12/2011 ❑ ® ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ❑ MEMO /LETTER: Jennifer Levitt and Howard Blin, January 14, 2011. ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ❑ OTHER: 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treat 'enYFacility NPDES /SDS Permit. ` . City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: WAPPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ OTHER CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE MINNESOTA To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Ryan Schroeder, City Administrator From: Jennifer M. Levitt, P.E., City Engineer Howard Blin, Community Development Director Date: January 14, 2011 Re: 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit Background The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has published the draft permit under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) /State Disposal System (SDS) for the 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility Agency for public review and comment. The permit and program fact sheet are enclosed for your review. The permit enters a 30 -day public notice period which began on Monday, January 3, 2011. There will be a public infor- mational meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, January 26 at the Washington County South Service Center. The most significant change to the permit is a set of provisions that allow increased ground- water pumping at the 3M Cottage Grove site as part of remediation activities that will reduce PFos impacts to the Mississippi River. The contaminated groundwater will be treated with the best available technology (granulated activated carbon) before discharge to the river. The permit also sets stringent discharge limitations for PFOS and establishes a schedule of ac- tivities to meet the discharge limitations. Discussion The wastewater treatment facility at 3M is one of the most complex industrial permits in Minnesota. The current facility uses a granulate activated carbon (GAC) for treatment for all three phases of waste treatment. The water matrix for the facility can be seen on page 9 of the permit, and the treatment diagram is on page 10. Staff has spent considerable time discussing the details of the permit with the MPCA and our consultant, Tom Dye of Bonestroo. PFC Discharge On permit pages 23, 25, and 26, it provides for a limit in the discharge of PFOS both for a daily maximum and a monthly average for discharge from SD003, SD007, and WS001. Additionally, on page 20 and subsequent pages of the Program Fact Sheet, it discusses the water quality criterion to establish a rate of discharge of 7ng /L (7 ppt) for PFOS. This value is very low, lower than drinking water standards at 0.3 ppb or 300 ppt, because PFOS has a chronic criterion due to fish consumption advisory. This limit provides for greater protection of the environment than what currently exists today. 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit January 14, 2011 Page 2 of 3 The Special Requirements section of the permit outlines a compliance schedule for the imple- mentation of the new limits. It should be noted that a treatment facility is not something that will quickly be built to achieve immediate compliance with the new limits. The process as outlined provides 28 months for 3M to develop a plan through a Treatability Study. The study will need to include evaluation of a GAC treatment system, along with other technologies that may exist to help achieve compliance. Along with the study, a detailed bench scale pilot plan for GAC needs to be submitted. Also, 3M is looking at a temporary GAC treatment of the pump -out water from the Woodbury disposal site. The monitoring program that has been in place for the discharge points for PFCs remain in the permit. Recent Report on Violations In December 2010, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy published an Audit of Minnesota Wastewater Permits. In the report they noted discharge violations for 3M Cottage Grove. ( http:// www .mncenter.org /LinkCIick.aspx? fileticket= R8u5oALdZEQ %3d &tabid =38 Staff followed up with MPCA and below is the response to the violations: In reviewing the Detection/Violations Report in the MPCA's Delta database that was compiled from all of the monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) submitted by 3M- Cottage Grove Center (3M -CGC) for the entire 59 -month period of January 1, 2005 through November 30, 2010, only four (4) relatively small effluent violations were re- ported and three (3) of those four (4) were resolved with an MPCA Enforcement Action in 2006. (Please note that the DMR for December of 2010 is not due at MPCA Offices until 1/21/2011) In March of 2005, 3M -CGC exceeded their permitted Oil & Grease discharge limit of 10 mg /L when they discharged 12.8 mg /L. In May of 2006 and July of 2006 they exceeded their permitted maximum pH limit of 9.0 Standard pH Units when they discharged at 9.73 and 9.30 Standard pH Units respectively. 3M -CGC was inspected in September of 2006 and all three (3) of these exceedances were resolved in a Letter of Warning (LOM issued by the MPCA in October of 2006. The only yet unresolved permit discharge limit exceedance remaining occurred in June of 2008 when 3M -CGC exceeded their permitted Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) limit of 0.04 mg /L by discharging 0.05 mg /L TRC. This small sole remaining exceedance will be resolved in the next enforcement action that the MPCA takes against 3M -CGC, when warranted, however it is not serious enough to warrant a separate enforcement action at this time. In compliance with U.S. EPA requirements for major industrial facilities, by inspecting the 3M -CGC Facility annually since prior to 2005, the MPCA considers 3M- Cottage Grove Center to currently be in compliance with its NPDES Permit, with only these four (4) relatively small exceedances having occurred in the past 5 years. Gary Simonsen 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit January 14, 2011 Page 3 of 3 Pollution Control Specialist, Senior MPCA Staff spoke with both MPCA technical staff and our consultant to ensure that these indeed were minor violation issues as it relates to an industrial wastewater treatment facility. This water quality permit re- issuance will not affect 3M's ability to accept additional hazardous wastes for incineration at the Cottage Grove facility. Air quality and hazardous waste permits will be on public notice at a later date, and if necessary, an additional public meeting will be held to address hazardous waste issues. Recommendation The Environmental Commission on January 12, 2011 provided the following recommendations to the City Council for comment on the NPDES permit: 1. The only PFC chemical limited in the permit is PFOS. The recommendation is to request that additional discharge limits be placed on other PFC chemicals for maximum daily and average monthly rates. The suggested limits are the current Health Risk Limits (HRL) for drinking water: 1. PFOA 0.3ppb 2. PFBA 7 ppb 3. PFBS 7 ppb 2. The MPCA should establish a deadline with appropriate milestones for compliance with PFC discharge limits in the permit. 3. The Woodbury Disposal Site is noted to potentially have a temporary GAC treatment facility. The City supports the option for providing treatment at the Woodbury Disposal Site. It would be requested that the language of temporary be defined as long as the barrier wells are operational to contain the contaminate plume at the site. 4. The permit on page 30 Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations, 2. Special Requirements, 2.3 "The Permittee may request a change or reduction in monitoring frequency for fluorochemical analysis 12 months after permit issuance." It is recommended that monitoring for fluorochemicals be conducted monthly for the duration of the permit. The final recommendation would be to direct staff to draft a letter to the MPCA incorporating the above recommendations for submittal prior to the February 2, 2011 deadline for the Mayor's signature. x r Minnesota Pollution Control ALFencv STATE OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency INDUSTRIAL DIVISION PUBLIC NOTICE OF INTENT TO REISSUE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)/ STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (SDS) PERMIT MN0001449 Public Comment Period Begins: January 3, 2011 Public Comment Period Ends: February 2, 2011 Current Permit Issued: February 1, 2003 Current Permit Expiration Date: January 31, 2008 Name and Address of Permittee: Facility Name and Location: 3M Co 3M Cottage Grove Center PO Box 33131 10746 Innovation Rd St. Paul, MN 55133 -3331 T27N, R21 W, Section 27, Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota Receiving Water: Unnamed Intermittent Stream (Class 2B,3B,4A,4B,5,6 water) to the Mississippi River (Class 2B, 3C, 4A, 4B, 5 and 6) Description of Permitted Facility The 3M Cottage Grove Center facility (Facility) is located at SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 27 North, Range 21 West, Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota. The Facility manufactures a number of diverse products including, but not limited to, organic chemicals and polymers, adhesives, thermoplastic resins, thermosetting resins, phenolic resins, fine chemicals, polyester resins, epoxy resins, urethanes, curative organic compounds, ceramic solutions, fluorochemicals, abrasives, glass beads, pressure sensitive tapes, polymeric films and extrusions, and automotive products. The facility also frequently conducts "pilot' or research operations for development of new products. The 3M corporate hazardous waste incinerator is located at the Facility where hazardous wastes from other 3M plants in North America may be incinerated. Process wastewater generated from production facilities, scrubber wastewater from the incinerator, "pilot' production wastewaters, and sanitary wastewaters are all treated at the Facility wastewater treatment plant (W WTP). See draft permit for wastewater treatment plant details. The location of the Facility is shown on the attached map. Page 2 of 4 Permit MN0001449 Preliminary Determination on the Draft Permit The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Commissioner has made a preliminary determination to reissue this NPDES /SDS permit for a term of approximately five years. A draft permit and fact sheet are available for review at the MPCA office at the St. Paul address listed below and on- line at http: / /www.pca.state.mn.us /news /data/index.cfrn ?PN =1. A copy of the draft permit and fact sheet will be mailed to you if the MPCA receives your written or oral request at this office. If you have questions about this draft permit or the Commissioner's preliminary determination, please contact Scott B. Knowles, P. E., at 218- 302 -6651. Written Comments You may submit written comments on the conditions of the draft permit or on the Commissioner's preliminary determination. Written comments must include the following: 1. A statement of your interest in the permit application or the draft permit. 2. A statement of the action you wish the MPCA to take, including specific references to sections of the draft permit that you believe should be changed. 3. The reasons supporting your position, stated with sufficient specificity as to allow the Commissioner to investigate the merits of your position. Public Informational Meeting An informal public informational meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 26, 2011, from 6:30 to 9:00 PM. Location of the meeting is: Washington County South Service Center 13000 Ravine Parkway Cottage Grove, MN 55016 This informal meeting is to solicit public comment and statements on matters before the MPCA, and to help clarify and resolve issues. Petition for Contested Case Hearing You also may submit a petition for a contested case hearing. A contested case hearing is a formal evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge. Ir, accordance with Minn. R. 7000.1900, the MPCA will grant a petition to hold a contested case hearing if it finds that: (1) there is a material issue of fact in dispute concerning the application or draft permit; (2) the MPCA has the jurisdiction to make a determination on the disputed material issue of fact; and (3) there is a reasonable basis underlying the disputed material issue of fact or facts such that the holding of the contested case hearing would allow the introduction of information that would aid the MPCA in resolving the disputed facts in making a final decision on the draft permit. A material issue of fact means a fact question, as distinguished from a policy question, whose resolution could have a direct bearing on a final MPCA decision. A petition for a contested case hearing must include the following information: 1. A statement of reasons or proposed findings supporting the MPCA decision to hold a contested case hearing according to the criteria in Minn. R. 7000.1900, as discussed above. 2. A statement of the issues proposed to be addressed by a contested case hearing and the specific relief requested or resolution of the matter. Page 3 of 4 Permit MN0001449 In addition and to the extent known, a petition for a contested case hearing should also include the following information: t. A proposed list of prospective witnesses to be called, including experts, with a brief description of proposed testimony or summary of evidence to be presented at a contested case hearing. 2. A proposed list of publications, references, or studies to be introduced and relied upon at a contested case hearing. 3. An estimate of time required for you to present the matter at a contested case hearing. MPCA Decision You may submit a petition to the Commissioner requesting that the MPCA Citizens' Board (Board) consider the permit issuance. To be considered timely, the petition must be received by the MPCA by 4:30 p.m. on the date the public comment period ends, identified on page I of this notice. Under the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 116.02, subd. 6(4), the decision whether to issue the permit and, if so, under what terms will be presented to the Board for decision if. (1) the Commissioner grants the petition requesting the matter be presented to the Board; (2) one or more Board members request to hear the matter before the time the Commissioner makes a final decision on the permit; or (3) a timely request for a contested case hearing is pending. You may participate in the activities of the Board as provided in Minn. R. 7000.0650. The written comments, requests, and petitions submitted on or before the last day of the public comment period will be considered in the final decision on this permit. If the MPCA does not receive written comments, requests, or petitions daring the public comment period, MPCA staff as authorized by the Board, will make the final decision on the draft permit. Comments, petitions, and/or requests must be submitted in writing on or before the end date of the public comment period identified on page 1 of this notice to: Scott B. Knowles, P. E. Industrial Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 525 South Lake Avenue, Ste. 400 Duluth, MN 55802 Page 4 of 4 Permit MN0001449 AttachmerltXl. 3M Cottage Grove Topographic Map m ¢ a+t at as aau ct IA gal STATE OF MINNESOTA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Industrial Division National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)l State Disposal System (SDS) Permit MN0001449 PERMITTEE: 3M Company FACILITY NAME: 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility RECEIVING WATER: Mississippi River (Class 2B,3C,4A,4B,5,6 water) CITY OR TOWNSHIP: Cottage Grove COUNTY: Washington ISSUANCE DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: The state of Minnesota, on behalf of its citizens through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), authorizes the Permittee to operate a disposal system at the facility named above and to discharge from this facility to the receiving water named above, in accordance with the requirements of this permit. The goal of this permit is to protect water quality in accordance with Minnesota and U.S. statutes and rules, including Minn. Star. chs. 115 and 116, Minn. R. chs. 7001, 7049, 7050, 7053, 7060, 7090.3000 through 7090.3080, and the U.S. Clean Water Act. This permit is effective on the issuance date identified above, and supersedes the previous permit that was issued for this facility on February 1, 2003. This permit expires at midnight on the expiration date identified above. Signature: Jeff Udd, Acting Supervisor for The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Water Quality Permits Unit Land and Water Quality Permits Section Industrial Division Submit DMRs to: Attention: Discharge Monitoring Reports Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd N St Paul, MN 55155 -4194 Submit Other WQ Reports to: Attention: WQ Submittals Center Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd N St Paul, MN 55155 -4194 Questions on this permit? • For DMR and other permit reporting issues, contact: Linda Brooks, 651-757-2246. o For specific permit requirements or permit compliance status, contact: Gary A. Simonsen, 651- 757 -2726. a General permit or NPDES program questions, contact: MPCA, 651- 282 -6143 or 1- 800 - 657 -3938. 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194; 651 - 296 -6300 (voice); 651- 282 -5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth ® Brainerd ® Detroit Lakes a Marshall m Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer o Printed on recycled paper containing at least 10% fibers from paper recycled by consumers DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 2 Permit MN0001449 Table of Contents Page Permitted Facility Description Topographic Map of Permitted Facility Raw Water Flow Schematic Wastewater Treatment Plant Flow Schematic Activated Carbon System Flow Schematic Non - Contact Cooling Water Flow Schematic Summary of Stations and Station Locations Limits and Monitoring Requirements Chapter 1. Special Requirements 2. Operation and Maintenance 3. Application for Permit Reissuance Chapter 9. Intervention Limits 1. Sampling and Analyses 2. Special Requirements 3. Reporting 10 11 12 13 14 28 28 29 29 30 31 31 31 32 32 32 32 32 32 33 33 34 34 34 35 37 37 37 37 37 37 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 40 41 41 41 42 1. Compliance Schedule Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations 1. Special Requirements 2. Sampling Location 3. Surface Discharges 4. Winter Sampling Conditions 5. Priority Pollutants - Monitoring Requirements 6. Discharge Monitoring Reports Chapter 3. Waste Stream Stations 1. Sampling Location 2. DMR Submittal Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 1. Prohibited Discharges 2. Toxic Substance Reporting 3. Hydrotest Discharges 4. Mobile and Rail Equipment Service Areas 5. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 6. Application for Permit Reissuance 7. Chemical Additives 8. New Proposed Dewatering Chapter 5. Domestic Wastewater (non -POTW) 1. Operator Certification 2. Bypass Structures 3. Stabilization Pond Requirements 4. General Requirements Chapter 6. Industrial Water Treatment/Cooling Process Water 1. Authorization Chapter 7. Ground Water Pumpout 1. New Proposed Contaminated Ground Water Pumpout Chapter 8. Industrial Pond System 1. Authorization 2. Operation and Maintenance 3. Application for Permit Reissuance Chapter 9. Intervention Limits 1. Sampling and Analyses 2. Special Requirements 3. Reporting 10 11 12 13 14 28 28 29 29 30 31 31 31 32 32 32 32 32 32 33 33 34 34 34 35 37 37 37 37 37 37 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 40 41 41 41 42 JRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 10. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing —Acute 1. General Requirements 2. Species and Procedural Requirements 3. Quality Control and Report Submittals 4. Positive Toxicity Result for WET 5. WET Data and Test Acceptability Criteria (TAC) Submittal 6. Permit Re- opening for WET 7. Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement Definitions Chapter 11. Facility Specific Definitions 1. Definitions Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements DRAFT Page 3 Permit MN0001449 42 42 42 43 43 43 43 43 44 44 44 44 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Summary of Required Submittals PFC Treatability Alternative Identification Plan Chapter 1. 1.2 PFC Treatability Study Updates PFC Treatability Study GAC Bench Scale Pilot Work Plan GAC Bench Scale Pilot Study updates GAC Bench Scale Pilot Study Plans and Specs for WWTP /PFC Upgrade Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) Priority Pollutants Monitoring Report Application for Permit Reissuance Pond Performance Evaluation Report Pond Evaluation Progress Report Intervention Limits Evaluation Report Chapter 1.1.8 Chapter 1.1.3 Chapter 1.1.4 Chapter 1.1.8 Chapter 1.1.4 Chapter 1.1.10 Chapters 2 & 3 Chapter 2 Chapters 4 & 8 Chapter 8.2.1 Chapter 8.2.3 Chapter 9.3.1 DRAFT DRAFT Page 4 Permit MN0001449 Due 180 days following permit issuance Due Quarterly Due (see Chapter 1.1.9) Due (see Chapter 1.1.4) Due Quarterly Due (see Chapter 1. 1.9) Due (see Chapter 1.1.10) Due the 21" of each month Due Semi - annually Due 180 days before permit expiration Due 180 days following permit issuance Due Annually Due w/ DMR Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Chapter 10 Due Annually DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 5 Permit MN0001449 Facility Description The 3M Cottage Grove Center facility (Facility) is located at SE 114 of Section 27, Township 27 North, Range 21 West, Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota. The Facility manufactures a number of diverse products including, but not limited to, organic chemicals and polymers, adhesives, thermoplastic resins, thermosetting resins, phenolic resins, fine chemicals, polyester resins, epoxy resins, urethanes, curative organic compounds, ceramic solutions, fluorochemicals, abrasives, glass beads, pressure sensitive tapes, polymeric films and extrusions, and automotive products. The facility also frequently conducts "pilot' or research operations for development of new products. The 3M corporate hazardous waste incinerator is located at the Facility where hazardous wastes from other 3M plants in North America may be incinerated. Process wastewater generated from production facilities, scrubber wastewater from the incinerator, "pilot' production wastewaters, and sanitary wastewaters are all treated at the Facility wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The WWTP consists of 3 separate treatment trains designated as phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3. A separate system is used for non - contact cooling waters. The phase I train treats primarily inorganic process wastewaters and consists of a bar screen, & screw pumps (2), grit chamber, pH adjustment /neutralization, flash mixing tanks, and five (5) parallel flocculation/settling tanks. Phase 1 effluent is discharged to pond cell "C" for flow equalization. The phase 2 system treats primarily organic process wastewaters and sanitary wastewater from 3M and Cogentrix (a non 3M electrical generation station). Phase 2 treatment train consists of a bar screen and screw pumps, a two cell flow equalization tank w/ pH adjustment, an activated sludge system (w/ an anoxic basin preceding an aeration basin), and final clarification for biological solids removal. Effluent from phase 2 is discharged to the five (5) parallel flocculation/settling tanks in the phase 1 treatment train. The phase 3 system treats scrubber wastewater (inorganic soot, ash and acids scrubbed from the combustion process) from the 3M hazardous waste incinerator. The phase 3 treatment train consists of pH neutralization tanks /system, bar screen and lift pumps, polymer addition/mixing, and particulate precipitation /clarification. A limited amount of wastewaters from other 3M facilities may also be treated at the Facility WWTP. Pretreated landfill leachate from the 3M designated cell at the SKB Industrial Waste Facility in Rosemount is also discharged to the headworks of the phase 1 system at a rate not to exceed 55,000 gpd. The leachate originates from a containment cell specifically built to receive waste soils from 3M sites in Washington County; which require disposal under various remediation activities. The pretreatment system, prior to leachate discharge to the Facility phase I wastewater treatment system, consists of two ten (10) foot diameter by fourteen (14) foot side wall carbon vessels. Each vessel has approximately 20,000 pounds of regenerated granular activated carbon (GAC). Overall height, including associated piping is approximately twenty two (22) feet. Carbon adsorber depth is eight (8) feet (each) and filter surface area is approximately 78 sq. ft. (each). The pretreatment system also includes two 300 gpm, 25.7 TDH feed pumps, associated piping & valves, electrical, mechanical and appurtenances. Discharges of liquids associated with remediation construction activities may also be discharged to the pretreatment system (prior to discharge to the phase I wastewater treatment system headworks) at a total combined rate of 55,000 gpd, or less. Sludges produced from the WWTP are discharged to two (2) gravity sludge thickening tanks followed by belt filter presses. Sludges generated from the phase 3 treatment system are disposed of at a hazardous waste landfill. Phase 1 & 2 sludges are disposed of at a non - hazardous waste landfill. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 6 Permit MN0001449 Non - contact cooling waters used at the facility are discharged to a non - contact cooling water retention pond prior to discharge. This pond also receives stormwater runoff from certain plant areas on site. This non- contact /stormwater basin also receives non - contact cooling waters from the Cogentrix co- generation facility located adjacent to the 3M facility. A portion of the non - contact water (prior to the non - contact water /stormwater basin) is pumped back to Cogentrix for non - contact cooling water makeup. Phase 1, 2, and 3 effluents all receive tertiary treatment from a GAC treatment system which initiated operation in 2004. The Phase 1 & 2 GAC system was designed to remove acute toxicity and alkyl phenol ethoxylates, which may have contributed to acute toxicity, in process wastewater effluent which existed prior to 2004. In addition, this system was designed to remove specific organic compounds to meet the Organic Chemical, Plastics and Synthetic fibers discharge limitations listed in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) industrial regulations 40 CFR pt. 414. The phase 3 GAC system was designed for removal of mercury from incinerator scrubber wastewater. As noted above, phase 1 & 2 effluents undergo flow equalization in pond cell "C" prior to GAC filtration. Pond cell "C" is 13 feet deep with 3:1 side slopes and a 10 foot working depth. It is divided into north and south sections by an earthen dike, and liquid is controlled through a culvert. Effluent from the phase I clarifiers is discharged to the north portion of the pond. Overflow from the north section to the south section is discharged through the culvert, with the inlet elevation of the culvert set to maintain 10 feet of water in the north section. A concrete sump receives effluent from the south section; and pond cell "C" effluent is subsequently discharged to the GAC building for tertiary treatment. Phase 3 effluents are discharged directly to a separate phase 3 GAC tertiary filtration system without flow equalization. Phase 1& 2 carbon effluent supplies the backwash water and water required during carbon replacement for both GAC treatment systems (phase 1 & 2, and phase 3). Phase I & 2 effluents are chlorinated and pH adjusted; and combined with pH adjusted phase 3 GAC effluents prior to monitoring from outfall SD001. Non - contact cooling waters and stormwater (outfall SD002) do not see tertiary treatment prior to combining with SD001 for ultimate discharge from SD003. The phase 1 & 2 GAC tertiary treatment system consists of nine (9) dual columns (18 individual vessels). Phase 3 GAC tertiary treatment system consists of four (4) dual columns (8 individual vessels). GAC tertiary treatment system design criteria is as follows: each vessel ** to top of associated piping - including backwash system * ** for each dual column system * * ** with one vessel in backwash mode Phase 1 & 2 Phase 3 Peak design flow (mgd) 2.6 1.0 COD (mg/L) 160 TSS (mg/L) 16 7.5 BOD (mg/L) 24 <6 TOC (mg/L) 50 <50 Vessel diameter (ft) 10 10 Vessel side wall height (ft) 12 12 Mass of carbon ( #)* 20,000 20,000 Overall system height (ft) ** 22 22 Configuration* * * "lead/lag" "lead/lag" Max. column loading rate (gpm /s.f) * * ** 3 3 Empty Bed Contact Time (min) * * ** 44.3 43.2 each vessel ** to top of associated piping - including backwash system * ** for each dual column system * * ** with one vessel in backwash mode DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 7 Permit MN0001449 Remediation Design /Response Action Plan Extraction Well Discharges (Outfall SD007) This permit also authorizes the discharge of groundwater from the Extended Pilot Well Pump Test ( EPWPT) for the Remedial Design/Response Action Plan (RD /RA Plan), which was previously approved by the MPCA Remediation Division on February 1, 2010. The intent of the EPWPT is to characterize groundwater responses to remediation activities required under the RD /RA Plan. Effluent from the EPWPT and cove related remediation activities will be regulated pursuant to designated outfalls SD003, SD007, and WS001; and shall comply with specific textual requirements as detailed in Chapter 9 of this permit. Peak flow from the EPWPT is not expected to exceed 2.88 mgd. A temporary GAC filtration system is proposed for the EPWPT. The temporary GAC filtration system is proposed to consist of three (3) dual columns (6 individual vessels). GAC temporary treatment system design criteria is as follows: Peak design flow (mgd) Mass of carbon ( #)* Configuration* Max. column loading rate (gpm /s.f) Empty Bed Contact Time (min.) Temnorary GAC Svstem 2.88 20,000 "lead /lag" 8.5 15 x each vessel ** for each dual column system Effluent from the GAC temporary treatment system will be discharge from outfall SD007. Outfalls SD001, SD002, and SDO07 combine for ultimate discharge through outfall SD003. EPWPT activities are outlined in the 3M Cottage Grove Site EPWPT Work Plan Dated May 2010. The location of designated monitoring stations is specified on the attached "Summary of Stations and Station Locations" report. The location of the facility is shown on the attached topographical map. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 8 Permit MN0001449 Topographic Map of Permitted Facility is Attachment XP. 3M Cottage Grove Topographic Map DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Raw Water Flow Schematic Aftachment n-A J Noce indi,idml Sax Ann, wav kuve mullipl. s,nvzr dia&", m rerx,n,mk major pm, ra wwr, DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 9 PermitMN0001449 3M cottage GMve water Schematic DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Wastewater Treatment Plant Flow Schematic DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Page 10 Permit MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Granular Activated Carbon System Flow Schematic DRAFT Page 11 Permit MN0001449 / Grove 'Activated / / w ICad Lag U' CaA va l;uij Vs Cud,,* Vah W Sarnp irig Port Location Influent Effluent . Unit Final Samp)f; Port Phase I Im pbagv III: v+Icm DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Non - Contact Cooling Water Flow Schematic Attachment A. 3M Cottage Grove Basic. Flow Diagram SDO02 DRAFT Page 12 Permit 9N0001449 On Site Production 3M CG Stormwater Woodbury'Disposat Wells 1 -5 Rulioff I I Site Water I I Non- Contact Cooling. 3M CG 0 -1000 grim Sump Facility Facility 3M CG Flume s0ooz 3 Contac � sto gPm Stomlwater 3M C Sam 2000 —150 gpm 3M CG Pbase III CO, Makeup Water Permit Issued: Summary of . Stations Page 13 Permit Expires: Permit fl: MN0001449 Surface Discharge Stations Station Twe of Station Local Name PLS Location SD001 Effluent To Surface Water Process & Sanitary Effluent Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 21 West SD002 Effluent To Surface Water NC Cooling & Storm Runoff Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 21 West SD003 Effluent To Surface Water Outfalis SDOOI+ SDO02 + SDO07 Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 21 West SD004 Bypass, Permitted Woodbury Groundwater Emergency NW Quarter of Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 21 West SD005 Bypass, Permitted SD007 Effluent To Surface Water Waste Stream Stations Station Type of Station WS001 Interval Waste Stream Bypass Stormwater Emergency Bypass NW Quarter of Section 35, Township 27 North, Range 21 West Remediation Extraction Wells Local Name PLS Location between "lead /lag" pair of carbon vessels in series Permit issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Pa 14 Permit Axpires: Permit 4' MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 Parameter Limn I Lunus - Lima r ryye � I Guecuve rci mu ioaurpre i,1- P9L °O "�y O -I 1,1,1- T'nchloroeihane 21 IF ug /L Calend th AverageII Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Crab �� 1 x Month d II, 1,1- Trichloroethane II 54 I ug /L II Daily Maximum I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec 6 Grab 1 x Month 11,1,2 Trichloroethane IF 21 II ug/L I Calendar Month Average I Jun, Sep, Dec II Grab 1 x Month 7,1,2- Triohloroethane I� S4 l uglL Deity Maximum I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I Grab 1 x Month Dichloroethane I( 22 I( r, iq/L I � Calendar Month Averago I I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Il Grab f 1 x Mo nth r 11,1- _- I l,l- Dichloroethane 59 __ - u /L Daily Maximum i t Mar, Tun, Sep, Uec Grab I f g 1 x Month 11,1- Diohloroethylene (Vinylidene 'Ir 16 ug/L h Calendar Month Average Ii Max, Jun, Sep, Dec It Grab I ` I x Month f chloride) 11 � � II 11.1- ;I 25 I rag /L M m mu I�Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec li Grab ixmonth i c ) 1 1 1,2,4- Trichlorobenzene I I 68 I _ u /L� Calen M nth Average 'I Mar, Jun, Sep, Decd Gab g JI F Month - s ne � � g Daily Maximum 11 �I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec 1i Grab t x Month �g o 'I 2 -Drchl benzene I( 77� I[ g ' Calendar Month Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab u /L� I x Month = = J _ 1 1,2 7Jichlorobenzeno 163 h ug /L II ` — Daily Maximum — � FMar, Jun, Sep, Dec i Crab 1 x Month L __ __ I 1,2- Dichloroethane 68 L� J I , 1 ug /L I Calendar Month Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab �I I x Month 11,2 - Dichloroethane 211 if ug /1, 1 Daily Maximum Mar, .Jun, Sep, Dec `�- Grab I x Month '1 2- Uichloroeihylene (trans -) I I 21 ug /L Calendar Month Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I� Grab ll 1 x Month 1 1,2- Dichloroeth �1 ene trans- S4 III` � u /L Dail Maximum Mar, Tun Se Dec F Crab I � I i! Mont -- 12- Bwhloropropana i5a _ -- h Average Mar Jun Se Dec Grab ug /L II Mont g l p, h t x Month ll 1,2- Dichloropropane Ir 230 II ug/L I Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec it Grab 1 x Month f1,3- Dichlorobenzene 31 I II ug/L 1�Calendar Mouth Average 1 Jun, Sep, Dec Crab I x Month �� 3- Dichlorobenzene 44�� if ug/L 11� Daily Maximum May Jun, Sep, Dec �I Grab I x Month —� 11,3- Dichloropropylene 11 29 ug/L alendar Month Averago Mar, Jrm, Sep. Dec l Grab '� - 1 x Month d 11,3- Dichloro ro lene 44 p py 1 � ag/L 11 Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I Grab � t x Month �� 1 1,4- Dichlorobenzene 15 1 u Calendar Month Average '1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab g/L - I x Month Ili L., 1 1,4 - Dichlorobenzene 28 u g /L Uatl 7 Maximum Mar, Jun, Se p , Dec Grab i I M I 2,4- Dichlorophenol I' 39 ug /L 'I Calendar Month Average 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec it Grab i 1 x Month i2,4- Dichlorophenol II 112 ug /L Ii Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I � Grab 1 x Mont h I L 12,4- Bimethylphenol 'I 18 ug /L II Calendar Month Average 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec r Grab 1 x Month I2,4- Dimetbylphenol j 36 i� ug /L 1 1 Daily Maxrmam I! Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I i Crab - �� 1 x Month j Permit Issued. Limit- and Monitoring Requirements Page 15 Pennit Expires: Permit 4: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below, SIB 001 — p — ar — ameter �1.umk7u i�s A Euluni �Type � ' ample T Notes — - - - - - - - -- - - - 2,4-Dinitrophenol P, - I -_ _�[ — Cal� - nd - a� - Kfonth — Avela - g e - �f-mqr..Iu - n - ,,Se Dec 1 Grab �L I �Xmonh� x Ont 2,4-Dinithopherrol 123 ----------------- M u 4 ar,hrn,Sep,Dec 1, Grab I X Month 11 2,4-Diniormoduene I f3 ----------- - - 1 cra at, Jun, Sep, Dec I i drah L_ CalendarmonthAv --- M I x Month) 2,4-Dinitrotoluciie 285 _ ---------- - ----- u !I Dail 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab I X month ,2,6-Dinitrotoluene 255 ver j Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec u Calendar Month A II Grab I X month 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 641 11 __ ug/L Dail Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Crab IF x \'out I _x Chlorophenol -- - 31 I - Average' Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab u C endar Month I month - - - - - - - - - - - - O.-Chlorrophimol - - - - - I F gg IF ug/L Dail Maximum on, Sep, Dec Grab I x Month F L - - - - - - - - - - - - ni/ - L --- F Calendar Month Average 1 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Gr�ab 2- - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 I x Month - - - - - - - - - - 2-Nitrophenol - - - - - - - - - - - �_ - 69 - ug/L Dail Maximum Mar, Sun, Sep, Dec Grab I , M L - ]I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol - - - - - - - - - i 78 g /L I Month Avera Nor, Jan, Sep, Dec 1 Grab I I _XMonth__ (2-Meth - -- - - - - - - - - - - I 4,6-Dimt_ro-_o-_cr_esoI[ 277 Daily Maximum I� Mar, Jun. Sep, Dec ;I Grab I x Month (2-Meth r pbenol) [ug/]Lll ug/L onth Average 'I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab I F Calendar M I I _J I I x Mont I --- �-Nitrophcnol I - 72 - - - - - - - - - - - - 4-Nitrophercol - - 1 1 124 I� aximurn - - Grab u Daily M Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec �F I _x MondvF1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Acenaphithene - -- - 22 ug/ IF Calendar Month Avera Mar,Jun, Sep, Dec I' Grab ir Lit 1x u Dail Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec j Grab Aceimplithene - 59 I X Month Acenaphthylene I, 22 u 11 Calendar Month Avera Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab 11 1 x Month Acenaphthylene I 59 ug/ - - - - - - - Jun, Sep, Dec - Grab 1 Dail Maximum Mar, I - Month X �ciylcmit_rikc 96 [691 Avera Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec �Grab F I x Momh ,A.r 242 Fug/L_ F — — Daily 'Maximum I Mar, Ju.�Sep�F Grab F_ixmoniJrF____ -- - - - - - - - - - -- - Anthracene _JL - - - 227 - IL - - - - - - - - - - u � C Month —Average T _F Grabi Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I x Month I fAnthrac - - - - - - - - - - - r5r) Dail Maximum 1 1 Mar, Jan, Sep, be '.__G_r_ab_____`. I I I I x Month I - - - - - - - Antimony, Total (as Sin - - - - Monitor - - - - - - - - u 11 Calendar Month Avera Jan-Dec I� 24-Ilour rhrw]� 2 x Month rd.V 0 �1 COMPOS-Ite-ji Antimony, Total (as Slid Monitor - - - - - - - - _u Daily Maximum 11 Jan-Dec 11 11 24-Hour Flow L 2 x Month Only_ I j L - - - - �rsenic, Total (as As) Monitor u Daily Maximum Jan-Dec 1 2ii]-Hour f1cov I Benzene 37 - A - ug - /L - _11' Calendar - Month - Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dee Grab I x Month I 'Benzene 136 u Dail Maximum I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab I x - Month-) Bertzmamaithricane 22 u Calendar Mont h Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab J� j I x - - - - - - Permit Issued. Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 16 Permit Expires Permit k MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 �� 2 � Notes i u x Month � a rene � 1 x __ -- 1 x Mona} ' 1 23 uglL 11 Calendar Month Average ' Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec ' Grab 1 x Month ! 4 _ - .....- j� _- -�1 _ - - -._. Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 17 Permit Expires: Permit #'. MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 Parameter d, Lim Ij Units_ LiinIt e LlCffectivePeriold� �g Fregae_nc� Notes y � -- Chr sene 1 - -- -� 22 u /L II Calendar Month Avera e I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab g g II... t x Month Chrysene 59 u l Dail y ma Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab - I x Month 'Copper, Total (as Cu) - 1 68 I it I 1 ug/L i Daily Maximum I� Jan -Dec 1 � 24-I lour Flow 1 C _.__ om osite I_ I x Month cyanide, Free (Amen To Chlorination) Monitor kg /day Daily Maxnnum It Jan - Dec 24 Flow 1 x Month Onl II 1_ C omposite I x Month V 'Cyanide, Free (Amen To Chlorination) � Monitor 1 ng /I. 'I Daily Maximum 11 Jan -Dec 1 -Hour Fiow 1 Com osite r Cyanide, Total (as CN) 420 11 ug /L Ali Calendar Month Average lI Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec 1 124 -Hour Flow( I x Month j Cyanide, Total (as CN) 1200 �I_Composite I� ug/L 1 m 1 Daily Maximu Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec 24 -Hour Flow i 1 x Month 1 I I 1 n �I Ii 1' - -. -_ L! Diethyl phthalate - - 81 _Composite - _ fu Calendar Month Average 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec �� Grab glI� I x Month 1 l I —._ I L — -- 1 _ Diethyl phthalate I II 203 ii ug /L II Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab ^� 1 x Month Din tiryl phthalate - ' 19 i t IL.— Av li Mar, Tun. Sep, Dec - G - J ug/L �I Calendar Month erage rab I x — Month � __ _ f 7 _ - -- _ _ l Dimethyl phthalate X 1 1 47 r� it 1 ug/L I Daily Maximum i Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec IF Ga II l li 1 x Month Di-n -butyl phthalate 27 Fug 11 Calendar Month Average Mar. Jun Sep, Dec Grab _ 1 x Month 1 Di-n -butyl phthalate - i t 57 - - '� llF,/1 Daily Maximum i Mar, Jun Sep, Dec 1, Grab - - rl x Month L Ethylbenzene IF 32 1 I ug /L_I Calendar Month Average 11 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec � Grab III x Month 1 L A _- -- - _ Ethylbenzene �� 108 �� - _ �� ug/L Daily Maximum jl Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab - -- i x Month f r Fecal Colifonn, MPN or Membrane i 200 I #100m1 Calendar M nGeomethcil l Apr-Oct 1 Grab L—� � L i _- 2x Weak 'Fi 44.SC � _ Flow Monitor _ �� e '� Jan-Doc Measurement, m d III Calendar Month Average Ill I x Day O nl y ;_Continuous, Flow 1 Monitor - mid nt Maximum Jan -Dec Measurement, ' mid Calendar Month I x Day l Out Out 1 � I LContinuous �� Flow Monitor I MG II Calendar Month Total Tan -Dec f Measurensent� 11 Continuous 1 x Day 1 -. Only- I I IIF7uoranthene ,� _ It ug/L it Calendar Month Average (Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec II Grab 1 x Mouth IFluoranthene 6K l � ug /L�I Daily Maximu�� Mar, Tun, Sep, Dec II Grab �P x Month i Flail -.. , 22 I L _ 11 == I Mar, Jun-Deo i ,� Grab ugfh Calendar Month Averag , Sop - j _... 1 x �� I �� rhimene 1 1 59 I 1 ri 1 Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec II Grab ' Ix Month p I TH exachlorobenzene it 15 I� ug /L Calendar Month Average I Mar. Jun, Sep, Dec Grab 1 x Month I I i Ilexachlorobenzene 1 28 i� u L Dad ° Maxnnum Mar, Jun Sep Dec �� Grab Calendar 17 x Month 1 Hexaohlorobutadiene 20 I u�L I Month Average e I g 1 g l Mar, Jun, Sep, Doc I Grab 11 1 x Month _ - __... _.. iexac 'II 49 n €l I. Dail - maximum - Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec h Grab I It t x Month Hexaehlorobutadiene 1 hloroethane I f h 21 1� ug /L i Calendar Month Average Mar, .tun, Sep, Dec Grab �� 1 x Month ' i If 'I ��L - Permit Issued, Limits and Monitoring Requirements Pagers Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 Parameter i Limit i� Units j( Limit T ype _ � ' Effective Period I SamR11eT ypq'jFr equency] Notes Hexachloroeflrane r 54 l ug/L �i Daily Maximum I � Mar, Jun, Sep -Dec Grab 1 x Month P Lead, Total (as Pb) T 320 J l L ug/L Calendar Month Average Jars -Dec 1 24 -Hour Flo w� � Composite 1 x Month Lead, Total (as Ph) 690 � to /l, II Daily Maximum Jan -Dec �I 24 -11our Flow II _ 1 x Month iI i I M onitor F g Cale rage 11 Jan-Dec Grab I x Month Hg) _ �� G - Mercury, Total (as I� 200 ngUl Daily Maximum Ja -Dec Grab 1 x Month - Meth ( ) Calendar Mo nth Average ll Sep, Dec II Grab g g r j ] x Month � _ , = _J _ I l L - Methyl Chloride Ch loromethane Y ( ) 190 _ _ awl, Mar, Jun II Y , Sep, Dec Grab I x Month I M e th ylene de 40 �� ug /L Calendar Month Average 1l Mar, Jun., Sep, Dec 1 , Grab =� � 1 1 x Month Bich than L _- L t ( ) L Onl f Methylene Chloride it 89 � ug /L De — Daily Maximum I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec l Grab 1 x Month �Dichloromethane) i L x Mowlr I � m (Naphthalene ( 22 ug /L r Calendar Month Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Cr rab I, 1 x Month 59 Nickel, Total (as Ni) �I 480 u ug/L Daily Maximum Jan -Dec 24 -Hour Flow 111 x x Quarter I t uoibenzcne 27 u ug /L 11 Calendar Month Average Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Crab I I x Month 68 n �-_ i x Month � 2 mg /L Calendar Month Average w Jan -Dee 24 -Hour Flo 2 x Week P I J -. , —�1 J I mg /L Daily Average 11 Jan -Dec Grab 2 2 x Week 1 (Hexane Extraction_, r 'PFBA (p erfluorobutanoic Moni T r 1 x Month Only IL FBA (pertluorobutanoic acid) ,Monitor m mg /day I�� Daily Maximum Jan -Decd Grab �I 1 1 x Month Only PFBS (perfluorobutane sulfonate) M nnit > n ng/L i t Calendar Month Average �� Jan -Dec Grab li I I x Month j Onl f PI'BS (perfluorobutane sulfonate) I Monitor I mg/day 1 Daily Maximum Jan - Dec Grab 1 �I x x Mowlr I � m i _ PF O _ - _ PFDA (perfluorodecanoicacrd) � Momtm m mg /day Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab 1 1 x Month j IPFDoA (perfluorododecanoic acid) IM oni�JI n ng LLl, Calendar Month Average I Jan -Dec l� Grab 1 1 - 1 x x Month PFDoA (perfluorododecanoic acid) Monitor 11 m mg/day I Daily Maximum Tan -Dec Grab 1 1 x Month L _ �_ I - - _ O ng /L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab 1 1 x Month Onl Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 19 Permit Expires' Permit!{'. MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 Parameter 9 Limit l� Units 11 Limit Ty pe ILEffective Period ISample'fyji IYir equency� Notes _- - _ - PFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) Monitor _ - _ ng� 1 1 Calendar Month Average I Jan -Dec 'L Grab 1 x Month ' 11 1 - - _ -Only_ IPFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) I I Monitor I� _ - -- -_ mg/day Daily Maximun II Jan -Doo II Grab 1 x MouUi I Only . - I PFNA (perfluorononanoic acid) Monitor 1 ng/L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec ' Grab x Month L OnlY � l .- - - -. __ - - -_ -_ - - -. PFNA (perfluorononanoic acid) 1 Monitor ,1 -. mg /day j Daily Maximum - ' Jan -Dec 1� Grab �l L_ � I I x Month ; _ IPFOA ( pertuorooctanoic acid) 1; Monitor 1 -1 _ Grab ng /L 11 Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec oo 1 x Onl FOA ( perfluorooetanoc acid) Moni io (� �' i I_ _ y Daily Maximum Jan -Dec I I I Grab tI _. m 1 I x Month � L _ _I /gn L Calendar Month Average Tan -Dec Grab b�l 11 x Month e sultbnate) r PFOS (perfluorooctan Monitor (.. -. �rY 1 Onl If _ ___ V - -_ ) �� PFOS perfluorooctane sulfonate I Monitor B Y 1 ill _ _ m /da Dad Maximum Jen -Dec 1 Grab �� Mon h — G PFOSA ( perflu orooctane sulfonmrde)� Mo uitor ng/L ll Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab I x Month I 1 l i , on , I II - ' - PFOSA (perfluorooctane sulfonamide) 1l Monitor I( mg/ y D lvia�' - Maximum Jan -Dec 1 Grab 7 x Month i 1 - it OnIY - -._ - 1 i I - - JFPeA (perfluoropentanoic acid) IL Monitor ng /L II Calendar Month Average II Jan -Dec Grab 11 l - 1 x Month 1 I Only -._ -. D aily — Grab �x month + PrPeA ( c O nl I - -._ _. I- D - �IF 1PFUnA(perfluoroundecaiazo c acid) MOnI ndar onth Averag= e Jan cc Grab n�day Cale .M 1 x Month I Z�r PFUnA (perfluoroundecanoic acid) 1, Monitor _ mg /day II Daily Maximum 1 Jan -Dec it Grab 11 - I x Mond, I I IpFi, Field 9.0 'I SU ' Calendar Month Maximum l Jan -Dec Measurement, LI x Day 2 I I Continuous _ - _ Su 1 Calendars Minimum I J an -Dec 1 l Mea ntinuo � $ Field 6A _ l x Day tl 2 s I Co ntinuous 'I �_, ,,_i _ 1 22 I� _ Month II Mar, J g g Jun, Sep Dec u /L I Calendar 1 Grab lr 1 x Month 59 l u L t Dad y Maximum Mar, .Jun, Sep, Dec ° I� Grab Ir l x Month III I Phenanthrene ' - (Phenol )� t c IL - - u '; Calendar Month Avera e II Mar, .hm, Se , Dec I� Grab S g P I, I x Month [ 7 Phenol 26 I I u /L Il Dail Maximum Mar Jun, Se Dec i �� Y , R � Grab l l x Month I 11 J 1 Phenols, Total 'I 1.5 I1 kg /day 1 Calendar Month Average San -Dec li Grab 2 x Week 1 1 .I ,Phenols, Total 3 �� 6 -�� kg /day I Daily Maximum 'I Jan _ -Dec b -;� 2 x Week Phosphorus, Dissolved Monitor l I mg /L 11 Calendar Month Average I Tan -Dec 1124 -Hour Fow 1 x Month L_ OrdY_ ___-L - i _ COmposit e ] ( Phosphorus, Dissolved 1 Monitor ' kg/day II Daily Maximum Jan -Dec 24 -Hour Flowl 1 xMmstO On1Y -J I � L I. - !Phosphorus, Total as P ) 1 Monitor _. I k da 1l Calendar Month Avera _g e I Jan -Dec 1�4-Hour Flow l x Weck �OOnh J _ b Composit j _ (Phosphorus, Total (as P) it or Monit iiI � J O�I i lug /L 'j Calendar Month Average �I Tan -Dec l 24 -Hour Flow �� I x Week d I O composite ' ' Total (as P) 1 Monitor Icg/day 1 Daily Maximum 1 Jan-Dec I(24 -11our Flow I x Week J Il Composite _� Phosphorus, Total (as P) I Monitor it mg /L Daily Maximum 1 ' Jan -Dec 1.24 -1-lour Flow 1 1 _ I1 I x Week 11 Only ,I J i Composite_ 1 J Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 20 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 001 Parameter Limit li LmYS Limit Type_ Iru ective Pe for d sam Type lFrequeneyi Notes -- Pyrene I� 25 —I� II �L ug L Calendar Moral, Average I I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I� Grab II II L I x Month 1 Pyrene ,� 67 _T_ ug/L Daily Maximum , I Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec I� Grab 1 I L _ 1 x Month ( as Monito kg / l Cale M Month ( Sele ni um, III Total Se 6 , Max ual Jan -Dec 24- or Flow I _ iL Co m p osite 40 Silver, Total as A monitor ( Maximum Calendar Week r I�O IC I Solids Total Suspended TSS 545 pen ( ) I� kg /clay I� Calenda Month Average Jan -Dec 1 12 1 4-IIouiFlow Week (�x r Composit F I�� Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) I 30 ` mg/L Calendar Month Average , �, Jan -Dec 24-I Iour Flow Composi x Week — — Calendar Month Average II — ,_ Jan Dec 2 }low 1 x M _ Solids, Total Sus ended TSS I10o p ( ) �� k d y g y � Dail Maximum Jan -Dec I.24 -Hour Flow 2 x Week II A Compo J ,s Total Suspended (TSS) 45 mg/I. I� Maximum Calendar Week �I Jan -Dec 24 -Hour Flow � �2 x Week II I �� Aversg �1'emperature, Water Monitor e Composite � _ � I — D P Calendar Month Maximum I Jan -Dec I CAF 1 x Day O I � I 11 I _— ' _ -- — Temperature, Water Moiumr O nly Deg F Calendar Month Minimum San -Dec Grab — � � — I x Day I y _..— Tetiachloroeth lene 22 I � u L Calendar Month Averse Mar, Jun, Se Dec �� ar M p _ J L � G b M 7 etrachlorethylene) 1P oethylene erchloro (., ng /L - I Daily Maximum Mar, Jun Sep, Dec 1 Month Titanium, Total (as Ti) Monitor g/L Daily Maximum Jan -Dec F24 -hour Flow' m _�— 1 x Quarter i I —i __ � I�_ Com osue_ _ _ _ 'Toluene IF 26 u Calendar Month Ave e Mar, Jun, Se Dec I r Grab I I __. g p 1 x Month I _. Toluene 80 ug/L Daily Maximum — 1 Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Ir Grab i 1 x Month , h Trichloroethylene ITC or I— 21 t Mar, Jun, Se Dec ug/h Calendar Month Average Grab Sep, I x Month Irrii,hloroethene) V I (TCE or F SA ug /L �I Daily Maxnnum Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec Grab 1 x Month 'rich loroethene)e -y Vin I Chloride Chloroethene I 104 u /L a Calendar Month Avers e Mar, Jun, Sep II Grab 1 x Month (Vinyl Chloride (Chloroethene) 1 268 -'� ug/I. Daily Maximum Mar, Jun, So �� Grab 12 1 x Month 1 'Z.inc, Total (as Zn) - _— - 240 ug /L Dail) Maximum Jan -Dec Composite 1 x Month 1 -- SD 002 Paramet Limit U Limit Type �IIFEffective Period ,Sa ple TypejFrequencyj Notes _ _ IBDD, Carbonaceous 05 Day (20 Deg I 25.0 X11 mg /L Calendar Month Average I I Jan -Dec 24 -Hour Flow 1 x Week d C ) h II II Composite j� _ _ AOD, Carbonaceous 05 Da 20 De Day ( g 40 I m L Maximum Calendar Week Tan Dec 24 -Hour Flow k I x Woek IC I Averse 1 u g r Composit F _ - _ Topper Total (as Cu) — Monitor IFkg /day — — Calendar Month Average II — ,_ Jan Dec 2 }low 1 x M r 11 1 Y_ II Comp - Composite Copper, Total (as Cu) 93.2 (ug/L -- llaily Maximum Tan - Dec 24-Hour t Iii I x Month 1 I II 111 �LComposite_ Permit Issued, Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 21 Permit Expires. Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shalt comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 002 �- Parameter Limit ) U Units� Limit T ype �F,ffectiv_ePeriod�lSamp T F Frequency[ Notes Cyanide, Free (Amen To Chlorination) Monitor k k�g/day — II Single Value �� Jan -Dec 24 -Hour Clow I�Montli l i Only _ _ l �L Composite I[ �yanide, Free (Amen To Chlorination) I _II _ 1 ] x Month + 13 I . M I I I ComPOSit I I anide, Total (as CI) II Monitor II k kg /day li Single Value Jan -Dec II 24 -flour Flow[l I I x Month OnIYJJ , _ JI_Com osite IL _. Cyanide, Total (as C7� Mooitor j , i _ 1 x Month) 12 1 � G rily � ��_ �I Com osite Flow II Monitor m mgd '� Calendar Month Average I I Jan-Dec I Measurement, iL 1 1 x Day � Y C Conti I I (_ _ 1 x Day glow Monitor m m d Calendar Montb Maximum Ian -Dec Measurement, �i 1 II O nly 1 _ 1 I Contirmilas _ _ _ __ I _ _ _ 1 F I x Day I Oulu I I: Continuous J — 1 — _ — __ - _ —. —_, — 1 x Month 6 l i M Comp_ 1 _ - ng L 1F Saud, Value Juu, Sep, Dec '[24 -Hoax Flow 1 1 x Month 10 11 Only I IL _ 1 I- - __ L __. Hexane Extraction I — — �� —.. ___. __ _.._. _ __ - -- O nly_ 1� l l PFBA (perflumobutanoic acrd) Monitor I m mg /day �� Daily Maximum II Jan -Dec l Grab I I x Month I Onl PFBS p n /L y l x Month p p� G p erfluorobutane s y C I x Month l � Onl' ( PFDA (pertluorodecanoie acid) Monitor n ng/L Calendar Month Average ll Jan -Dec I Grab II I ( PFDA (perfluorodecanoic acid) I` Monitor Ij m mg/day-11 Daily Maximum Jan -Dec 11 Grab I I x Month L _..._ ._..._ —.. . —�i'IL _.. n ._ OnJ( — ng/L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec . 1 x Month } ._ AIL PFDoA erfluorododeeanoie acid I Monitor I / /da L I x Month Old P A uo rohe tanoic acid om to� n L D — Ong , _ _.. —� e , y m Jan -Dec G Perm it Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 22 Permit Expires' Permit #'. MM001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 002 Para -- ' j Li UmYs L ttT a Sa Tie _ ��requ enc y Fu � y II ffeetive Period] Notes) _ PFOS erlluorooctane sulfonate (p � 1 M t)n y r i n I Calendar Month Average l i h�� Jan -Dec �i Grab it x Montle __ -_- PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) - Monitor - I� - - - mg /day I� Daily Maximum l - Jan -Dec i I Grab - -- I x Month jl On l r l_ PFOSA (perfluorooctane suH'onamrde) Monitor If ng/L II Calendar - - onth Average �Ii Jan -Dec -��_� 11' Grab 7 x Month 1 I� PFOSA erfluorooetane sulfonam ide I� Monitor (p /day Dail Maximum g ➢ I Y Jan -Uec Grab i 1 I x Month Onl _ PFPeA (perfluoropentanoicacfd) Monitor �m ng /L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab 'j 1 x Monh PFPeA (pertluoropentanoic acid) 1 Monitor Fa g/day N Daily Mmi_ iI Jan -Dec I Grab I x Month i ' PFUnA erfluoroundecanoic acrd (p ) i Onl Monnor L g 1 € l i n /L I Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab �( I li ix Only I .I — - - i ( - IPFUnA (pert7uoroun de ea aci-d) _ 11 Monitor 1 Onl ... — mg /days Daily Maximum _ 1 n Jan -Dec �� Grab � d_ 1 x Month _ �� _.. S �I Calendar Maximum 1! Jan -Dec m,,t, I x Week IpH, Field I� 9.0 Month C - Ip H, Field - 6.0 `� �� SU IrCalendar Month Minimum I I Ian -Dec = Measurement, �l 1 x Week f I� II _ Contimmus _ - -. _. ( Phosphorus, Dissolved ,i_ II Momtor I - mg /L Calendar Month Average II Jan -Dec 1 24 -Hour Flow I� Composite_ 1 x Month i 7L _. _ _ Phosphorus, Dissolved i Monitor kg /day II Daily - Maximum 'h 24 -Hour Flo (1 x Mon 1 I Onlv I __ _.. I, Compos ite_ih a Phosphorus, Total (as P) Monitor '[kg/day Calendar Month Average �� Jan -Dec 1 24-Hour Plow 1 x Week !, Onl 'l l i Composi @ Phosphorus, Total (as P) X 1F Monitor I� mg /L Calendar Month Average I I Jan -Dec ' 24 -Hour Flow I[ 1 x Week I O Inly I I , II Composite �Phosphoms, Total (as P) I Monitor [ Op� kg /day p Daily Maximum ti h i Jan -Dec I', 24-Hour Flow Com osit0 I[ 1 x Week - i 1Phosphoms, Total (as P) iI Monitor L ray mg /L Daily Maximum I� '�� — t _ Jan -Dec - - - - 24 -(lour Flow Com osp : te 1 x Week fi I _i 'Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) 1' 30.0 _ _ i� mg/L i Calendar Month Average l l Jan -Dec 24-Hour l _ 1 x Week L Composite_ 1Solids, Total Suspended (TSS) 45 _ mg /L Ij Maximum Calendar Week ; Jan -Dec I(24 -hour Flow �1 1 x Week 3 II Avera e g_ _ � i _ Composite 3 Temperature, Water p I 83.0 Dc F i Month —Maximum -- Jan -Dec Grab t x Week I fem erature, Water p I Monitor I D ge F Il Calendar Month Minimum Jan -Dec I; Grab I x Week [I. Only 11 �: IC I _._ -._ S SD 003 Parameli (Acute Toxicity Testing �� rafinr ng Total (as Sb) 1 Antimony, Total (as 5b) ( Chlorine, Total Residurd �Iopper, Total (as Cu) - Limit II Units II Limit ug/L II Calendar Month Average mg/L I1 Daily Maximum Effective Period Jan -Dec, etfectwe January 01, 2011 Jan -Dec Jan -Dec I x Year % 2 x Month r� I I 2xM2x Month II Ix Week 8 5 I x Month !I 11 Penn it Issued: Limits and MOnitOring Requirements Page 23 Permit Expires: Permit #; NM0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT ThePermittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 003 Parameter Lim1 Units ,I Limit Ty _ ESfec - Period S ,. Notes { or Total as Cu - t pp ( ) u L Dail Maximoi Jan Dec Flow g/ y I i x Month ( I q Onl II C i M I — - Cornp L r Jan mgd Calendar Month Average I -Dec LCaleulation 1 II Dx y —... �it IRow I' Monitor IL MG 'F Calendar Month Total Jan -Dec V Calculation x Day L iL_� _ Flow Mmtitox ''mid � Daily Maximum Jan -Dee Calculation I xDay PFBA (perfluorobutauoic acid) Il Monitor ng /L ,� Calendar Month Average Jan Dec Grab - �� i x Month l 9 11 On!Y— �? __ IPFBA (pertluorobutanoic acid) 1 Monitor mg /day I Daily Maximum -� Jan -Doe Grab - I I x Monti 1 9 I I I Only _ _j _ _ 'PFBS (perfluorobutane sulfoate) Monitor lngiC I Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab x Month 9 PFBS (pexfluorobutane suifonate) Monitor' mg /day Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab l x Month 9 O 1 y �I I L L 1'FDA (perfluorodecanme acid) MOnly �ng/I J Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec �Crrab� 1 x Month ( 9 PFDA (perfluorodecanoic acid) onitor mg/da Dai m� Jan -Dec (rah I x Month 9 only-J! L J! �� _ . I. �PFDoA (perfluorododeeanoic acid) Monnor I �ng .. /L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec �� Cnab .. --_.. CL x Month 9 On o `PFDoA (perfluorododecanom acid) Monitor mg /day Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab i 1 x Month 9 only L IPFHpA (perfluoroheptanoic acid) Monitor 1 Avage Jan -Dec Grab ng /L Calendar Month er 1 x Month I I 9 Only__ Onl i L � I PFHpA (perfluoroheptanoic acid) Monitor 1 1 - mg/day I Daily Maximmn Jan -Dec Grab �) I x Month 9 L Only L i L IPFHxA (perfluorohexanoic acid) I' Mon or � _ rig /L IF Month Average Jan -Dec Grab 1 x Month 9 - _. JI Only -1L I I ` -_ _.. _- _.. I PFHxA (perfluorohexanoic acid) I, Monitor I mg/day '( Daily Maximum J r an -Dec II Grab IF I x Month , 9 Only . _�____jI PFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) Monitor Ij ng /L ' Catendar Montle Average I Jan -Dec Grab J� x Moth 9 Only- L _ _ I[ 1I L PFHxS (perflaorohexane suifonate) I Monitor Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab mg /day Da FI x Month 9 Only I� I _ _- i. I- L _ IPFNA (p erfluorononanoic acid 'onts itor ) M Only ng /L II Ca lendar Month Averaged Jan -Dec Grab I x Month 9 _. _ I� ANA (perfluorononanoic acid) Monitor mg /day II Daily Maximum �I Jan -Dec, �'_ Grab I x Month 9 C it y it _ I PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) i Momtor Ir ng /L Calendar Month Average I Jan-De Gr b II 1 x Month 9 Onl y _ �FOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) Monitor ! _ On _ mg /day Dail Jan -Dec I I ' Grab �I_� I x Month 9 9 PFOS (perfluorooctme suifonate) I� 1 �� l gr /day Month Average Jan-Dec Grab -1 x Month 1 9 _ S u l I LCalendar ! I x Month I' 9 I (perfluorooctane sulfoate) 172 it .__. gr/day Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) Mon ;VOr I ng /L Daily Maximum I' Jan -Dec Grab 11 1 x Month 1 9 IPFOSA erfluorooctane sulfonamide Monitor 'j n L Calendar Month Average ' .fan -Dec II Grab 1 x Month 1 9 On ly ,-_ !PFOSA (perthiorooctane sulfonamide) II Monitor F mg /day Daily Maxiinum 1 Jan -Dec Grab 1 x Month 1 9 Only I PFPeA (perfluoropentanoic acid) Monitor 1 ng/L I Calendar M onth Average i� Jan -Dec Giah I� 1 x Morabt 9 Only _IL i_ Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 24 Permit Expires: Perma4 MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 003 - - -- _ — 1 limit I Units_i�tTy - — Notes, PFPcA (perfluoropentauoic am n � �EffectivePeriod ' Jan -llec j j Grab �Fl x x Month + + 9 - � _ , II Monitor 1 ng /h Calendar Month Average J Jan -Dec �I, G _ 1 x Month 9 9 PF'UnA (perfluoroundecanoie acid) I -. Jan - Dec G Grab I x x Month 9 9 'pH, Field 9 _. _ m m = =.`. - _ _ a ay _ i 3 p _ I IL _ I� Grab I� 1 — 1 3 3 L O Only j F __�L I Tan -Dec 2 24 Hour Flow I I x Month i i I I _ L Monitor I u Y ._ I J an-Dec 2 4 - a o �oahe _ l 1 x Month l 11 l L Onl y- Y II ;� L J — — — — SD 004 I Monitor Units '� _Limit Type_..._ � j Effe ian- DPc 1!SamPl �� (F eq�a -- Notes Pa r a meter L imit _ .— . I,� mgd II CalcnCalendarMonth Average t d Jan -Dec II Estimate II 1 x Month Total ,. Jan-Dec ¢ Estimate Ii I x SD 005 Limit — J Units jL it Type I1 Effe Pe riod_�jSample Tye Frei Monitor it MG ! I Single Value II Jan-Dec jI Estimate IF I x SD 007 Parameter _ Limi I j Units_Ir Limit EfectivePeriod I SampleTyp �requen Notes j Flow I ! Monitor ,I mgd l Calendar Month Average Jan Dec m � Measurement, I x Day l I I Only i 'I Continuous _ - _ (Flow i Monitor MG Calendar Month "Total � Jan-Dec i Measurement, 1 x Da7)� JI oil' _J I _ I Continuou� (Flow :Monitor 'I� gd Daily Maximum � Jan -Dec q Measurement, I x Day f _ li l l � PFBA (perfluorobutanoic acid) ❑g /L Id) il Monitor I '1 Calendar Month Average I San -Dec Ord I I , Grab '( 1 x Month j 9 Y - - - __ — - -. . -__ -JI _.. IL _ -. IPFBA(perfluorobutanoic acid) Monitor 1( ng /L I Daily Maximum II Jan -Dec Grab 1 xMonth C 9 IL j PFBS (perflumobutane sulfonate) 'I` Monitor ng/L i Calendar Month Average I Jan -Dec Grab I x Month j 9 (P ) li Ord Y g/ ..— J -._ iI i. — PFBS erfluorobutane sulfonate Monitor n L li Daily I Jan -Dec j Grab 1 x Month 9 i On II _ _ Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 25 Permit Expires: Permits MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. SD 007 Parameter Limit �_ r- Units Limit Type I�EffectivePeriod� Frequency Nntes� L . ____ _ PFDA (perfluorodecano ic acid) - M n for i5ng /L I Cale Month A verage _ Jan -Dec Grab 1 x Month _ 9 PFDA (perfluorodecanmc acid) Only Monitor �I ng/I, Daily Maximum jl Jan -Dec � �� Gcab 1 x Month 9 PFDoA (perfluorododecanoic acid) Monitor ng /L it Calendar Month Average II Jan -Dec Grab I x Month 9 I I� Only , ._ � I_ - _ _ (p ) d tanoie�ac I g Y 9 I (bH u ll y _ d Ir• A erfluorohe (p erfluoroha �� M n /L I LCalendar Month Aera e II g g Tan -Dec Grab 1 x Mont hJ I � - FH tanoic acid �' ` P (P' P I Monitor n L Dait Maximum l Y Jan -Dec I Grab ] x Month 9 �.. IPFHxA acid (p ) Mom - to _ Cale nth e g/ g �� Jan-Dec 1 1 Grab �� "I 9 OnIY , n U nra J;ffi A erfluorohexanme acrd Momtox / L Jan -Dec Orab If� r 1 x Month 9 Only s �� 3xS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) 4 Monitor _. - ng/L 1LCalendar Month Average Jan -Dec �' Oxab 1 x Month 9 Ong L ate (P - -- -) Mora � a J -Deo n I� Orab �L Month 4 9 I , On _ PFNA erfluo enoec acid) _ L�Mo n L CaleDda Month Avera e Jan -Dec �i Gab LL x Month 9 Onl I �/L L PFNA(perfluorononanoic acid) jl Moni r F. i� Daily Maximwn - 7an -Dec Grab 1 x M 9 I F Ord)' L _ L_ � L- �'FOA (perfluorooctanoio acid) Monitor I ng /L Calendar Month Average i Jan -Dec I� Grab � � ( I x Month j 9 -- -- - L..._ —L IPFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) I Monitor It On1Y ng /L L Daily Maximum 11 -L Jan -Dec IF Grab � �L 1 x Month I 9 I (perfluorooctan , sulfonate) 11 Monitor _ ng /J, 1I Calendar Month Average I� Jan -Dec �� Grab 3 x Week L_�I 9 L . -.... __ -.. IPFOS (perfluorooetane sulfonate) L Only 0.91 -iL Calendar Month Ave __ - gr /day re , _ Jan -Dec �_ � � Grab l 3 x Week 9 I Intervention (perfluoroochme sulfonate) Monitor ng /L Daily Maxi mun �I San -Dec Grab �� 3 x Week 9 I PFOS L Onto � _ PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) 1.72 L( _ - gr /day Daily Maximwn Jan -Dec - I Grab r 3 x Week 9 Intervention Limit ��1 PFOSA erfluorooctane sulfonande Monitor CP )II e n Calendar Month Avera gti g Jan -Dec �` Grab x Month � 9 I Only L -..- _ (perfluorooctane sulfonamide) Monib r L ng/L DailyMax� mum �1 _- Jan -Dec _ I` Grab I x L �1 9 �PFOSA Month PFPeA (perfluoropentanore acid) Monitor Ir ng/L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab � I xx Month 9 f I Only J _ _ L __ II PFPeA (pMIuoropentancic acid) 1 Monitor _ [ ng/I, �F Daily Maximwn Jan -Dec � Grab I x Month 9 Only 1 _ _ _ IPFUnA (perfluoroundeeanoic acid) �� Monitor _ ng /I. �� Calendar Month Average ll Jan -Dec ?L Crab I x Month 9 PFUnA (perfluoroundecanoic acid) I , Monitor ng /L � Daily Maximum Jan -Dec '� Grab I x Month M 9 J I tIi Field _Y 9�0 SU Calendar Month Ma um i 1 Jan -Dec Measurement, ji I x Day 1 3 Continuous �� _ I I Field P I . 60 ,I SU , Calendar Month Minimum I _ Jan -Dec 11 Measurement, 1 x Day 3 J i _ �� Continuou rfempemture, Water I f Monitor , I Deg F iCalendar Month Maxhrom Jan -Dec IxDay Did � I l Continuo tPemperature, Water Monitor ] Deg F II Calendar Month Minimum II Jan -Dec (Measurement, I x Day Out II Continuous , Permit Issued Limits and Monitoring Requirements Page 26 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Permittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. WS 001 P arameter _j Limit a Un emit T ype - I , Effie PeriodjSample Typ � Fre� Notes _ -_— Flow I Monitor mgd I Calendar Month Average r Lm-Dec ,Measurement, F IxDay (Flow Monit M Calendar Month Total ]I Jan-Dec ' 1� Onl Flow Monitor m d Daily Maximum Jan -Dec et _ 1 xDaY I I I I On Continuou _ - -- (P __ -- ) j � PFBA erfluorobutanmc acid Monitor n L 1 Calendar Month Averaged Jan -Dec Grab 1 x Week 9 i IPFDA (perfluorobutanoic acid) Monitor II ng /I. i� Daily Maximum Jan -Dec �� Grab [ I x Week 9 Only — .. �PFM (perfluorobutane sulfonate) Monitor ng/L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec �� Gxab 1 x Month I 9 L _ _ _ _ __jI Only L ' � S (perfluorobutane sulfonate) I Monitor PF B ng /1, � _ Daily Maximum Jan -Dec i( Grab 1 x Month ' 9 Onl _. _ �� FDA (perfluorodecanme acid ' non Onl Calendar Month Avera e g/ g Jan -Dec G n L ' _ 1xMonth 9 - ' PFDA (pesfluorodeoanoic amd Fla kgi Daily Maximum Jan -Dec i� Grab _ I x Mont 9 o nly 1 1; �FDOA erfluorododecanoic acid Monitor I Out n L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab I x Month PFDoA (perflumododecanoic acid) Monitor Fn/L IF Daily Maximum 1 Jan -Dec — Giab I x Month 9 Only Ji - J PFIIpA (perfluorchepti noic acid) Monitor 1 _ L, _I dar M -Dec Calenonth Average I Jan — Grab I x Month 9 Only = L_ _ L PFIIpA (perfluoroheptanoic acid) I' Monitor 1 1 ng/L ' Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab I x Month 9 J I Only it .— _ — PFIIxA (perfluoroltexanoic acid) Monitor ' ng /L Calendar Month Average i' Jan -Dec I I Grab I x Month 9 II O-, y_j —_ I — I_ _ IPFHxA (perlluorohexanoic acid) Monitor ng/L Daily Maximum Jan-Dec Grab 1 I x Month 9 _ Onl Y - �P I _— PFIIxS erfluorohexane sulfonate Monitor ) I� _ — g _.. n /L Calendar Month Avera e Jan-Dec Grab � x Month � 9 Only II _ iPFHxS (perfluorohexane sulfonate) Monitor r Daily Maximwn Jan -Dec Grab I x Month 9 Onl I� � PFNA (perfluorononanoic acid) Mentor' _ ng /L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab 1 I x Month j 9 onl PFNA (perfluoroitonanoic acid) Monitor ng /L Daily Maximum Jan -Deo �L Grab � Da �� I onth x M 9 Only FOA erfluorooetatiore acid Monitor n /L Calendar Month Avera e Jan -Dec i� _ Grab g I x Week 9_.... O �� — I (perfluorooctanoic acid) Monitor ag /L Daily Maximum Jan -Dec Grab ij I x Week 9 Y L L --- a _ itor PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate) Mon/h ng �lendar Month Average �� Jan -Dec � Grab - 3 x Week 9 Only _ _ PPOS (perllummuctane sulfonate) 0 91 II _� r /da II Calend I ntervention t vera o Jan-Dee Gab gr/day € 3 xWaek 8 IPFOS i (perfluorooetane sulfonate) I� Monitor �� g/L f Grab IF Daily Maximum Jan -Dec n 3 x Week 9 2 -]�F rfluomoctane sulfonate 1.72 ( ) I� r /da Dail Maximum Jan -Dec Grab - Ir3x M axi Weelc 1 8 I PFOS PFOSA (perfluorooctane sulfonamide) Monitor I nterv e ntion Limit _ I i ng /L I Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab I x Month r, 9 - Onl y it I PFOSA (perflumooctane sulfonamide) 1 Monitor _ I ng /L li Daily Maximum Jan -Dec - Grab I x Month ; 9 I Only II — II _� i _ 1 PFPeA (perfluoropentanoic acid) Monitor ng/L Calendar Month Average Jan -Dec Grab I x Month 9 1 �I on Permit Issued: Limits and Monitoring Requirements Pa 27 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The Pennittee shall comply with the limits and monitoring requirements as specified below. WS 001 -- 1,3- dichloropropene is synonmous with 1,3- dichlompropylene. -- Analyze immediately. -- Analyze in the field, within one hour of sample collection. -- Benzo(b) fluoranthene is synonymous with 3,4- benzofluorenthene. -- EPA approved analytical methods shall be used for total residual chlorine. -- EPA method 1631, with clean techniques method 1669, and any revisions to those methods. -- Phenol refers to the individual phenol compound analyzed by EPA Method 625. -- See Chapter 6 ❑ Intervention Limits. Also see MPCA Guidance for Perfluoroehemieals Analysis at the MPCA Quality System webpage. -- See MPCA Guidance for Pertluorochemieals Analysis at the MPCA Quality System webpage. 0 -- Use EPA Method 1631 & 1669. Samples may be taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. 1 -- Use EPA !Method 200.8. 2 -- Use EPA Method 33 5.4, rev. 1.0. Samples may be taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. 3 --Use EPA Method OIA -1677. Samples maybe taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. LimiYT e Effective Period Sam eT �I Yp - P l Yi ce an Notes 9 _ _ —_ _ efllorop acid Cp P ) I Mo r — ng/—L g -- �rre Grab I x Monffi 9 tnorc ' Onl I I l - P A (pe ecanorc acid) MOnly r I � n�g/I, Cale Mouth Avera c g Jan -Dec ir] l x Month l 9 - Grab _ -- �PFUnA (perfluoroundeeanoro acid) - j � Monitor ng /L - - I Daily Maximum Jan-Dee r Grab - 11 - 1 x Month 9 Only � -- .�I- —_.. Field I� Monitor i� SU �i1 . Calendar Month Maximum � Jan-Dec .. 11 Measurement1 1 x Day I 3 I pFI, � �orinnuous_� II, Field Monitor IL Only SU L Calendar Month Minimum I Measurement, �I Continuousl 1 x Day 3 _ _- temperature, Water Ij Monitor Deg P _i i _ _.iI Calendar Month Maximum I Jan -Dec Measurement, �L 1 x Day i Only_ I _ I _ I� Continuous temp Water P If Monitor De g P �� Calendar Month Minimum it Jan -Dec I� Measurement, 1 x Day Only i� II 11 Continuous �I _j -- 1,3- dichloropropene is synonmous with 1,3- dichlompropylene. -- Analyze immediately. -- Analyze in the field, within one hour of sample collection. -- Benzo(b) fluoranthene is synonymous with 3,4- benzofluorenthene. -- EPA approved analytical methods shall be used for total residual chlorine. -- EPA method 1631, with clean techniques method 1669, and any revisions to those methods. -- Phenol refers to the individual phenol compound analyzed by EPA Method 625. -- See Chapter 6 ❑ Intervention Limits. Also see MPCA Guidance for Perfluoroehemieals Analysis at the MPCA Quality System webpage. -- See MPCA Guidance for Pertluorochemieals Analysis at the MPCA Quality System webpage. 0 -- Use EPA Method 1631 & 1669. Samples may be taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. 1 -- Use EPA !Method 200.8. 2 -- Use EPA Method 33 5.4, rev. 1.0. Samples may be taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. 3 --Use EPA Method OIA -1677. Samples maybe taken anytime within the quarter, but are reported at the end of each quarter. Pennit Issued: Page 28 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 1. Special Requirements 1. Compliance Schedule Perflaorooetane Sulfanate (PFOS) 1.1 The facility must meet final discharge effluent limitations not to exceed the water quality criterion (7 ng/L) for Perfluorooctane Sultanate (PFOS) as soon as possible. The following section outlines a compliance schedule for this permit cycle. Within this permit cycle the Permittee must commence work to achieve final effluent limitations. 1.2 The Permittee shall submit a PFC Treatability Alternative Identification Plan (Plan), for MPCA review and comment, within 180 days of the permit issuance. The Plan shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the state of Minnesota with expertise and experience in wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) design and operation /maintenance. The Plan shall include a preliminary analysis of all potential feasible treatment alternatives /technologies that may be capable of meeting the applicable effluent, water quality, and public health requirements for 20 years. The plan shall utilize MN Rules 7077.0272 Subp. 2., as a guide. The Plan shall be modified pursuant to MPCA review. 1.3 A Treatability Study (Study) of treatment alternatives /technologies identified in the Plan, having a reasonable chance of removing PFCs, shall be completed within 28 months of MPCA acceptance of the Plan (as discussed above). The Study shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the state of Minnesota with expertise and experience in wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) design and operation /maintenance. The technologies to be evaluated shall include, but are not limited to, adsorption /absorption technologies, dissolved -phase removal technologies as well as process optimization trials with existing and /or new systems at the current W WTP. The Permittee may, upon concurrence from the MPCA, make changes to the study as new technologies and information emerge. 1.4 Granular activated carbon (GAC) shall be specifically evaluated as part of the Study (pursuant to chapter 1.1.3.) for treatment of PFCs. In conjunction with other technologies being considered, the permittee shall submit a detailed bench scale pilot (BSP) work plan and study to specifically evaluate granular activated carbon (GAC). A BSP work plan shall be submitted for MPCA review and comment, within 2 months of MPCA acceptance of the Plan (as discussed in chapter 1.1.2.). This BSP study shall be completed on the same timelines as required for all potential technologies identified in the Study (as discussed in chapter 1.1.3.). The GAC BSP work plan/study shall be prepared & conducted by a professional engineer registered in the state of Minnesota with expertise and experience in GAC W WTP design and operation /maintenance. The BSP work plan /study shall be modified pursuant to MPCA review. The BSP work plan /study shall include but not be limited to evaluation /analysis of the GAC mass transfer zone (MTZ), carbon usage rates (CUR), empty bed contact time (EBCT), minimum required bed depth and hydraulic loading rate; at all design flow and loading rates anticipated for full scale operations (for all potential discharges from the facility). The BSP work plan/study shall target a breakthrough concentration (Cb) for PFOS at the water quality criteria. The BSP work plan /study shall take into consideration all analytes known or believed to be present. As a supplement to the BSP study, the permittee shall include all data from the temporary extended pilot well pump test GAC treatment system to augment data collected during BSP study testing. 1.5 The Study (outlined /discussed above) shall also include a section on enhanced total suspended solids (TSS) removal for polishing pond C. This section of the Study will evaluate improving TSS removal from the effluent of existing polishing pond C; to reduce TSS discharges to the GAC building to less than 15 mg/L. This TSS evaluation target (15 mg /L) shall not be considered a limit, nor an intervention limit, pursuant to the "Limits & Monitoring Requirements" sections of this permit. This portion of the Study shall include an analysis of all feasible TSS treatment alternatives /technologies including, but not limited to, the use of filtration and /or membranes to reduce TSS in pond C discharges. This portion of the Study shall also include evaluation of other applicable alternatives /technologies, including flocculants and coagulant chemical additives. Permit Issued: Page 29 Permit Expires: Pennit H: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 1. Special Requirements 1. Compliance Schedule Temporary Treatment System for Woodbury Disposal Site Groundwater 1.6 The permittee is currently evaluating the option of constructing and operating a temporary granular activated carbon (GAC) treatment system for the Woodbury disposal groundwater; which is pumped to the 3M facility for various raw water uses. This temporary GAC treatment system for the Woodbury ground water has been proposed to be constructed and operated dining the timeframe of this permit. Should the permittee elect to construct and operate this temporary GAC system; plans, specifications and support documentation shall be submitted 180 days prior to initiation of operation of the temporary GAC treatment system. Temporary GAC treatment system plans, specifications, and support documentation for the Woodbury ground water shall be prepared & submitted by a professional engineer registered in the state of Minnesota with expertise and experience in GAC WWTP design and operation maintenance. These documents may be modified pursuant to MPCA review. The temporary GAC treatment system plans, specifications, and support documentation for the Woodbury ground water shall include but not be limited to evaluation /analysis of the, carbon usage rates (CUR), empty bed contact time (EBCT), minimum required bed depth and hydraulic loading rate; at all anticipated pumping rates. The permittee may use data from the temporary GAC treatment system to augment and support data collected within the context of the compliance schedule noted above. Reporting 1.7 The Plan shall include a schedule for the Study; which will detail evaluation timeliness and establish interim milestone dates for all treatment alternative /technologies identified. 1.8 The Permittee shall provide progress updates on the Study to the MPCA every three months following MPCA concurrence of the Study. 1.9 The Permittee shall provide results of the Study to the MPCA within three months of Study completion. Based on the Study results, the Permittee shall include a description of the selected treatment alternative(s) and the complete wastewater treatment system of which it is a part. MN Rules 7077.0272 Subp. 2.; "Ten States Standards" Chapter 10 & Section 53; and WEF MOP #8 shall be used as guidelines. 1.10 The Permittee shall submit plans and specifications for the selected treatment alternative and the complete wastewater treatment system of which it is a part at the facility, for the PFC wastewater treatment system (see applicable guidance documents listed above). The Permittee shall also submit an operations /maintenance plan demonstrating how PFC discharge limitations will be met (see 2003 3M GAC O &M Plan for guidance). Submittal of these documents to the MPCA shall be within five months of completion of the Study. Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations 1. Requirements for Specific Stations 1.1 SD 001, SD 002, SD 003, SD 004, SD 005, SD 007: Submit a monthly DMR monthly by 21 days after the end of each calendar month following permit issuance. 2. Special Requirements 2.1 The granular activated carbon treatment system shall be operated at all times except under emergency conditions or other conditions authorized by this permit, and under conditions of maintenance or downtime as described in the MPCA approved operations and maintenance plan for this system. Fluorochemical Analysis Permit Issued: Page 30 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations 2. Special Requirements 2.2 The Permittee shall analyze other fluorochemical compounds upon request of the MPCA should future research or environmental study determine a need for added fluorochemical parameters. 2.3 The Permittee may request a change or reduction in monitoring frequency for fluorochemical analysis 12 months after permit issuance. Any request for change or reduction in monitoring frequency shall be consistent with EPA guidance (EPA 833 -B -98 -001), or other applicable guidance for NPDES /SDS monitoring. MPCA approval is required prior to any change or reduction in monitoring frequency. Fire Training Basin Liner Requirements 2.4 Any basins used for the purpose of fire training, or collection of fire training runoff wastewaters, shall be lined using high density polyethylene (HDPE) or similar synthetic liners. The Permittee shall submit plans and specifications for any basins not adequately lined with HDPE or similar synthetic liner for MPCA approval. Fire training basin liners shall be installed in accordance with MPCA criteria. Wastewater Polishing Basins Liner Requirements 2.5 Polishing ponds 2 and 3 shall not receive any flow other than direct rainfall. In the event the Permittee chooses to use the old polishing ponds, or portions thereof, plans for this conversion shall be submitted to the MPCA for review and approval. Alkyl Phenol Ethoxylates 2.6 Alkyl Phenol Ethoxylate (APE) compounds used and discharged to any process wastewaters at the plant shall be discharged to the wastewater treatment system and subsequently to the granular activated carbon facility, or directly to the activated carbon treatment facility. APES shall not be discharged to any cooling waters unless such waters receive treatment at the wastewater treatment system and the activated carbon treatment facility. 3. Sampling Location 3.1 Samples for Station SD 001 shall be taken at a point representative of the process wastewater discharge (SD 001) prior to mixing with other waters. SD00I consists of the combined effluents from phases I and 2, and phase 3 treated wastewaters and shall be monitored after the confluence point of phase 1 and 2, and phase 3 combined GAC treated effluents. SD001 shall be monitored after the confluence point of the phase 1 and 2, and phase 3 GAC effluents prior to mixing with other waters. 3.2 Samples for Station SD 002 cooling/stormwaters shall be taken at a point representative of the discharge (SD 002) prior to mixing with other waters. Cooling and stormwaters will be directed to the mixing structure downstream of the SD001 discharge. Samples for SD002 shall be taken at a point prior to the parshall flume confluence with SD001. 3.3 Samples for SD003 shall be taken after the confluence of SD001, SD002 and SD007 discharges prior to mixing with other effluents, waters, waste streams or discharges. SD003 is the combined monitoring point for SD001, SD002, and SD007 prior to discharge to the ravine at manhole 358A. For total residual chlorine (TRC) and whole effluent toxicity - acute (WETa), SD003 will consist of the directly combined SD001, SD002 and SD007 discharges prior to discharge to the receiving water (river). An alternative sample point during unsafe conditions will be located at manhole 358A. 3.4 SD004 is the Woodbury Groundwater Emergency Bypass. The Woodbury Groundwater consists of groundwater pumped from a 3M Woodbury site to the 3M Cottage Grove plant for use as process and cooling waters, and is eventually monitored and discharged via the process wastewater system (SD001) and cooling water system (SD002). On very infrequent occasions a bypass of Woodbury groundwater is required due to piping pressure constraints from plant shutdowns. On these infrequent occasions Woodbury groundwater may bypass the cooling water system (ponds) and discharge to the ravine adjacent to the plant. The emergency bypass consists of groundwaters only. Permit Issued: Page 31 Permit Expires: Pennd fi MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations 3. Sampling Location 3.5 SD005 consists of the Stormwater Emergency Bypass for SD002, with the SD005 discharge point originating after installation of the granular activated carbon treatement systems, reconfiguration of polishing pond 2 (Basin 1) and repiping of SD002 coolinglstonmwaters. SD002 typically consists of cooling waters but may, on occasion, include stormwaters. For almost all stormwater runoff occasions SD002 will discharge through its normal discharge point. However, during high rainfall events typically exceeding a once in 10 year 24 hour rainfall volume, flow may exceed the normal SD002 piping capacity and may bypass the normal SD002 discharge point. This bypass is designated SD005 and during these very infrequent events stormwater flow may discharge via SD005. SD005 will discharge from the last cooling pond to the ravine located adjacent to the plant site. 3.6 Samples for Station SD007 shall be taken at: a point representative of the discharge from the extended pilot well (groundwater) pump test GAC wastewater treatment system prior to mixing with any other discharge or waste stream. 3.7 Samples and measurements required by this permit shall be representative of the monitored activity. 4. Surface Discharges 4.1 Floating solids or visible foam shall not be discharged in other than trace amounts. 4.2 Oil or other substances shall not be discharged in amounts that create a visible color film. 43 The Permittee shall install and maintain outlet protection measures at the discharge stations to prevent erosion. 5. Winter Sampling Conditions 5.1 The Permittee shall sample flows at the designated monitoring stations including when this requires removing ice to sample the water. If the station is completely frozen throughout a designated sampling month, the Permittee shall check the "No Discharge" box on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and note the ice conditions in Comments on the DMR. 6. Priority Pollutants - Monitoring Requirements 6.1 The Permittee shall monitor SD001 and SD002 semi - annually for the following specified priority pollutants. Sampling events shall be as equally spaced as possible. Monitoring shall be for the organic priority pollutants identified under the volatile, acid, base /neutral, and pesticide fractions using EPA methods 624, 625 and 608 (40 CFR Part 136, October 25, 1984) as listed in Table II of 40 CFR Part 122, Appendix D. The following priority pollutant total metals shall also be monitored using either EPA method 200.8 or their corresponding graphite furnace method found in Table IB of 40 CPR Part 136: antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc. In addition, the Permittee shall monitor for Total Cyanide (EPA method 335), Total Phenolic Compounds (EPA method 420), and Hardness (total as CaCO3) (EPA method 130). Total Mercury shall be monitored by EPA method 1631, if not already required by the permit. 6.2 In addition to the quantitative analysis for the listed parameters the Permittee shall identify and quantify any additional substances indicated to be present in the extracts by peaks on the reconstructed gas chromatograms (total ion plots) more than 10 times higher than the adjacent peak to peak background noise. The identification shall be by reference to the EPA/MH computerized library of mass spectra, with visual confirmation by an experienced analyst. Quantification may be an order of magnitude estimate based on comparison with an internal standard. 6.3 Submit the priority pollutant sampling results by 30 days after receipt of priority pollutant scan report. Permit Issued: Page 32 Pennit Expires: Pennit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 2. Surface Discharge Stations 7. Discharge Monitoring Reports 7.1 The Permittee shall submit monitoring results for discharges in accordance with the limits and monitoring requirements for this station. If no discharge occurred during the reporting period, the Permittee shall check the "No Discharge" box on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). Chapter 3. Waste Stream Stations 1. Requirements for Specific Stations 1.1 WS 001: Submit a monthly DMR monthly by 21 days after the end of each calendar month following permit issuance. 2. Sampling Location 2.1 Samples for Station WS001 shall be taken at: a point representative of the discharge from the 'lead" columns of the extended pilot well (groundwater) pump test GAC wastewater treatment system prior to mixing with any other discharge or waste stream. 2.2 Samples and measurements required by this permit shall be representative of the monitored activity. 3. DMR Submittal 3.1 The Permittee shall submit monitoring results for discharges in accordance with the limits and monitoring requirements for this station. If no discharge occurred during the reporting period, the Permittee shall check the "no discharge" box the DMR. Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 1. Prohibited Discharges 1.1 This permit does not authorize the discharge of untreated sewage, wash water, scrubber water, spills, oil, hazardous substances, or equipment /vehicle cleaning and maintenance wastewaters to ditches, wetlands or other surface waters of the state. 1.2 The Permittee shall prevent the routing of pollutants from the facility to a municipal wastewater treatment system in any manner unless authorized by the pretreatment standards of the MPCA and the municipal authority. 1.3 The Permittee shall not transport pollutants to a municipal wastewater treatment system that will interfere with the operation of the treatment system or cause pass - through violations of effluent limits or water quality standards. Permit Issued: Page 33 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 2. Toxic Substance Reporting 2.1 The Permittee shall notify the MPCA immediately of any knowledge or reason to believe that an activity has occurred that would result in the discharge of a toxic pollutant listed in Minnesota Rules, pt. 7001.1060, subp. 4 to 10 or listed below that is not limited in the permit, if the discharge of this toxic pollutant has exceeded or is expected to exceed the following levels: a. for acrolein and acrylonitrile, 200 ug/L; b. for 2,4- dinitrophenol and 2- methyl- 4,6- dinitrophenol, 500 ug /L; c. for antimony, lmg/L; d. for any other toxic pollutant listed in Minnesota Rules, pt. 7001.1060, subp. 4 to 10, 100 ug /L; or e. five times the maximum concentration value identified and reported for that pollutant in the permit application. (Minnesota Rules, pt. 7001.1090, subp. 2.A) 2.2 The Permittee shall notify the MPCA immediately if the Permittee has begun or expects to begin to use or manufacture as an intermediate or final by- product a toxic pollutant that was not reported in the permit application under Minnesota Rules, pt. 7001.1050, subp. 2.J. (Minnesota Rules, pt. 7001.1090, subp. 2.B) 3. HydrotestDischarges 3.1 The Permittee shall notify the MPCA prior to discharging hydrostatic test waters. The Permittee shall provide information necessary to evaluate the potential impact of this discharge and to ensure compliance with this permit. This information shall include: a. the proposed discharge dates; b. the name and location of receiving waters, including city or township, county, and township /range location; c. an evaluation of the impact of the discharge on the receiving waters in relation to the water quality standards; d. a map identifying discharge location(s) and monitoring point(s); e. the estimated average and maximum discharge rates; f the estimated total flow volume of discharge; g. the water supply for the test water, with a copy of the appropriate Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) water appropriation permit; h. water quality data for the water supply; i. proposed treatment method(s) before discharge; and j. methods to be used to prevent scouring and erosion due to the discharge. 3.2 This permit does not authorize the construction or installation of pipeline facilities. Permit Issued: Page 34 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 4. Mobile and Rail Equipment Service Areas 4.1 Locomotive traction sand, degreasing wastes, motor oil, oil filters, oil sorbent pads and booms, transmission fluids, power steering fluids, brake fluids, coolant /antifreeze, radiator flush wastewater and spent solvents shall be collected and disposed of in accordance with applicable solids and hazardous waste management rules. These materials shall not be discharged to surface or ground waters of the state. 4.2 The steam - cleaning of mobile equipment and rail equipment, except for limited outdoor cleaning of large drills and shovels, shall be conducted in wash bays that drain to wastewater treatment systems that include the removal of suspended solids and flammable liquids. The only washing of mobile equipment done in outside areas shall be to remove mud and dirt that has accumulated during outside work. 4.3 Mobile and rail equipment washing shall not use solvent -based cleaners such as those available for brake cleaning and degreasing, unless the cleaning fluids are completely contained and not allowed to flow to surface or ground waters of the state. Soaps and detergents used in washing shall be biodegradable. 4.4 Mobile and rail equipment maintenance and repairs shall not be conducted in wash bays. 4.5 Hazardous materials shall not be stored or handled in wash bays. 4.6 Wastewater containment systems, including pipes shall be inspected regularly. Leaks that are detected shall be repaired immediately. 4.7 If the Permittee discovers that recoverable amounts of petroleum products have entered wastewater containment systems, they shall be recovered immediately, and reported to the MPCA. 4.8 Spill cleanup procedures shall be posted in mobile and rail equipment maintenance and repair areas. 5. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 5.1 PCBs, including but not limited to those used in electrical transformers and capacitors, shall not be discharged or released to the environment. 6. Application for Permit Reissuance 6.1 The permit application shall include analytical data as part of the application for reissuance of this permit. These analyses shall be done on individual samples taken during the twelve -month period before the reissuance application is submitted. Permit Issued: Page 35 Permit Fxpires: Permit #: NMOM 1449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 6. Application for Permit Reissuance 6.2 The permit application shall include analytical data for at least the following parameters at all monitoring stations: a. biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, total organic carbon, gasoline range organics, diesel range organics, fecal conform, ammonia, temperature; b. color, fluoride, nitrate - nitrite (as nitrogen), total organic nitrogen, oil and grease, total phosphorus, chloride, sulfate, sulfide (as sulfur), surfactants, bicarbonates, alkalinity, total salinity, total dissolved solids, specific conductance; c. aluminum, antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, boron, cadmium, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, lithium, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, potassium, selenium, silver, sodium, strontium, thallium, tin, titanium, vanadium, zinc (all in total form) using atomic absorption (AA) furnace methods according to 40 CFR Part 136.3; d. total mercury using EPA Method 1631; e. gross alpha particles, radium -226, radium -228, radon -222, uranium; f PCB -1016, PCB -1221, PCB -1232, PCB -1242, PCB -1248, PCB -1254, PCB -1260; and g. a scan of constituents using EPA Methods 624 and 625, in 40 CFR Part 136. The Permittee shall identify, in addition to those pollutants noted in Methods 624 and 625 (Appendix D, Table I1), the concentrations of at least ten of the most abundant constituents of the acid and base /neutral organic fractions shown to be present by peaks on the total ion plots (reconstructed gas chromatograms) within ten percent of the nearest internal standard. Identification shall be through the use of U.S. EPA /NTH computerized library of mass spectra, with visual confirmation and potential quantification. 6.3 The Permittee shall include, as part of the application for reissuance of this permit: a. current facilities and topographic maps; and b. an updated Pollution Prevention Plan for the facility. 6.4 The Pollution Prevention Plan may be a revision of or an attachment to the current Pollution Prevention Plan. 7. Chemical Additives 7.1 This chemical additives section supersedes the chemical additives section in the Total Facility Requirements Chapter. 7.2 The Permittee shall evaluate chemical additives before increasing the use of a chemical additive authorized by this permit or previously approved by the MPCA, or using a new chemical additive not authorized by the permit or previously approved by the MPCA. "Chemical additive" includes processing reagents, water treatment products, cooling water additives, freeze conditioning agents, chemical frost suppressants, detergents and solvent cleaners used for equipment and maintenance cleaning, biocides and slimicides, among other materials. Permit Issued: Page 36 Permit Expires: Permit N: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 7. Chemical Additives 7.3 The Permittee shall evaluate the chemical additive to determine the impact of a chemical additive in the following areas: a. Evaluate the potential for impact on the wastewater treatment plant. Chemical additives that cause upset of the treatment processes or may cause exceedance of effluent limitations shall not be used, or used at a dosage that will preclude upset or any deterioration in performance of the wastewater treatment processes and will be below applicable effluent limitations. Mass balance assessments shall be completed to the extent needed to determine this evaluation. b. Evaluate the potential for aquatic toxicity of the chemical additive that may be present in the treated effluent. Chemical additives which may cause acute toxicity in the effluent to applicable test species shall not be used, used at a dosage that is not acutely toxic in the effluent, or used at a dosage where wastewater treatment will render the chemical additive not acutely toxic in the effluent. c. Evaluate the potential for adverse human health impacts, including human or mammalian toxicity, and evaluate suspected or known impacts related to carcinogenicity, and mutagenic and teratogenic effects. Chemical additives causing these effects shall not be used, used at dosages that do not produce these effects, or used where the wastewater treatment process will treat or remove the chemical additive to a level that will not produce these effects. 7.4 The use of any chemical additive at a dosage equivalent to or exceeding the above described restrictions shall not be used unless approved by the MPCA. In the event that the Permittee is uncertain of the potential impact of a chemical additive approval shall be obtained from the MPCA before using the chemical additive. 7.5 The Permittee shall use qualified personnel with appropriate engineering and /or toxicological background in making the above evaluations. The Permittee may use a new chemical additive or adjust the dosage of existing chemical additives after completing the above evaluations. 7.6 The permittee shall use the following information in conducting evaluation of a proposed additive: a. Material Safety Data Sheet. b. A complete product use and instruction label. c. The commercial and chemical names of all ingredients. d. Aquatic toxicity and human health or mammalian toxicity data including a carcinogenic, mutagenic or teratogenic concern or rating. e. Environmental fate information including, but not limited to, persistence, half -life, intermediate breakdown products, and bioaccumulation data. f The proposed method, concentration, and average and maximum rates of use. g. If applicable, the number of cycles before wastewater bleedoff. h. if applicable, the ratio of makeup flow to discharge flow. 7.7 The Permittee shall maintain a record of chemical additive evaluations for changes in chemical additives used. The Permittee shall submit these evaluations for a chemical additive conducted in any month in the subsequent monthly discharge monitoring report (DMR). This permit may be modified to restrict the use or discharge of a chemical additive. Permit Issued: Page 37 Permit Expires. Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 4. Industrial Process Wastewater 8. New Proposed Dewatering 8.1 The Permittee shall obtain a permit modification before discharging from a new dewatering outfall. 8.2 In addition to the requirements in the Permit Modifications section of this permit, the Permittee shall submit to the MPCA detailed plans and specifications for the proposed methods of achieving discharge limits for turbidity and total suspended solids, based in part upon representative water quality data for untreated wastewater and a detailed map and diagram description of the proposed design for the flow control structures, and route of the discharge to receiving waters. Chapter 5. Domestic Wastewater (non -POTW) 1. Operator Certification 1.1 The Permittee shall provide a Class A state certified operator who is in direct responsible charge of the operation, maintenance and testing functions required to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. 1.2 If the Permittee chooses to meet operator certification requirements through a contractual agreement, the Permittee shall provide a copy of the contract to the MPCA, WQ Submittals Center. The contract shall include the certified operator's name, certificate number, company name if appropriate, the period covered by the contract and provisions for renewal; the duties and responsibilities of the certified operator; the duties and responsibilities of the permittee; and provisions for notifying the MPCA 30 days in advance of termination if the contract is terminated prior to the expiration date. 1.3 The Permittee shall notify the MPCA within 30 days of a change in operator certification or contract status. 2. Bypass Structures 2.1 All structures capable of bypassing the treatment system shall be manually controlled and kept locked at all times. 3. Stabilization Pond Requirements 3.1 Unauthorized Releases. For all unauthorized releases that may cause pollution of the waters of the state, the Permittee shall take at least one grab sample for permitted effluent parameters two times per week. If the Permittee believes that measuring these parameters is inappropriate due to known information about the discharge, the monitoring may be modified in consultation with the MPCA. Where there is reason to believe a pollutant other than those limited in the permit is present, the Permittee shall sample for that pollutant in addition to the permitted effluent parameters. 4. General Requirements Sewer /Forcemain /Piping Extension Permit 4.1 The Permittee may be required to obtain a Sewer Extension Permit from the MPCA prior to the start of construction of any addition, extension or replacement to /of any sewer. If a sewer extension permit is required, no construction of any part of the system may begin until that permit has been issued. Chapter 6. Industrial Water Treatment /Cooling Process Water I. Authorization 1.1 This chapter authorizes the Permittee to discharge untreated, non - contact cooling water generated at the facility, as described in the 'Facility Description' portion of this permit. This activity is limited by the 'Limits and Monitoring' section of this permit, as well as the other terns and conditions of this permit. Permit Issued: Page 38 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 7. Ground Water Pumpout 1. New Proposed Contaminated Ground Water Pumpout 1.1 The Permittee shall submit a written application for and obtain a major modification of this permit to begin discharge of contaminated ground water from a new outfall in accordance with the Permit Modifications section of this permit. Chapter S. Industrial Pond System 1. Authorization 1.1 This chapter authorizes the Permittee to manage wastewater in a pond system, as described in the 'Facility Description' section of this Permit. This activity is limited by the 'Limits and Monitoring' section of this Permit, as well as the other terms and conditions of this Permit. 1.2 The requirements of this chapter apply to all components of the permitted pond system, including but not limited to all impoundments at the facility used for collection, containment, storage, and/or treatment; and all related structures, conveyances, and /or appurtenances. 2. Operation and Maintenance Pond Performance Evaluation Plan/Report 2.1 Submit Pond Performance Evaluation Report by 180 days after permit issuance. 2.2 The Pond Performance Evaluation Report/Plan shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered in the state of Minnesota with expertise in wastewater structures, and shall include at least the following elements: a. A detailed listing of water balance tests completed since construction of the pond system for which the permittee has records, including the results of the tests (records of the tests should be included as appendices to the report); b. A description of any significant repairs and /or modifications to the pond liners or dikes since the completion of the last water balance test for each impoundment; c. A proposed schedule for the completion of water balance tests for each impoundment at the facility for which a water balance test has not been completed since pond construction or since the last significant liner repair /modification, whichever is most recent; and d. A certification from the professional engineer preparing the report, stating that all impoundments at the facility that have not been included in the proposed water balance schedule meet the seepage requirements in this chapter. 2.3 Submit a Pond Performance Evaluation Progress Report for MPCA review and comment by June 30 of each year following permit issuance. 2.4 The Pond Performance Evaluation Progress Report shall include at least the following information: a. A summary of any maintenance activities, operating difficulties and associated corrective actions, nuisance conditions, and /or improvements associated with the pond system within the past year; b. The results from any water balance tests completed within one year prior to submittal of the progress report; and c. A projected schedule for actions during the year following submittal of the progress report. Maintenance of Wastewater Ponds Permit Issued: Page 39 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 8. Industrial Pond System 2. Operation and Maintenance 2.5 Liner Performance. Wastewater ponds at the facility shall maintain liner systems that restrict infiltration losses to less than 500 gallons per acre per day if the pond was constructed after May 16, 1975 or less than 3,500 gallons per acre per day if the pond was constructed before May 16, 1975. 2.6 Locational Standards. All of the following locational standards apply to any wastewater impoundment at the Facility: a. The impoundment must be located entirely above the high water table. A minimum separation of 4 feet (1.2m) between the bottom of the pond and the maximum ground water elevation should be maintained. b. The impoundment may not be located within a shoreland or wild and scenic river land use district governed by Minn. R. chapters 6105 and 6120. c. The impoundment may not be located within a wetland. d. The impoundment may not be located within a location where emissions of air pollutants would violate the ambient air quality standards in Minn. R. chapters 7005, 7007, 7009, 7011, 7017, 7019, and 7028 and Minn. R pans 7023.0100 to 7023.0120. e. The impoundment may not be located in the designated Karst Region in the Southeastern portion of Minnesota that was subject to the 1993 Administrative Order that required the preparation of a contingency plan. f. The impoundment should not be located in an area which is unsuitable because of topography, geology, hydrology, or soils. 2.7 Operating Depth. All of the following apply to impoundments at the Facility: a. Except for impoundments lined with synthetic material, such as HDPE or PVC, impoundments that do not discharge continuously shall maintain a minimum depth of 2 feet at all times, except for maintenance. b. At least 3 feet freeboard on all impoundments and wastewater solids containment dams at the Facility shall be maintained at all times. 2.8 An approved rip rap cover that meets MPCA's "Riprap Criteria for Stabilization Ponds" (5/91) shall be maintained on any earthen wastewater impoundment dikes from one foot above the high water line to the toe of the dike. Where riprap is not used, the Permittee shall maintain a vegetative cover of shallow- rooted, perennial, low- growing grasses that withstand erosion and inundation and that can be mowed. 2.9 Plants with long root structures, such as alfalfa, reed canary, willows, poplars, cottonwoods, shrubs, and cattails shall not be allowed to grow in the pond or on the dikes, regardless of water depth in the pond. Such harmful vegetative growth shall be controlled and such plants removed from the pond and pond structure. 2.10 The Permittee shall use approved methods to prevent muskrats and other burrowing animals from tunneling and causing damage to the pond liner or dikes. Nesting and transient birds (including waterfowl) shall be restricted so that their presence does not affect the quality or integrity of the ponds. 2.11 The Permittee shall maintain a perimeter fence around the wastewater treatment system. Appropriate signs should be provided along all fences to designate the nature of the facility and advise against trespassing. At least one sign shall be provided on each side of the site, and one for every 500 feet of its perimeter. 2.12 In addition to the requirements of this Permit, the Permittee shall operate and maintain the pond system in general accordance with MPCA's "Stabilization Pond Manual" (1999). Solids Removal Permit Issued: Page 40 Permit Expires Permit N: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 8. Industrial Pond System 2. Operation and Maintenance 2.13 Prior to the excavation or removal of solids from any wastewater pond at the facility, the Permittee shall implement measures to maintain the integrity of the pond liner during the removal process. 2.14 A water balance evaluation shall be completed on the pond within seven months of each removal action, the results of which shall be made available for MPCA review at the facility or upon request. The water balance evaluation procedure is described in the MPCA document "Pref ll and Water Balance Criteria (7/89)." 2.15 Ground water quality monitoring results shall be evaluated before and after the excavation or removal to assess the potential impacts of the pond on ground water. Any significant changes shall be reported to the MPCA on the next scheduled Discharge Monitoring Report. 2.16 No impact demonstration. The requirements of parts 2.12 and /or 2.13 of this Chapter can be foregone if the Permittee can successfully demonstrate that the removal action will not impact the liner of the wastewater impoundment, or the integrity thereof. To make this demonstration, submit a Removal Plan for MPCA review and approval at least 90 days prior to the anticipated removal date. The Removal Plan should include, at a minimum, a description of the proposed methodolog(ies) to be used for the excavation or removal or solids, any proposed deviations from the water balance procedure cited in subpart a, above, and justification that the removal action does not impact the liner of the wastewater impoundment. 'the requirement to comply with parts 2.12 and /or 2.13 of this Chapter shall only be waived after written confirmation of approval of the Removal Plan by the Agency. Inspection of Wastewater Ponds 2.17 The Permittee shall inspect the pond system weekly, and shall take measurements of pond water depth, estimate the coverage of aquatic plants, floating mats and ice cover on the surface of the ponds, and note odors, the condition of the dikes and the presence of muskrats, birds (including waterfowl) and/or other animals. The Permittee shall maintain records of these weekly inspections for the last three (3) years, and submit the results on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) supplemental form. 2.18 The Permittee shall maintain daily precipitation records. 3. Application for Permit Reissuance 3.1 By the end of each calendar five years following permit issuance, wastewater treatment ponds; related conveyances; and appurtenances to the pond system at the permitted facility shall be inspected and certified for structural integrity, complete containment, and compliance with performance standards. 3.2 The inspection and certification shall be completed by a registered professional engineer with expertise in wastewater structures. 33 An inspection report shall be prepared by the professional engineer and submitted with the application for permit reissuance and /or every five years, whichever comes first. 3.4 If repairs are necessary as a result of the professional engineer's inspection, a detailed proposal for restoration shall be submitted to the Agency for review within 180 days of discovery, and at least 60 days prior to initiation of restoration work. Chapter 9. Intervention Limits 1. Sampling and Analyses 1.1 If an intervention limit for SD007 is exceeded the Pernittee shall immediately discontinued /cease discharge from S13007. Permit Issued: Page 41 Permit Expires: Permit 4: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 9. Intervention Limits 1. Sampling and Analyses 1.2 If an intervention limit for WS001 is exceeded, the Permittee shall: a. sample the monitoring station again within two (2) days of receiving sample results if the previous samples at the facility did not exceed the intervention limit; b. evaluate the significance and the cause of the intervention limit having been exceeded; c. evaluate the need for immediate corrective action to prevent pollutant levels from exceeding the intervention limits again; and d, evaluate the need for changes in monitoring, including but not limited to, increasing sampling frequencies, changing the characteristics monitored, installing additional monitoring stations, and reducing pollutant loadings. 2. Special Requirements 2.1 If an intervention limit for SDO07 is exceeded the Permittee shall initiate the following actions to preclude a violation of effluent limitations listed in the Limits and Monitoring Requirements section: a. discharge from SDO07 shall be immediately discontinued /cease; b. evaluate the cause of the intervention limit having been exceeded; c. evaluate corrective action(s) necessary to prevent pollutant levels from exceeding the intervention limits in the future; d. evaluate necessary changes in the EPWPT temporary GAC filtration system (including but not limited to the items listed for WS001 below); and e. submit a Discharge Evaluation Report (as outlined in the Reporting section below) to reestablish acceptable levels of discharge from SDO07. The Discharge Evaluation Report shall include a schedule of activities to lower pollutant discharges from SDO07 to levels below intervention limitations. Discharges from SDO07 are prohibited, following an intervention limit exceedance, until corrective actions have been completed and written approval has been granted by the MPCA. 2.2 If an intervention limit for WS001 is exceeded the Permittee shall consider and initiate the following corrective actions to preclude a violation of effluent limitation as listed in the Limits and Monitoring Requirements section: a. curtailment of discharges from the pilot test extraction wells; b. acceleration of carbon change -out for the lead and lag units; c. installation of additional carbon units; and /or e. a combination of remediation strategies listed herein. 3. Reporting 3.1 The Permittee shall submit a Discharge Evaluation Report with the monthly Discharge Monitoring Report; after obtaining sample results indicating an intervention limit exceedance. 3.2 This report shall describe the evaluations and conclusions, and the schedule of actions taken to prevent the limits from being exceeded. Pennit Issued: Page 42 Pennit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 9. Intervention Limits 3. Reporting 3.3 This report shall describe the evaluations and conclusions, and the schedule of actions taken or planned to prevent the intervention limits from being exceeded. Chapter 10. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing - Acute 1. General Requirements 1.1 The Permittee shall conduct annual acute toxicity test batteries on Discharge SD003 beginning with the issuance date of the permit. The first set of annual results are due one year from the end of the first full calendar quarter following permit issuance and annually thereafter. (For example, if the permit is issued April 28, the first test results are due October 1 of the following year.) 2. Species and Procedural Requirements 2.1 Tests shall be conducted in accordance with procedures outlined in EPA- 821 -R -02 -012 "Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms" - Fifth Edition (Acute Manual) and any revisions to the Manual. Any test that is begun with an effluent sample that exceeds a total ammonia concentration of 10 mg /l shall use the carbon dioxide - controlled atmosphere technique to control PH drift. 2.2 Test organisms for each test battery shall include the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas)- Method 2001 A, Ceriodaphnia dubia- Method 2002.0, and Daphnia magna - Method 2021.0. 2.3 Static renewal acute serial dilution tests of the effluent shall consist of a control 12, 25, 50, 75 and 100 percent effluent. 2.4 All effluent samples shall be flow proportioned, 24 -hour composites samples. Test solutions shall be renewed daily. Testing of the effluent shall begin within 36 hours of sample collection. Receiving water collected outside of the influence of discharge shall be used for dilution and controls. Acute toxicity tests shall be conducted in accordance with procedures outlined in EPA Manual 821 -R -02 -012 "Methods of Measuring Acute Toxicity in Effluent and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms" - Fifth Edition (Acute Manual), and any revisions to the Manual. 2.5 Any other circumstances not addressed in the previous requirements or that require deviation from that specified in the previous requirements shall first be approved by the MPCA. 3. Quality Control and Report Submittals 33 Any test that does not meet quality control measures, or results which the Permittee believes reflect an artifact of testing shall be repeated within two (2) weeks. These reports shall contain information consistent with the report preparation section of the Acute Manual. The MPCA shall make the final determination regarding test validity. Permit Issued: Page 43 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 10. Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing - Acute 4. Positive Toxicity Result for WET 4.1 Should a test exceed 0.9999/1.0 TUa for whole effluent toxicity based on results from the most sensitive test species, the Permittee shall conduct two repeat test batteries on all species. The repeat tests are to be completed within forty -five (45) days after completion of the positive test. These tests will be used to determine if toxicity exceeding 0.9999/1.0 TUa remains present for any test species. If no toxicity is present above 0.9999/1.0 TUa for any test species, the Permittee shall return to the test frequency specified by the permit If the repeat test batteries indicate toxicity above 0.9999/1.0 TUa for any test species, the Permittee shall submit for MPCA review a plan for conducting a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) including the Facility Performance Review (to be submitted to the MPCA WQ Submittals Center within 60 days after the toxicity discovery date), and at a minimum, provide quarterly reports, starting from the date of TRE submittal, regarding progress towards the identity, source, and any plans for the removal of the toxicity. The TRE shall be consistent with EPA guidance or subsequent procedures approved by the MPCA in attempting to identify and remove the source of the toxicity. Routinely scheduled acute toxicity test batteries required in this permit section shall be suspended for the duration of the TRE. The return to routine acute toxicity testing is subject to successful completion of conformation testing, as determined by the MPCA. Amendments to the initial TRE shall be approved by MPCA staff and the schedules identified therein. 5. WET Data and Test Acceptability Criteria (TAC) Submittal 5.1 All WET test data and TAC must be submitted to the MPCA by the dates required by this section of the permit using the following form(s) and associated instruction forms: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Acute Toxicity Test Report/ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Ceriodaphnia dubia Chronic Toxicity Test Report/ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Fathead Minnow Chronic Toxicity Test Report. Data not submitted on the correct form(s), or submitted incomplete, will be returned to the permittee and deemed incomplete until adequately submitted on the designated form (identified above). Data should be submitted to: MPCA Attn: WQ Submittals Center 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 -4194 6. Permit Re- opening for WET 6.1 Based on the results of the testing, the permit may be modified to include additional toxicity testing and a whole effluent toxicity limit. 7. Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement Definitions 7.1 "Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Toxicity Test" is a static renewal test conducted on an exponentially diluted series of effluent. The purpose is to calculate the proportion of effluent that causes 50 percent mortality/immobility of aquatic organisms at 48 or 96 hours. An LC50 /EC50 (lethal /immobile concentration) less than or equal to 100 percent effluent constitutes a positive for toxicity. 7.2 "Acute toxic unit (TUa)" is the reciprocal of the effluent dilution that causes the acute effect by the end of the acute exposure period. For example, a TUa equals (100% effluent) /(48 or 96 hour LC50 in %). 73 "Test" refers to an individual species. 7.4 "Test Battery" consists of WET testing of all test species for the specified test. For acute WET testing, all test species includes Fathead minnows, daphnia magna, and ceriodaphnia dubia. Permit Issued. Page 44 Permit Expires: Permit k: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter Lt. Facility Specific Definitions 1. Definitions L 1 Please refer to the'Permit Users Manual' included with the permit for standard definitions. Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements General Requirements 1.1 Incorporation by Reference. The following applicable federal and state laws are incorporated by reference in this permit, are applicable to the Permittee, and are enforceable parts of this permit: 40 CFR pts. 122.41, 122.42, 136, 403 and 503; Minn. R. pts. 7001, 7041, 7045, 7050, 7052, 7053, 7060, and 7080; and Minn. Stat. Sec. 115 and 116. 1.2 Permittee Responsibility. The Permittee shall perform the actions or conduct the activity authorized by the permit in compliance with the conditions of the permit and, if required, in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the Agency. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item E) 1.3 Toxic Discharges Prohibited. Whether or not this permit includes effluent limitations for toxic pollutants, the Permittee shall not discharge a toxic pollutant except according to Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, sections 400 to 460 and Minnesota Rules 7050, 7052, 7053 and any other applicable MPCA rules. (Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp.l, item A) 1.4 Nuisance Conditions Prohibited. The Permittee's discharge shall not cause any nuisance conditions including, but not limited to: floating solids, scum and visible oil film, acutely toxic conditions to aquatic life, or other adverse impact on the receiving water. (Minn. R. 7050.0210 subp. 2) L5 Property Rights. This permit does not convey a property right or an exclusive privilege. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item C) 1.6 Liability Exemption. In issuing this permit, the state and the MPCA assume no responsibility for damage to persons, property, or the environment caused by the activities of the Permittee in the conduct of its actions, including those activities authorized, directed, or undertaken under this permit. To the extent the state and the MPCA may be liable for the activities of its employees, that liability is explicitly limited to that provided in the Tort Claims Act. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item O) 1.7 The MPCA's issuance of this permit does not obligate the MPCA to enforce local laws, rules, or plans beyond what is authorized by Minnesota Statutes. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.3, item D) 1.8 Liabilities. The MPCA's issuance of this permit does not release the Permittee from any liability, penalty or duty imposed by Minnesota or federal statutes or rules or local ordinances, except the obligation to obtain the permit. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.3, item A) 1.9 The issuance of this permit does not prevent the future adoption by the MPCA of pollution control rules, standards, or orders more stringent than those now in existence and does not prevent the enforcement of these rules, standards, or orders against the Permittee. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.3, item B) 1.10 Severability. The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provisions of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected thereby. 1.11 Compliance with Other Rules and Statutes. The Permittee shall comply with all applicable air quality, solid waste, and hazardous waste statutes and rules in the operation and maintenance of the facility. Permit Issued'. Page 45 Permit Expires: Permit H: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.12 Inspection and Entry. When authorized by Minn. Star. Sec. 115.04; 11513.17, subd. 4; and 116.091, and upon presentation of proper credentials, the agency, or an authorized employee or agent of the agency, shall be allowed by the Permittee to enter at reasonable times upon the property of the Permittee to examine and copy books, papers, records, or memoranda pertaining to the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or pertaining to the activity covered by the permit; and to conduct surveys and investigations, including sampling or monitoring, pertaining to the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or pertaining to the activity covered by the permit. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.3, item I) 1.13 Control Users. The Permittee shall regulate the users of its wastewater treatment facility so as to prevent the introduction of pollutants or materials that may result in the inhibition or disruption of the conveyance system, treatment facility or processes, or disposal system that would contribute to the violation of the conditions of this permit or any federal, state or local law or regulation. Sampling 1.14 Representative Sampling. Samples and measurements required by this permit shall be conducted as specified in this permit and shall be representative of the discharge or monitored activity. (40 CFR 122.41 0)(1)) 1.15 Additional Sampling. If the Permittee monitors more frequently than required, the results and the frequency of monitoring shall be reported on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) or another MPCA - approved form for that reporting period. (Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, item E) 1.16 Certified Laboratory. A laboratory certified by the Minnesota Department of Health shall conduct analyses required by this permit. Analyses of dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature and total residual oxidants (chlorine, bromine) do not need to be completed by a certified laboratory but shall comply with manufacturers specifications for equipment calibration and use. (Minn. Star. Sec. 144.97 through 144.98 and Minn. R. 4740.2010 and 4740.2050 through 4740.2120) (Minn. R. 4740.2010 and 4740.2050 through 2120) 1.17 Sample Preservation and Procedure. Sample preservation and test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to 40 CFR Part 136 and Minn. R. 7041.3200. 1.18 Equipment Calibration: Flow meters, pumps, flumes, lift stations or other flow monitoring equipment used for purposes of determining compliance with permit shall be checked and /or calibrated for accuracy at least twice annually. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, items B and C) 1.19 Maintain Records. The Permittee shall keep the records required by this permit for at least three years, including any calculations, original recordings from automatic monitoring instruments, and laboratory sheets. The Permittee shall extend these record retention periods upon request of the MPCA. The Permittee shall maintain records for each sample and measurement. The records shall include the following information (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, item C): a. The exact place, date, and time of the sample or measurement; b. The date of analysis; c. The name of the person who performed the sample collection, measurement, analysis, or calculation; and d. The analytical techniques, procedures and methods used; and e. The results of the analysis. Permit Issued: Page 46 Permit Expires: Permit#: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.20 Completing Reports. The Permittee shall submit the results of the required sampling and monitoring activities on the forms provided, specified, or approved by the MPCA. The information shall be recorded in the specified areas on those forms and in the twits specified. (Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, item D; Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, item B) Required forms may include: DMR Supplemental Form Individual values for each sample and measurement must be recorded on the DMR Supplemental Form which, if required, will be provided by the MPCA. DMR Supplemental Forms shall be submitted with the appropriate DMRs. You may design and use your own supplemental form; however it must be approved by the MPCA. Note: Required summary information MUST also be recorded on the DMR. Summary information that is submitted ONLY on the DMR Supplemental Form does not comply with the reporting requirements. 1.21 Submitting Reports. DMRs and DMR Supplemental Forms shall be submitted to: MPCA Attn: Discharge Monitoring Reports 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 -4194. DMRs and DMR Supplemental Forms shall be postmarked by the 21 st day of the month following the sampling period or as otherwise specified in this permit. A DMR shall be submitted for each required station even if no discharge occurred during the reporting period. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subps. 2.13 and 3.H) Other reports required by this permit shall be postmarked by the date specified in the permit to: MPCA Atkin: WQ Submittals Center 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 -4194 1.22 Incomplete or Incorrect Reports. The Permittee shall immediately submit an amended report or DMR to the MPCA upon discovery by the Permittee or notification by the MPCA that it has submitted an incomplete or incorrect report or DMR The amended report or DMR shall contain the missing or corrected data along with a cover letter explaining the circumstances of the incomplete or incorrect report. (Minn. R. 7001.0150 subp. 3, item G) 1.23 Required Signatures. All DMRs, forms, reports, and other documents submitted to the MPCA shall be signed by the Permittee or the duly authorized representative of the Permittee. Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, item D. The person or persons that sign the DMRs, forms, reports or other documents must certify that he or she understands and complies with the certification requirements of Minn. R. 7001.0070 and 7001.0540, including the penalties for submitting false information. Technical documents, such as design drawings and specifications and engineering studies required to be submitted as part of a permit application or by permit conditions, must be certified by a registered professional engineer. (Minn. R. 7001.0540) Permit Issued: Page 47 Permit Expires: Permit # MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.24 Detection Level. The Permittee shall report monitoring results below the reporting limit (RL) of a particular instrument as " <" the value of the RL. For example, if an instrument has a RL of 0.1 mg /L and a parameter is not detected at a value of 0.1 mg/L or greater, the concentration shall be reported as " <0.1 mg/L." "Non - detected," "undetected," "below detection limit," and "zero" are unacceptable reporting results, and are permit reporting violations. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, item B) Where sample values are less than the level of detection and the permit requires reporting of an average, the Permittee shall calculate the average as follows: a. If one or more values are greater than the level of detection, substitute zero for all nondetectable values to use in the average calculation. b. If all values are below the level of detection, report the averages as " <" the corresponding level of detection. c. Where one or more sample values are less than the level of detection, and the permit requires reporting of a mass, usually expressed as kg/day, the Permittee shall substitute zero for all nondetectable values. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 2, item B) 1.25 Records. The Permittee shall, when requested by the Agency, submit within a reasonable time the information and reports that are relevant to the control of pollution regarding the construction, modification, or operation of the facility covered by the permit or regarding the conduct of the activity covered by the permit. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item H) 1.26 Confidential Information. Except for data determined to be confidential according to Minn. Star. Sec. 116.075, subd. 2, all reports required by this permit shall be available for public inspection. Effluent data shall not be considered confidential. To request the Agency maintain data as confidential, the Permittee must follow Minn. R. 7000.1300. Noncompliance and Enforcement 1.27 Subject to Enforcement Action and Penalties. Noncompliance with a term or condition of this permit subjects the Permittee to penalties provided by federal and state law set forth in section 309 of the Clean Water Act; United States Code, title 33, section 1319, as amended; and in Minn. Star. Sec. 115.071 and 116.072, including monetary penalties, imprisonment, or both. (Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, item B) 1.28 Criminal Activity. The Permittee may not knowingly make a false statement, representation, or certification in a record or other document submitted to the Agency. A person who falsifies a report or document submitted to the Agency, or tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate a monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit is subject to criminal and civil penalties provided by federal and state law. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp.3, item G., 7001.1090, subps. 1, items G and IT and Minn. Stat. Sec. 609.671) 1.29 Noncompliance Defense. It shall not be a defense for the Permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. (40 CFR 122.41(c)) 1.30 Effluent Violations. If sampling by the Permittee indicates a violation of any discharge limitation specified in this permit, the Permittee shall immediately make every effort to verify the violation by collecting additional samples, if appropriate, investigate the cause of the violation, and take action to prevent future violations. Violations that are determined to pose a threat to human health or a drinking water supply, or represent a significant risk to the environment shall be immediately reported to the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer at 1(800)422 -0798 (toll free) or (651)649 -5451 (metro area). III addition, you may also contact the MPCA during business hours. Otherwise the violations and the results of any additional sampling shall be recorded on the next appropriate DMR or report. Permit Issued: Page 48 Permit Expires: Permit 9: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.31 Unauthorized Releases of Wastewater Prohibited. Except for conditions specifically described in Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, items J and K, all unauthorized bypasses, overflows, discharges, spills, or other releases of wastewater or materials to the environment, whether intentional or not, are prohibited. However, the MPCA will consider the Permittee's compliance with permit requirements, frequency of release, quantity, type, location, and other relevant factors when determining appropriate action. (40 CFR 122.41 and Minn. Stat. Sec 115.061) 1.32 Discovery of a release. Upon discovery of a release, the Permittee shall: a. Take all reasonable steps to immediately end the release. b. Notify the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer at 1(800)422 -0798 (toll free) or (651)649 -5451 (metro area) immediately upon discovery of the release. In addition, you may also contact the MPCA during business hours at 1(800) 657 -3864. c. Recover as rapidly and as thoroughly as possible all substances and materials released or immediately take other action as may be reasonably possible to minimize or abate pollution to waters of the state or potential impacts to human health caused thereby. If the released materials or substances cannot be immediately or completely recovered, the Permittee shall contact the MPCA. If directed by the MPCA, the Permittee shall consult with other local, state or federal agencies (such as the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources andlor the Wetland Conservation Act authority) for implementation of additional clean -up or remediation activities in wetland or other sensitive areas. d. Collect representative samples of the release. The Permittee shall sample the release for parameters of concern immediately following discovery of the release. The Permittee may contact the MPCA during business hours to discuss the sampling parameters and protocol. In addition, Fecal Coliform Bacteria samples shall be collected where it is determined by the Permittee that the release contains or may contain sewage. If the release cannot be immediately stopped, the Pennittee shall consult with MPCA regarding additional sampling requirements. Samples shall be collected at least, but not limited to, two times per week for as long as the release continues. e. Submit the sampling results as directed by the MPCA. At a minimum, the results shall be submitted to the MPCA with the next DMR. 1.33 Upset Defense. In the event of temporary noncompliance by the Permittee with an applicable effluent limitation resulting from an upset at the Permittee's facility due to factors beyond the control of the Pennittee, the Permittee has an affirmative defense to an enforcement action brought by the Agency as a result of the noncompliance if the Permittee demonstrates by a preponderance of competent evidence: a. The specific cause of the upset; b. That the upset was unintentional; c. That the upset resulted from factors beyond the reasonable control of the Permittee and did not result from operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventative maintenance, or increases in production which are beyond the design capability of the treatment facilities; d. That at the time of the upset the facility was being properly operated; e. That the Permittee properly notified the Commissioner of the upset in accordance with Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, item I; and f. That the Permittee implemented the remedial measures required by Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item J. Operation and Maintenance Permit Issued: Page 49 Permit Expires: Permit N: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.34 The Permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain the facilities and systems of treatment and control, and the appurtenances related to them which are installed or used by the Permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. Proper operation and maintenance includes effective performance, adequate funding, adequate operator staffing and training, and adequate laboratory and process controls, including appropriate quality assurance procedures. The Permittee shall install and maintain appropriate backup or auxiliary facilities if they are necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit and, for all permits other than hazardous waste facility permits, if these backup or auxiliary facilities are technically and economically feasible Minn. R. 7001.0150. subp. 3, item F. 1.35 b1 the event of a reduction or loss of effective treatment of wastewater at the facility, the Permittee shall control production or curtail its discharges to the extent necessary to maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit. The Permittee shall continue this control or curtailment until the wastewater treatment facility has been restored or until an alternative method of treatment is provided. (Minn. R. 7001.1090, subp. 1, item C) 1.36 Solids Management. 'the Permittee shall properly store, transport, and dispose of biosolids, septage, sediments, residual solids, filter backwash, screenings, oil, grease, and other substances so that pollutants do not enter surface waters or ground waters of the state. Solids should be disposed of in accordance with local, state and federal requirements. (40 CFR 503 and Minn. R. 7041 and applicable federal and state solid waste rules) 1_37 Scheduled Maintenance. The Permittee shall schedule maintenance of the treatment works during non - critical water quality periods to prevent degradation of water quality, except where emergency maintenance is required to prevent a condition that would be detrimental to water quality or human health. ( Minn. R. 7001.0150. subp. 3, item F and Minn. R. 7001.0150. subp. 2, item B) 1.38 Control Tests. In -plant control tests shall be conducted at a frequency adequate to ensure compliance with the conditions of this permit. (Minn. R. 7001.0150. subp. 3, item F and Minn. R. 7001.0150. subp. 2, item B) Changes to the Facility or Permit 1.39 Permit Modifications. No person required by statute or rule to obtain a permit may construct, install, modify, or operate the facility to be permitted, nor shall a person commence an activity for which a permit is required by statute or rule until the Agency has issued a written permit for the facility or activity. (Minn. R. 7001.0030) Permittees that propose to make a change to the facility or discharge that requires a permit modification must follow Minn. R. 7001.0190. If the Permittee cannot determine whether a permit modification is needed, the Permittee must contact the MPCA prior to any action. It is recommended that the application for permit modification be submitted to the MPCA at least 180 days prior to the planned change. 1.40 Construction. No construction shall begin until the Pennittee receives written approval of plans and specifications from the MPCA (Minn. Stat. Sec. 115.03(1)). Plans, specifications and MPCA approval are not necessary when maintenance dictates the need for installation of new equipment, provided the equipment is the same design size and has the same design intent. For instance, a broken pipe, lift station pump, aerator, or blower can be replaced with the same design -sized equipment without MPCA approval. If the proposed construction is not expressly authorized by this permit, it may require a permit modification. If the construction project requires an Environmental Assessment Worksheet under Minn. R. 4410, no construction shall begin until a negative declaration is issued and all approvals are received or implemented. 1.41 Report Changes. The Permittee shall give advance notice as soon as possible to the MPCA of any substantial changes in operational procedures, activities that may alter the nature or frequency of the discharge, and /or material factors that may affect compliance with the conditions of this permit. (Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3, item M) Permit issued: Page 50 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.42 Chemical Additives. The Permittee shall receive prior written approval from the MPCA before increasing the use of a chemical additive authorized by this permit, or using a chemical additive not authorized by this permit, in quantities or concentrations that have the potential to change the characteristics, nature and /or quality of the discharge. The Permittee shall request approval for an increased or new use of a chemical additive at least 60 days, or as soon as possible, before the proposed increased or new use. This written request shall include at least the following information for the proposed additive: a. The process for which the additive will be used; b. Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) which shall include aquatic toxicity, human health, and environmental fate information for the proposed additive; c. A complete product use and instruction label; d. The commercial and chemical names and Chemical Abstract Survey (CAS) number for all ingredients in the additive (If the MSDS does not include information on chemical composition, including percentages for each ingredient totaling to 100 %, the Permittee shall contact the supplier to have this information provided); and e. The proposed method of application, application frequency, concentration, and daily average and maximum rates of use. Upon review of the information submitted regarding the proposed chemical additive, the MPCA may require additional information be submitted for consideration. This permit may be modified to restrict the use or discharge of a chemical additive and include additional influent and effluent monitoring requirements. Approval for the use of an additive shall not justify the exceedance of any effluent limitation nor shall it be used as a defense against pollutant levels in the discharge causing or contributing to the violation of a water quality standard. (Minn. R. 7001.0170) 1.43 MPCA Initiated Permit Modification, Suspension, or Revocation. The MPCA may modify or revoke and reissue this permit pursuant to Minn. R. 7001.0170. The MPCA may revoke without reissuance this permit pursuant to Minn. R. 7001.0180. 1.44 TMDL Impacts. Facilities that discharge to an impaired surface water, watershed or drainage basin may be required to comply with additional permits or permit requirements, including additional restriction or relaxation of limits and monitoring as authorized by the CWA 303(d)(4)(A) and 40 CPR 122.44.1.2.1., necessary to ensure consistency with the assumptions and requirements of any applicable US EPA approved wasteload allocations resulting from Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) studies. 1.45 Permit Transfer. The permit is not transferable to any person without the express written approval of the Agency after compliance with the requirements of Minn. R. 7001.0190. A person to whom the permit has been transferred shall comply with the conditions of the permit. (Minn. R., 7001.0150, subp. 3, item N) Permit Issued, Page 51 Permit Expires: Permit #: MN0001449 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Chapter 12. Total Facility Requirements 1. General Requirements 1.46 Facility Closure. The Permittee is responsible for closure and postelosure care of the facility. The Permittee shall notify the MPCA of a significant reduction or cessation of the activities described in this permit at least 180 days before the reduction or cessation. The MPCA may require the Permittee to provide to the MPCA a facility Closure Plan for approval. Facility closure that could result in a potential long -term water quality concern, such as the ongoing discharge of wastewater to surface or ground water, may require a permit modification or reissuance. The MPCA may require the Permittee to establish and maintain financial assurance to ensure performance of certain obligations under this permit, including closure, postelosure care and remedial action at the facility. If financial assurance is required, the amount and type of financial assurance, and proposed modifications to previously MPCA - approved financial assurance, shall be approved by the MPCA. (Minn. Stat. Sec. 116.07, subd. 4) 1.47 Permit Reissuance. If the Permittee desires to continue permit coverage beyond the date of permit expiration, the Permittee shall submit an application for reissuance at least 180 days before permit expiration. If the Permittee does not intend to continue the activities authorized by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the Permittee shall notify the MPCA in writing at least 180 days before permit expiration. If the Pennittee has submitted a timely application for permit reissuance, the Permittee may continue to conduct the activities authorized by this permit, in compliance with the requirements of this permit, until the MPCA takes final action on the application, unless the MPCA determines any of the following (Minn. R. 7001.0040 and 7001.0160): a. The Permittee is not in substantial compliance with the requirements of this permit, or with a stipulation agreement or compliance schedule designed to bring the Pennittee into compliance with this permit; b. The MPCA, as a result of an action or failure to act by the Permittee, has been unable to take final action on the application on or before the expiration date of the permit; c. The Permittee has submitted an application with major deficiencies or has failed to properly supplement the application in a timely manner after being informed of deficiencies. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System /State Disposal System (NPDES /SDS) Permit Program Fact Sheet Facility Name: 3M Cottage Grove Wastewater Treatment Facility 10746 Innovation Road Cottage Grove, MN Permit Number: MN0001449 Current Permit Expiration: January 31, 2008 Public Comment Period Begins: January 3, 2011 Period Ends: February 2, 2011 Receiving Water: Mississippi River via an unnamed creek Class 213, 3C, 4A, 413, 5, and 6 Proposed Action: Permit Reissuance/Modifcation Permitting Contact Scott Knowles, P. F. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 525 South Lake Ave, Ste. 400 Duluth, MN 55802 Phone: 218- 302 -6651 Fax: 218-723-4727 e -mail: scott.knowles @state.mn.us Table of Contents Purpose and Participation Fact Sheet Purpose Applicable Statutes Public Participation Facility Description Background Information Facility Location Legal Description Outfall Location Legal Description Permitted Facility Map Components and Treatment Technology Current Information Flow Schematic Changes to Facility or Operation Recent Compliance History Recent Monitoring History Receiving Water 19 Use Classification 19 Impairments, Listings, and Total Maximum Daily Load Studies 20 Existing Permit Effluent Limits Technology Based Effluent Limits Water Quality Based Effluent Limits Proposed Permit Effluent Limits Technology Based Effluent Limits Water Quality Based Effluent Limits Additional Requirements Compliance Schedules Total Facility Requirements Nondegredation and Anti- backsliding 20 20 20 20 20 20 27 27 27 27 Purpose and Participation Applicable Statutes This fact sheet has been prepared according to the Title 40 Federal Code of Regulations (CFR) § 124.8 and 124.56 and Minn. R. 7001 .0100, Subp. 3 in regards to a draft NPDES /SDS permit to construct and /or operate wastewater treatment facilities and to discharge into waters of the State of Minnesota. Purpose This fact sheet outlines the principal issues related to the preparation of this draft permit and documents the decisions that were made in the determination of the effluent limitations and conditions of this permit. Public Participation You may submit written comments on the terms of the draft permit or on the Commissioner's preliminary determination. Your written comments must include the following: I . A statement of your interest in the permit application or the draft permit. 2. A statement of the action you wish the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to take, including specific references to sections of the draft permit that you believe should be changed. 3. The reasons supporting your position, stated with sufficient specificity as to allow the Commissioner to investigate the merits of your position. Public Informational Meeting An informal public informational meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 26, 2011, from 6:30 to 9 p.m. Location of the meeting is: Washington County South Service Center 13000 Ravine Parkway Cottage Grove, MN 55016 This informal informational meeting is to solicit public comment and statements on matters before the MPCA, and to help clarify and resolve issues. Contested Case Hearing In addition, you may submit apetition for a contested case hearing. A contested case hearing is a formal hearing before an administrative law judge. Your petition requesting a contested case hearing must include a statement of reasons or proposed findings supporting the MPCA decision to hold a contested case hearing pursuant to the criteria identified in Minn. R. 7000.1900, Subp. 1 and a statement of the issues proposed to be addressed by a contested case hearing and the specific relief requested. To the extent known, your petition should include a proposed list of witnesses to be presented at the hearing, a proposed list of publications, references or studies to be introduced at the hearing, and an estimate of time required for you to present the matter at hearing. You must submit all comments, requests, and petitions during the public comment period identified on page 1 of this notice. All written comments, requests, and petitions received during the public comment period will be considered in the final decisions regarding the permit. If the MPCA does not receive any written comments, requests, or petitions during the public comment period, the Commissioner or other MPCA staff as authorized by the Commissioner will make the final decision concerning the draft permit. During the public comment period, however, you may request that the draft permit be presented to the MPCA's Citizens' Board (Board) for final decision. You may participate in the activities of the Board as provided in Minn. R. 7000.0650. Comments, petitions, and /or requests must be submitted by the last day of the public comment period to: Scott Knowles, P. E. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 525 South Lake Avenue, Ste. 400 Duluth, MN 55802 The permit will be issued /reissued /modified if the MPCA determines that the proposed Permittee or Permittees will, with respect to the facility or activity to be permitted, comply or undertake a schedule to achieve compliance with all applicable state and federal pollution control statutes and rules administered by the MPCA and the conditions of the permit and that all applicable requirements of Minn. Star. ch. 116D and the rules promulgated thereunder have been fulfilled. More detail on all requirements placed on the facility may be found in the Permit document. Facility Description Background Information Facility& Outfall Location The 3M Cottage Grove Center facility (Facility) is located at SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 27 North, Range 21 West, Cottage Grove, Washington County, Minnesota. Map of Permitted Facility See draft permit. Components and Treatment Technology Current Information & Flow Schematic See draft permit. Changes to Facility or Operation See the 2003 permit and fact sheets (Appendix A & B below). For future issues, see facility description in the draft permit. Recent Compliance History MPCA staff conducted the last Compliance Evaluation Inspection (CEI) at the Facility (NPDES /SDS Permit No. MN0001449) on 8/27/2009. No enforcement action(s) were taken. Recent Monitorina History Seven acute whole effluent toxicity (WET) tests have been submitted since 2005 for outfall SD003. Two acute test performed in 2006 were unacceptable because the samples exceeded required holding time periods. However, the re -test illustrated no acute toxicity problems. The five acceptable acute tests have shown no acute toxicity at this outfall. Therefore, it is concluded that the effluent does not exhibit acute toxicity pursuant to Minn. R. 7053.0215, Subp. 1. PFC monitoring has been performed on SD001 and SD002 pursuant to the existing permit. Recent monitoring data for detectable levels of PFCs is shown below. 4 2009 SD001 PFCs 2010 SDOO1 PFCs PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 PFDA (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFNA C10 PFBS PFHS PFOS 0.426 0.110 C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C9 acid acid C4 C6 C8 73.1 10.7 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) FOSA Jan -10 41.2 6.45 3.95 0.601 16.8 0.0600 0.0386 11.1 0.800 2.61 ND Feb -10 32.3 6.51 3.77 0.301 2.45 ND ND 9.92 0.593 0.393 ND Mar -10 33.1 2.91 2.17 0.201 1.26 ND ND 11.8 0.450 0.217 ND Apr -10 32.7 5.24 5.15 1.22 43.2 0.128 0.0987 17.3 1.50 9.01 0.0313 May -10 60.0 4.44 2.57 0.232 1.41 ND ND 28.7 0.445 0.221 ND Jun -10 59.1 0.674 5.83 0.340 2.90 ND ND 35.4 0.450 0.238 ND Jul -10 60.7 9.73 6.23 0.511 5.16 ND ND 43.4 0.713 0.352 ND 2009 SD001 PFCs 5 PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Jan -09 42.3 1.84 0.629 0.0437 0.377 1.92 0.426 0.110 Feb -09 47.9 7.61 4.13 0.402 2.33 8.74 0.781 0.251 Mar -09 73.1 10.7 4.51 0.431 2.78 13.2 0.620 0.179 Apr -09 38.6 1.01 0.495 0.0963 1.85 0.880 0.527 0.189 May -09 73.2 6.06 2.04 0.184 1.14 9.52 0.344 0.118 Jun -09 88.9 7.68 3.31 0.370 3.11 13.1 0.617 0.178 Jul -09 23.1 2.24 0.883 0.0377 0.406 28.0 0.669 0.131 Aug -09 55.5 6.05 2.24 0.280 2.49 22.6 0.535 0.193 Sep -09 18.0 3.54 1.64 0.124 1.48 77.7 0.471 0.162 Oct -09 103 16.6 3.24 0.168 1.68 59.2 0.531 0.601 Nov -09 41.3 6.76 1.33 0.0658 0.284 6.15 0.363 0.126 Dec -09 36.9 7.70 2.26 0.107 0.487 7.87 0.350 0.238 2008 SDO01 PFCs PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Jan -08 31.6 0.377 0.109 0.0434 0.229 0.460 0.424 0.104 Feb -08 66.7 1.56 0.333 0.0676 0.349 3.58 0.416 0.190 Mar -08 55.3 2.76 0.815 0.159 0.906 6.80 0.515 0.245 Apr -08 59.5 5.51 0.973 0.151 0.588 6.05 0.352 0.193 May -08 16.2 0.124 0.072 ND 0.325 0.204 0.439 0.220 Jun -08 74.2 6.61 1.14 1.26 0.159 4.65 0.352 0.0684 Jul -08 81.1 10.1 3.28 0.120 0.551 14.9 0.608 0.144 Aug -08 65.2 4.79 2.44 0.147 0.500 11.0 0.344 0.0984 Sep -08 85.5 7.45 5.49 0.716 8.01 21.0 0.636 0.459 Oct -08 92.5 6.02 5.13 0.603 5.00 28.4 0.506 0.359 Nov -08 108 4.36 2.72 0.313 3.69 31.8 0.441 0.370 Dec -08 30.4 132 1.08 0.116 1.73 42.7 0.533 0.432 5 2007 SDO01 PFCs PFHA PFBA PFOA C4 acid PFHS (ppb) Jan -07 NA Feb -07 NR Mar -07 25.1 Apr -07 60.6 May -07 50.8 Jun -07 73.1 Jul -07 54.4 Aug -07 58.3 Sep -07 14.2 Oct -07 41.7 Nov -07 68.8 Dec -07 43.9 PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) NA NR NA NR 10.3 0.332 0.0797 22.2 8.00 0.541 1.49 27.5 0.372 0.126 0.222 0.121 ND 0.267 1.67 0.510 0.106 1.06 0.494 0.112 0.663 2.71 0.576 0.337 1.61 0.974 0.339 3.99 7.49 0.938 3.26 1.98 0.439 0.0755 0.897 17.2 0.766 0.573 4.56 0.918 0.0688 0.829 21.5 0.822 0.507 6.46 1.29 0.197 0.882 25.1 0.939 0.600 1.51 0.809 0.205 1.18 32.4 1.08 0.553 5.48 1.58 0.151 0.320 13.3 0.392 0.162 10.1 9.23 0.973 1.04 52.7 0.604 0.187 2.36 128 0.107 0.365 4.67 0.411 0.161 NA = Not Analyzed NR = NOT REPORTED DUE TO QUALITY CONTROL FAILURES ND = not detected = response between 0 and 0.025 ng /mL 2010 SDO02 PFCs rp PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Jan -10 2.93 0.634 0.710 0.223 2.35 2.04 4.25 1.36 Feb -10 2.87 0.592 0.712 0.248 2.38 2.07 5.23 1.75 Mar -10 2.50 0.727 0.787 0.255 2.80 2.06 5.21 2.08 Apr -10 1.54 0.521 0.753 0.220 1.78 1.73 4.95 1.38 May -10 4.24 0.669 0.709 0.237 214 1.62 5.00 1.52 Jun -10 3.36 0.728 0.796 0.200 2.49 1.65 3.87 1.46 Jul -10 4.07 0.935 1.08 0.315 3.95 2.47 5.33 2.25 2009 SDO02 PFCs PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Jan -09 2.69 0.430 0.610 0.197 1.85 1.79 4.62 1.25 Feb -09 2.88 0.597 0.742 0.208 1.93 2.05 4.00 1.11 Mar -09 2.30 0.457 0.647 0.229 1.73 2.08 4.71 0.980 Apr -09 6.04 0.413 0.715 0.325 2.75 1.92 4.80 0.915 May -09 2.12 0.373 0.566 0.219 1.65 1.80 4.52 0.825 Jun -09 2.68 0.510 0.704 0.251 2.72 2.07 4.80 1.54 Jul -09 2.30 0.532 0.867 0.227 2.21 1.93 5.15 1.08 Aug -09 3.23 0.758 0.834 0.272 2.87 2.07 5.27 1.41 Sep -09 3.27 0.827 0.919 0.283 3.43 2.00 4.99 1.31 Oct -09 3.72 0.794 0.834 0.286 3.07 1.97 5.12 1.51 Nov -09 1.80 0.555 0.615 0.241 2.51 1.84 5.06 1.62 Dec -09 2.26 0.542 0.595 0.239 2.49 1.72 4.54 1.73 rp r1W-� 2007 SDO02 PFCs PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA PFOA PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid C8 acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Jan -08 2.17 0.512 0.671 0.277 1.64 1.54 4.42 0.986 Feb -08 3.14 0.578 0.571 0.228 1.74 1.29 4.09 1.09 Mar -08 2.50 0.511 0.597 0.294 1.92 1.77 4.45 1.09 Apr -08 2.17 0.422 0.585 0.267 1.69 1.69 4.65 1.17 May -08 2.76 0.585 0.671 0.265 2.15 1.64 4.45 1.23 Jun -08 1.61 0.249 0.353 0.377 0.907 1.29 3.62 0.646 Jul -08 2.61 0.485 0.511 0.176 2.09 1.80 4.64 1.10 Aug -08 2.98 0.537 0.695 0.242 2.45 1.90 4.74 1.07 Sep -08 3.02 0.436 0.522 0.189 1.98 1.71 4.21 0.951 Oct -08 2.22 0.302 0.408 0.154 1.80 1.38 3.42 0.949 Nov -08 33.6 0.707 1.33 0.600 5.34 276 4.11 1.82 Dec -08 3.23 0.434 0.566 0.163 2.46 1.77 4.02 1.23 2007 SDO02 PFCs NR = NOT REPORTED DUE TO QUALITY CONTROL FAILURES NO = not detected = response between 0 and 0.025 ng /mL Recent Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) results for all outfalls are shown in the tables below. SDO06 is effluent VOC and Semi -VOC monitoring, from the UAC treatment system for Phase 1/2 and 3, discharged through outfall SD001. 7 PFOA PFBA PFPeA PFHA PFHpA C8 PFBS PFHS PFOS C4 acid C5 acid C6 acid C7 acid acid C4 C6 C8 (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) Feb -07 3.89 0.860 0.927 0.148 3.01 2.52 5.05 1.32 Mar -07 2.50 0.523 0.702 0.150 1.98 2.42 5.67 1.27 Apr -07 4.09 0.760 0.804 0.212 2.71 2.49 5.42 1.55 May -07 4.61 1.02 0.956 0221 3.31 2.71 6.05 1.96 Jun -07 4.01 0.891 0.870 0.266 3.51 2.27 5.45 2.19 Jul -07 3.10 0.611 0.678 0.211 2.50 1.86 4.85 1.32 Aug -07 4.81 0.980 0.952 0.245 314 2.54 5.46 1.68 Sep -07 4.22 0719 0.739 0.326 2.91 1.90 5.14 1.46 Oct -07 3.53 0.676 0.688 0.353 2.52 2.28 5.35 1.43 Nov -07 2.62 0.526 0.725 0.315 1.89 2.02 5.19 1.13 Dec -07 3.00 0.757 0.989 0.295 2.70 1.98 4.87 1.52 NR = NOT REPORTED DUE TO QUALITY CONTROL FAILURES NO = not detected = response between 0 and 0.025 ng /mL Recent Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) results for all outfalls are shown in the tables below. SDO06 is effluent VOC and Semi -VOC monitoring, from the UAC treatment system for Phase 1/2 and 3, discharged through outfall SD001. 7 12=010. DMR :Summary Report Page t all 3M Cptt Grove Centel (MN0041449) Su[8Pe Gisclarge Station 80001 (Procea$ & San4tary MfUent) P$dneB, N I eff Dal or", M�.f NMI NV.nmY." vol u4R. eaNVM. 000;CBi4on0ttaai EcIfn a. Ca 25mb1 ca(M.Ae sobFCUmnni:xwsOxPbYlm oe4FA 40x,1 Mwealwka, C9Q(h'6rn t.,. Cat ugf. Nom. t um TdWuscrl 222ou9H, pa0yM0e dg1PM Tdo1 B, CB) 86 nk a4wo[ ia001. CgIln,arm B,.. 'I Fil[M ' Mmas CBlMdG6tlMlf 44 3C' Sny MG: COWTi4 paW red COtmO !tae: Tau w DO 69D,1 Q,iB BoX Meanry T" t" N99 020, 25a0VM, Moa,.. Tato 0( TU, 4Wu94 DMYMda 6fd1,, N..BB Vit,.D.d(o5221 Malrlgk cndywS al & OD,11, Tam. R4cn'.nmBWOA.ea. 10m0- NOM. cluD.Ba) DH 90 Su tellkoVnx. O H. toel cuiMOran lH, Lenny O(61d.00l 11H Qll.,O. 50 mIa Cq(Mg I OH+ FLRtM CI TmR ao,Gun M1 U.N I% C01MdTd. ON. R.a, EXUasKn[ T.B. 4i0min a"AsTd p9v1d9�TMA1. i$alk, Cd1MDA1 PoiMIOA Teal 3641ssy CBFMdAax P%, fksW1,I. eWM1 Sut40YM. Sn-a. Tga4az5l uVL .11AN x 6dd2t.Td015nzOenaed(TS L n5Dk9Mey cwmrt , Sdidr•: YdBf 9utasna!NCiB&? 110 Oovd, cmmM wi Sd(dd ldbl Siz,re aa(MI 3omgh cBMaD, SdAS: Tdol Su,,Bnd(T.1 Oagk MlcnwArg TawN crf¢: YYa1Er Be, F Callan.v, ZAITder10s2O 740ag 00yMbx = 7134 = v24 -. 344 5!24 549 NO %W t0.: TN' S70 Q:0 LA <a -,sB 0 17. e2,0 Q0 as 420 ?'.0. 0'ra <20 •30 1,4 <20 170 a20. <a i0 6P. <S0 ca4 77 0.1' <100 <iev d00 AP d0 +10 1.2. 'al 159 9725 MOD 1009 i9:];: a0 p. 29.P4. 281 2.71 255 262' 2" 263 <5A so 60 e510 to e50. 0➢OS3 00on 00957 OWF. 0902 11.0973 a O as <xe <5 0 *59 .6k 1 B41 Dre 02R. '0.052 OYk3. 40110 .2 142 <a2 <a3 'a1 14}. 7114 21) 3Y fr3 ,la �Se sfi 29:8 2a9T 26c ,59 0 DOW no 0021 q2 244 040 20 <2a «b a40 171 51D 165 ea 0,01. 50 P raj "I H]4. 1= 71!14 r2ng 3e BID 1371. 20 261 Q1. xi:P 120 04 12 RO <to 149 f55 7104 ea8 24T 1 64 <5¢ Y& .A48 0Dal .su sa 6.034 M4 .s =a2 &a 91 9a a:^: Be 82 Q.4 9s 87 ' Bd b9: e5 >3 T.& frd 818 65. 7:1 67 S:S Nni W 66 e0.3 O11 w.£s V95i. : n Ail an <9uT ,an rc071 -on 3SY 79 4a a n as, a,75 <VZ3 BM 0915 Og" 9955: 905: Ort9. 0005 Olis ooss 9935. 44 =900 GOP .1" q9e ,0 alb. <10 "a ON <'.26f 40 30 a3 QJS 1..8 73 DU sY -we <94 59 393 39 X34.5 40 an 19. 119. 12d <24 0 OT Ox 14 "ad Is 411h: 33' 1A t3d 17 T.d. 10 - 24: 2:i x0 r0 17 k2. 86 At n9 e8 oY 8] Y] 92' S5. a04 . ?0 c0.0 140 s20. <20 .p <100. <20 S3 9 3959 1:295 3:909 i5Y52 TI:4&i Y55 4215 effn 84 a." to UP AD OA! 3.82 .AT!' lZ259 52.9 .a. 2:929 Be4 me Surface Dorn aageSonan 5OUD2 tNC Coding &Stofm RuroM PeDs,lm Nome Llmlr aM y'a . Al.PTB.o 7a- M Do$ Oft xi .. fine M M 824 run- ,ay,q: 17" Ayy Ka).. 050®, M)b"L1 5oing, DI'Wx I'D 30' 470 epe 40 �24 30 20 3.P e10 3;25 fVNIX tl IfrMI if Sfik Umk90a 'UIUISbdNT��aOFM1.tYaeM1tlnTt2UM�' i(MSIX9i5tlry IrytpNtlnitCrt BTIk,tlN p'ryOtFk vlMtlfftlt {tlUefng3l� Umnalo DMR.: Summary Report . R4pa zara 3M Cottage Gflea Center(MN0001A49) FvStDMR I Dome t[vYH9M sulane Dlsehalcte StnNnn So= {NCCooiinga ft" P..,tI, N, tlmtlkad(kaie Imt ll.. = Via 31,�a M -=. §(]Q.. M M 9 .. I= 41(10 2]$20. 'MY$ .v CmM- 105eayt10De0C) 29.0.19, CaIMaAV¢ 120 t 2,8. "o 075 .2a 05 2A c2d 10 v10 1.01 Vatg a. talal R.Y ., OaV& DMO,Mev -A.ON 4,W -n ON -04S 20024 N:024 0.(e saM 50.021 * 024 .14 045 FpY' MG'. COMnTN G472 83:44 7516 . 7567 74k 63,78 G221 29.8 4208 095 4la 07A42 Fein tod Gm' as RVs 221 242 252. 14T T73 3 122 Stir: 37i 21M PfibfUwesa. Tgdl Reoa>emblp llk-. 10,agk hairy +n;1 &2 .xt 442 41, <41 M1 041 rf¢ 142 nimr MYq IY[.tlfaS,l]iSS e1 0166 O 4 0133. dt "81 dtd O:iO 901 012 at3 & T Maadd'a A - a w a eN 300m CdIN o 2 5A -2d 10 Qd -34 Gtq -S4 + 12 . 0 9 v:4b9 Iot T atty & (TM >M145paM1d8&1 . 2 ,.. C9 r9 4o O #,P 1 2 '-3:A. A S : 0: 10 Tott, aatM tarzronwfe Watr &'ltl tleg CeaMOM1 o cm 5 0 0 50 b 5 .6 5.9 ,0 $e.k 61 58 54 6 6 60 GO: fi5: SB 54 5 &b Sorlaaee DSchama SCatlan 60003 (cottened allalis So= & SDM6 Pa0lYltiat NVm tlnpdnautle, M,," Z IMP 730 �.Q. 400 WO Va. In "a ,a- 1MV . tZ!. 'me An W-., TU fa'idv'41 0 -1 mgt. Nib mlY .'0024 ND24 -Oa24 10124 -0824 n024 c0024 54 ff.4 001 x0024 0.01 Trek, w wd Me't Alldo O NAWT05 D,O WI <f,o Surface Diseha�ge'.Siation SDO04tWOix[tsury Gremd.,e., emerge¢ tiypassp PA[Myo: Mmd U.11feedualia HTy In too I]¢ M ,1,a "0 We W14, . 100 ; 121,1,9.. ,j)f_1Q. 41- FMS MG Io,a .1 Y1W 0027 n015 0002.' 000] a. 110 NoWZ NpGi 052 NWAi VAO SABaca Diw�agew^tatbo MGM Sian oter Emargemy eYgs69} ParmneNl Nalda flap Mad Rna S .. MaAl NUe Y,fQ j((Q, Ill. 4XP 5J10 in TfMSf Y'M-. ?a- MG navq vdt Nd)IS Naftu NaOts Mo l NN s NO:AS Ntl, 1tlWT4- t3o04x tbt4s` Surface Otscharga Station SD008 (Piocess & sanitary 5"t.VOC & semi v=GS Pub^_ Uraf.oaUtUa tm4 h.Tm VIQ zW 31,�a Me 4 9»a L UMO X24: 1-49 IM 1rm mow,.. 1,1 Ti 9A"k IYeYrMet -10 -10 cY.G a1J0 ann 1 aaa. 00 41,0 <Ie 111.2- Tl,MaatlOaae. bf o4& Ra3Y61dx v10 o-W slA 00 rta -10. ab 'f9 Hk a10 f,1rIXi1VlbMNlBria 39n1& DIi My =10 11A .14 219 'It qla Q.8 -10 r>,o` cip 9,hIXaMMMtrylawa tvinN!ddna oRtkCar 2.1.1 DWYM. x1.0 -10 x0 <l0 .10 4la =tA. s10 v'1,0 ct'0 tlttt, eiimyNNd l-e-d vMFS ddtimawfluM1i5dm5fWeJ by ASnskS isan lMervdalrm flrtlM1.ns'.v M1at+l vlMe6m ttmin011mH. 9 1243R OMR Summary Report 3M Cottage GroVe:Center (MN0001449) First OMR: 7M3atla:. 1 S.tPoNe DlscndogeS rtion 56006 (Process 8, 9antary Gf7 VOC & Semd-VCCS) Page 31114 Ggy'n nslnr uam. tmtmn b 4k ... YrD_n us sm u24 W 2= ff114. = = = 1.AiM f1do t2f1P ev8 1¢6TrlapNdyeEene IN.Rt_, NeRm. +52 <50 kSQ 0.2' &1 -a2 102 00 02 02 i„.�p[rylwWeK¢ne 16.0. D,KMD, 110 so 00 AD AD 9?. .11 .50 AR 00 t 9d$MPRebtBnn ON, cow., d0 AD AD =40' nR A0 00 A. cc A. i 2{»xhkrcelNan[. 211ugM1 pa TyMax 110 .0 00 A0 MA Aa A. AIt 0. No LDI 41 no- PsE. ON -0 AN t o +10 AD to d:0 AD 010 LS'CAfhwwfinent 'uoRa Oe %YR1ax A0' AD Am 00 40 A0 A9. A. d_o Ko 1,3INxtAO1Me11tene 44up2 wow 410 150 do 04: .6 42 to so AD 00 1,3- UkNwytpprtrc 9409& DeieW AR No 00 me MA do .0 +t0 AD 40 IA 0AiMDoI.me 28096: NNW to 40 At 00 1tG 42 a0 so AD' .0 2.41?2FIagXCfd 11",& 0 &3ylvla% stop 110. 1400. .100 cdo AN AD 'to .1N AD 24 DIMN7onDa wnp NoNey: 1 ;. so 00 152 43 92 52 .0 e52: 42. 2;4.IA'rv¢tghend 123ugh tdry x rtN 5.0 1100 152 x50. Ad MO io A2 e52. .1-01"d000ne 2a5pgn. Da3vMnx: 0.5.2 x50 .:p e5: a52 iS2 152 h0 6.2 =SY 2.O;YlNVIXMItl V41RVL V.1wX 152 450 so 152 + §} 1v.2 %.s2 to e53. x52 }ON-o" 08 ug.& Dom. Moo 000 too woo Alto 150 No to 00 do 26A10.4 54 uN& DAVI. 40A moo -too too AID do 00 00 to 00 d GRDko-octesct. 277ugll D"doN AD 40 -00 42 61 47 42 40 :i0 42 { N R D , Idoa inRrWlrentlS 4-N 12a N+26 . DeiD x 250 151 1 + 51 ' -, 1510 <1 151 p tgl3gdhnX O6ugX. D dtiYMnx W l ; x2l '4+.d QO e 2t Y:G 121 c2, @a ^JY 1210 <Lt x21'. A,WNoq.. ON& DNyMex x3. <0 AD 210 AR =21 <1 aD 12,1 2# R,1_ 01e UNM baB. OR do 110 At a24 cc 00 54 dd do AN... ON' Do4m.. *311 120 44 &A &p. 21 At 22.0 W a, fh..l us. DINWD to so 00 41 :.t cc or .0 01:6 09 aeaxgekennrnen. INN&' N4,1Mv At AD 40 At 41 121 S21 20 +.2:t. 41 S.N. o'N si tlpi DN,MW e25 A9 220 x21 x2Y 131 '11 ego =2Y G. OMegNplawanlhpo0 61 ug4 OalyFt§% If AD At 41 W A, .1 AD A, A, emnttgY.YblmBNnatle. 51 pslw. 134' aA so 15.2 QED All 121 120 At .21 MvD"N`blw) PDANI. MNS "ttN& D.DIW 152 .. x50 x50 A s53 a53 <2 iN 42 S2: CNtftll to Mchn,@. 08"'t DaoyMax AD .0 X19 00 AD 00: A. OR do cc CXI91Wvnzene {Manxl+KKWeM1Sant! 26 nk 0,4141, AD 00 110 AD do 0:0' to 00 00 do cWRIe.. MID&: 67. U.M ON 150 0. AD .1 s'1'.0 AD 00 cc 00 NOM[Anr 46 uN& NNMa. -10 d0 OR N4 .14 04 me 21 2:3 00 2;25 Lgryzele ON&. DIINdev: Al d.o 120 At 411 =St 221 AD 2 ?t At Diu18p1}rglNelete 8P"L D wo, e5:2> 00 ON 42 43 42' 152 6p Ed 42 NNt a uN N ih t S entlUnitz Cgpnfn+rvM1kM1 iStlNndR.ketl ty 4 t3ks i5en lnteNmLxRrzM, nd B:M1dM Mi x4{eusinglfmlt. VpNo4olo IDMR Summary Report 3M Cottage GMVa Cdnler (MN00ol 449) f•(rsr.DMRin Ckalla' t W1948' 5efface IJlscfiarye:statiRn 9O4o6 (5>roeess 5 Sanitary EN1 VDC& S9ml- V{JGS): i.,..mxmtlaam. Lf„mwr}hm Boom Um Ul AM Am Al em is I- 313¢. Motto.. "'M 11Lt9 Era .ot, tN't'do. IDORA PetP/Mix r6R 4. 4. 42 rte t4R 41 4A 42 .2 Umu }hN pM nlala 4"" DdRW <5: ^. *5-0 `ND sH :53 1^.R 40 +52. 4.2 F$NNa(nM: Y2v9& NRNRDp' AD +td 0. A. do to 00 N9 00 to [$ytbu'rs led uod nadF+Nlek rA .0 OR A, do Ore Ad .L9 =TA do FvareNM1ane ot,O pO,W .24 'IM "D. +' 12t s?i "1 AD 111. '21 FLttene 54upYL O.NW !R:.S s:9 +Rd +25 -21 d.t ¢1 126 x2:1 11 XLme}dIXNMI(T,YXa ., PtlPy ti .3.q 47 69 +52 dY HvsueIJMGV1uJ:erta 10 up O NA Boil Ic R o *Stl: + +19 : : i2 c!„ 4A .1 �'v2 152 . A 1 Do Ah01yICMMbc fYTlwgmeltlenel Y9G, p x +t0 0 .t +'111 A. f€ elM1YlenntllOakYe{RStM1iwgxAUn6tltF 4b og D. .. 0 tufidGwq . 4 c +Sp A T Ad aN ' wG so MS o s 6P 44 Ao `. MCLM1yIeNe C1{IMUb @ohloramtlMexnM 69 t1 AA +3..0 4 . *5.9 A. *.RD so + H, `p'm NePM1tl'elme do D : 0AIN D%NN •52 s50 e5 .2: <`v2 +'S2 s 1R 52 N $ ..Nk PtllryMnx AD AD X5 sl 1 .1 D be P11Y'�MelliMM: RO P611Y14dk 1 1 +42R No -20 1too .21 e11 c1{. .11 O9 AD 11 11 11 11 ( URN URN- PnXYMa+ .10 1 tf . P. 11 Oo N0 X1 0 210 %Stine 6Yuv2 . 21 . M 9 io 0, 1I1 .2.1 - - 1 0 , Se4acmanNn yrene4lMrcJtlnpNirrleneY 5 6.up& r fYBIw. 1L;0 OR x.2.0 0 +^.:0 c2o A ON 4 0 x20' 40 26 Uy, d 111f . 0 AD 0 d o 0 . aSA. AD 0,55 TIYYkn'U I... yp { D DO A. A . A. 0 ' r to II 1.1 0 . AD t.t Sd tlfkYrclXNma1T6E !ai TiiGfk'nFYNevn1 5, bAUg2 I,W A& x1'.6 A �.t A. AD RA' 04 A . ON t10 A D VInItCIfIMa54CPNMggXener No.,, NDDt D >IbN1n1 1Yi -2 aE 2:A .. .5 rI5 As Q9 05 @S A. 4E Q,5 w.5' w Md. o.1,t lna ti1n14vrtl lFnds adwrvrzwbionin+ damertktetl dY aumfSks lxan llv[+wnOm IXmd,nd afaN,mlmef mu lip l(mi 10 Wears, DMR Summary : Report. Pa6e104: 3M Codage..Grove Center (1ANOOM449) Suftace DaHlwargeSital S0001 {FnxaES &SZMltary FfNrent) An6mc0l T..H.1 He) -WL DtdyM>x. BOD: enmon.ce0ez05 DNy {20Dti0OF NITA COHwivq BOD, cenwhxdems CS WY420Dag CI. 40,w- M0Cel0el" COdmium Toeitgi C41 QWL. DeeydM% C.Pei, TowY Ol OF 2710-02 ele'V4+. CMPer TQ51(90CU) IvivoL HIfe"l F"O' 00111., MP" M MamhvaaP eel O.Ad9100M CoMPGenMn 46C FIOW 1.4G Ce1MPTo Fkas m4tl claml,ry Land, Tdel I. Pbi ffiq. L DBHyMpM MP.1 -Tool Re H91 P2P Q, 00q`yM.a M"kCl, Tam (Hi w WPM De{ryMnY MBApen &TP,v e, UO3q$edo,HT 0458Npfl: OlHadx Oil &0.., Td.1 WHO., 10mg[. Da3054e, E9H,HPHI PN Oesu Cdl,FN%P 6064 CHMA6o PH Laegh OF lndiNtluM PH EkcursYm OOH CBIMwlt4x: PH. Pe.ld 0 lame EMYeedl.Og vH L." 440 CaiMOTO. PH.Raae¢ w swTe TPine. 440 Vt0 Cs15A0TO PhmdS toe,. '. *Ieiay awrol 0 P,Hela Tear 3a Fg y coseedkm H,H',mn DFNP vJ "i sleglof 3NanPom.TdAi (00611}. eWL D"Haw AWl40.Tat049uspensledrr580 5150N9key ppMgMy SON, TNe[ 5,H'Ode(TBS. 11000 ke'd., Ce11laAN4 Sd+ds.TdeFSrcPenJedAYSU'1 .30m09.. G91MD4y.. Sdidz. iIXtl[£usPmded dT0s1 45mgfl. :Faluv MA y SemggT9lule; will, OFOF CAMvQA9x:. Za.Te.Tdalfas2nl 240PWL TO'Hwe 4th M TMa_4@ M AM M 127 3qp 2iU. Y2 T9. 3:'At o,ss: 12..0 �x:D Q:o 1x11 1a.o 33 c0 1120 120 =20 4 #d 1120 x2a 12 ", 124 + T` 4v S.0 X$0 +50 +5:0. 1150 1T00 111.0 1510 t1q 1110 .10 t4 6a 1dH 6567 SA02. PB 95 92.70 2:2 2:11' 208 209 15.0 =50 +GO 11$:0 a.Cos 0.0925 00024 0M24 18:b <S.o a,0 511 011 0,101 0 0 06 662.1 c5:2 159 <So 150 711E 999. em 31' 180 1w 110 025 20 124 <2.0 <'D Q0 112fl 134 5.0 35. <5;0 110 q0' s10 65 15,2 21 6295 59111' 4316 7130 20.5 1 a 142 120 1150 .60 54: "50 O W22 0:002 0002 0.0013 1156 150 1150 150 0254 00240 0004 005 91 115.3. d9 b3 Case 23a ao OW? d0 ©3GC 1152 .79,l III" SSE 2. Ise 9&0 0:77 20 C0 tl s26 R0 6k 1150 154 '10 +100 .110 7a HIM 800 ' 84:03 20 2 I 274 '50` + 0 15D 00019 e o" )WHI U0 -10 s50 0252 vol. 0,041 c53. 14,3 k41 &4 81 a 77 52 BS 59. 83: Oo. 8:1 0.2 0.6 GO 71 66 73 70 72 T4 69 66 r1 71 50 +052 ION Qea NF1 000 5040 1630 fi53 x]35 ro11 Hit. 1059 ,0.57 29.64 e0M <vw 063 dp45 NSb 110102 1002 `0 ?78 0.85 ±F aO 9095 6038 9045. 0He O0g8 F10 k117 0091 0013 0092 904a 0071 K 0 .200 tV)1) OQ0 1100: <NO. eid <to 1110 '10 1100. "a 225 x21.0 .90 1195 17 =i80. 16 113Y2: W 99` Q59 31 T/0 e b 1240 .29 .9 30 225 D' 22 <44 0 47 "Sa 5q. 425 124: 126 =Zll 025' 112 4. 020 44 et' 01 4..4 0.3 I,D 14 Q4 a24 YO 44 1A Qi '5'9' V C[;4 10 76. A2 n a SP 0A 72 94 M 69 92 49 130.0 M. 26.0 120 120 120 IN <200 63 120 "AD 510 AU 591,417 esi? 4.15 940 18.5Mi wA39 xa2s a9d2 0.124 s.aw 0.9 &i tl:0 0 00 PADS 0& elm 1.659 580 0.5w 2.233 MITT 47.25 Surfacee Descharge: Sta nn.S0002 (NC C.ft G &. SwroI iiuTHI) vasealkrtiamn uso'1C[ LM4`. 292 319 9@8 w M M. 949. °-16,9 ". L. 12m5 nw BOD:OsDey(h Dvi 50mg2 Da FvHo 6.0 120 20 I0. 40 20 sF <2u 120 120 12A 120 4,2 Not o-wrd b the tM1nO and 103kscdumntthx0tsvledaerc4tetl dyafldlsks lSdn:IdfM9h0m Ilm 1.naaaam vKKa6di<eaNn04nYL 21!2010 DMR: Summary Report PIDpO:iot4 3M Gonoge'Grove Center (MNaoot 449) FrtSt �ufaca Olscharge Statlan S00C rNoc mho & SWIM RUhM} P.M., Name lboit MDJUVR, thenIVV B,tu GeM1wngseialFDS[hy^ijd 6e4Cj 2YUm9f1. C3Ik" VIDDO,t. i&etR,`"Itt OVIg& 0,06ADc FIOW Mu:. cvWTO FlPY toad ca!w" old tsoastn Iaot pacp;yrdh`etUasoni 1tlmy4, pe6yMex M<n i Pnasgiwus; 9tx3dvea Mort 9ngevai st T0M1I fY5,51. 400mry2 . Srrfa4. YaoESbepenEal (5851 . Ze lemp9N6heeNYalet tl14 GegF 300el cWhI Miay, CAIM91 ✓b% = 7.A8. N4fl dam` n5 2A zd 0&1' ,I)"I <0024 40l1N W.024 60:57 44'10 asm 7" 2.14 : 231 22$ 3:3b i5P �s <550 4t) 31p3 4U e4024 )109 255 , 54 QID3 6a N:028 41:55 252 .na IM MR 453 i¢ma It" =2 1.40. 41, N0' e1u .2A: •20: eO 024 e00£4 N.4. 2 4 <o W4 1'0034 0621 85,8 70}20. 4666. 6110 OV2 604: 2 T 533 39. 282 239 2,15 N4 a5T a l I" +6S .0 4A OtH 005 Dro. 020 0:10 0.10 010 OA& 015 948 "I e2.4 .34 < "-2A e25 10 41 <A: +24' a2-0 24` 4'a. Q,4 24 <,I �A s&4' S0 di 122 12d 12A 124 530 540 570 56 61 4S 04 65 53. 0 5e 59 "tie 105 Mae ZAPS 0t2 1.0 SO' 59=563. Surface Discharge Station 50003 tCototItned OU IMIS 50001 & S000)) eamnMer NM tIVH.qurdfs klti"nV Tan@ 2DIS No ^m3. 3+026 No rms ED PNq A Cnw., TOlal R.otaM O'". M1 O"DIA.v 10024 *Q24 0624 )D?4 NO24 0024 s9024 N04a X0024. Io4 1007A...A024:. Tfnidt, ". d4 EeLmd V+d4."i 0.&54106 bdFJMar aID y SurfVoe OecIrafge5101ion DO04(Mwinlry Geounc st& Fmergeruy Bypmsl P4M11MAi 0012 Glml eAUVnnB WMI�(re 3v. PM m AM "0 WQQ too ry �� y RM Oe{ 19.k4i ti . M. 1J,G sDnVWWb 8512 Oh$ OJJ7 'tVVr, 0002 0174 DU OW14 Q82 0261- 0:127 NaOm Swrace0 acharg3 SWIM S0005It iorirdvalet E1YWSg9pcy tiypeas) vxmmenrN6m4 : 4imnanaunne tmmrvoe fws 7, +Ida 51ve. ate i!a3 9inp ': 5u4i4 tt_a4 12,05 I+vw on S.0.1 NCb15 NOLYS N.UD NUINS NIXkS Na'A. NoPS NW65 rttOl NOIY.S MDO9 Nabs CNarfete 0leatatga:Statm S W6 (PBices6 & SanAt ry EM VOC & semLVO�sJ P.DnVruana cDmrannums tMx n'ryn « . tMO Zte M 4114 VAOS SMS 7M MQ y�ne: IOM I'M 10,09 +,tl,TDchfvet56phd IA otgwa <10 .10 .0 e60 00 T.0 "0 00 <1A 00' It lit 1:PSYddQVrVVI` o 34.,& ohmb. Y9• 13-0 al .l. .t0 100 KIa at0 11D Ito Ito +La UbPddwoeietV, 5oogt DIMIMtlx. +ID <IA w10 d:0' 11b 11.0 a1U <1,O 110' It tlA 1110 1.1- pc01mo11dy180e 4IMVI se Ward.) 25,& beNYM16ax. atA 'IQ 11:0 -010 .0 25. aie 0. 4'1.0 d0. da X1.0 . t4dt w YeM n' Ma tlmll entl llnlCSCtluMn arh4M1 (s damntmlaJ b1 I Iabs Rsnn In:arven hm Frtcl,: nN a flat4 1IN lim -camAg amlt l5� 0.226 m 12 2M °01 OMR: Summary : Report Nno- -eINMN fivvantl p@GVOIrs EIYUm xMth fsdernAYtilatlbp Yet4RSlsan lnlurvdn0e'tMHtOd ¢ hdM IdnH@xeatismg9mW Not d4 0 13 3M Coll hill Grove Center )MN0001449) Fr(5PD40RkiDeve FOI1996: 96rtion Riscroore sWon 8OtW5 tPrr.cov5 & Ban15ar, cm VCC &Semi -Vocsy e..e. Noma uma enn WIi[ IM)yIII jrp3. 20 an In in am W2 $99 253 3014 111" "Me t 2:p- ?nG4NO We" ..W." u5 150 64 150 I'D 153 <5tl e54 IDA 43 15;9 158 1.2 Orhlwobenzana iD3 uge, 00,Mex 110 150 d.0 110 110 15:4 110 154 11,0 1Po 151 -le 1,Q.➢i'Airceelpv9@ 5&OgR CWDAM g tlA 110 <f D -10 -10 111 10 110 d 0 111 <10 "a Y 9.. ➢kMaWlh @nit 4H Aryt D.tymn 'le c10 11.$ 110 <fe I'D <tti cf,D +10 Ile <1;6 10 1,2O.Nwnniyene MD§d SAdgh D,NMex <10 a1e Ito 40 r10 Ito a1O aO e_0 110 K10 '0 "ZOdiom"W'Do 2:12 gv. bdtlyfd4x 11,0'. 150 110 v'16 110 <i;D <iD <I.b 124 [t0 s1;0 <le 1 44Yp5 DaBYN 110 9.0 110 1i.O 110 153. 110 e54 <I.c. 11,4 154 ID Q :4YFIfipXfdeXtaM1t i,Yt#dtlercp[tpyl4Md 44 too. D @iyM%. d:4 d0 e10 ',0 .10 to v1.0 I'D dk UU 119 I'D 1 d`CMKKWnv. MI,& Do.Ato <Y:0 1" 110 111 <IA 153 <f0 154 110 <t0: 153 <t.d. Z400it"t'Daid 112bpi OooloX 'too <1p,0 <td9'. <100 cito 111 110 111 411 all "to III 2. alL, MMP.nd'.. mt,l Do., 11;4 <$P +60 156' 153 152 15e. I" 15A: 153 153 155 3;4ifinimvl,l -4 Into&. DO'Nol 151 X50 <SD 15.0 153. *tt: 1td ^58 111' .53 155' 156 2.4- Uellool,ee N6I,t wyMax 151 150) I5b 1e 43 155 do s64 15.9 oD xis -36 2.6'C"o1Doo1pan0' M,'WL Olin "I y5,@ +S,Q c5..b 153 <5S -0 5A 1612 e54 153 +59' 2- cNVNh¢rd 09191 DayM. 1149 .Ioo .100 11011 010 110 .ip. 111 Ill 111 111.0. 111 z_Ndrod;redd Go,& Doiimo, Ile 0 c109 1loo 1100 1110 <:" e19: Ill III cll x11,0. 111 It Mftro-neraia 317.91. Nvdwk 103 w50 dA I'D a51 01. 10 v5D Hi 53 a51 . Iom R-1Amh51d6dndriN ¢ n¢l 41 - etd p9u0 16;1 h .5D 193 d9 160 17 1612 153 <g3 x5,5 .01t fieva Po enevad 5 , O. N . A1' DWY11 La <2u 20 1J.A + 19:0 1' 1 1 1.2 12.2 ' 21 171 122 FEa a S e YpR vWW' 110 : Q4 c3O 21 21 1 2 12;1 le nd It0 2.2 172 ootre ' Dot.. rilu0r4 2@1 p91ty? <i0 .0 6 11 1iA =1u 1 11:b 11:6 '122 1> _0 1 1 2k 't o 'to MiNt@Lene . DO 2i : 1 a1 36 r:0 11 111 K J.9 71, 21 13 0 Doe 912. 9MYG42 Mil" DdyMdv N. D 1 1 110 110 11 0 : I I I II I 11 112 i 0 < DID 1 <4b . DcazgalantM1racerve. 55,k 6 11,& : 12;1- 1 2 2 7;2 Gib 11:0' 'et 1? 1 4 1 12 12 :9 122 Z t 120 121 2 1 22 '. &ugapyleve 61 u9n D e0 vav DaYyWv 131 vD %^_.d 20' <211 <?t It 12 12 2 121 121 0.2 Oe'uti4Mum@flilMt�a bt Yp0. DwNgo 12t +ZO <Y0 120 41 12.1' 120 122 �3.2 ' Cf 12y 122 w 54ug0.. pa@JM11vx C:! 40 15. 139 12.1 -2t 123 01. � 11 rDe teeq@di W O i5 i2'a1 @IE14iPFI4P' YlOv2Y. p @I(YMax 13 :1 0 + ' 15 R ' 159 c50 ID sIo I51 is.0. e 5 1 I56 ' Carbm:IMPUt 1, 50 <1D '10 A O di0 I'D ur,D s1A <iP 10 eta < &3 ptMmch pWVnzeho-1 2 11 "1 2 DolYMdx DWw Y Il e I sI IID I'D 0 A eit 0 elb e1;0 . 10 x1.D fAlp'e°ih ae v e ovmm� ena 2 10 <IO .0 N0 le < .110 0. 11. 0 ei 1 1 d 1 1:0 ct0 0. Ii0 . < ceiadpm ,L C <tD <t d 11.0 10 10 1 o I 110 <t stD < <.0 13 D : CAt,f 0,4. D <1d' rt0 110 0 1 ,a 11 If t 4 111 1 + 0 6 11;1 0 t em 5Da04Cbgb b ee l ln I2A d 4 12 1 *tt 1 22 Z I crr i. 121 v 127 ti3 m t,t , m gr fAAAMit0eleCe 52 57,& lo , bdllyMSx. 15, +St � .e <5 b <$0 5 b e5.D 53 K3 1 53 I" <S b. r54 . I" 15p 5 5 .: 5 3 153 G Nno- -eINMN fivvantl p@GVOIrs EIYUm xMth fsdernAYtilatlbp Yet4RSlsan lnlurvdn0e'tMHtOd ¢ hdM IdnH@xeatismg9mW Not d4 0 13 w M1a AMR Surnmary Report . raMraot4. 3M Co#age:GrovesCenter (MN0001449) Porn( z2.L/R OY fta: WOO OO Sueace Discharge St.Non SLY006 (Prossss & Sanifory Or VOC & S M - VOCSt P ».w+�dei Name Ln Mnnn una LIm1MM I= M ALPY M .M M LAY. M M 10 -9 4LAY 129Y. flt5 gep.9lyitNatate R0.,& DOWN 15.: AD :50 <5.0 A3: <53 e59 64 No x.53 At AD l ov Oo,.W1e e7.a Noma <Et -50 150 -5.0 am Am <10 A,4 s4 .53 -55 s rnb0 bPrtt A 32,k C.WA, Am <tb <@ A0 .. A0 00 40 0. A.t 0,A 00 zffilben , IOBOg& D.D44" 0m .D <Id 00 Am AD @0 6.T 0. 00 A4 A0 {LgeMM.eu' 6004A. Oa" At A0 No A0. 41 NJ Ao .37 =23 It .11 At A..D, 59u0ri. OM M§ NJ <S. No a0 .21 11 x5:0 Al <3:2 .21 all V^3 NesailNaaSenmib 2.,. NNWI aj 5.6 Am Am AS G.3 <5.0. <54 A5 At <53 15; ; Ntlza<Maobvtiekfve 490a OeTyMee N'l ad. am 40 53 at 6.0. No &A 03 53 =6 H.s,0D ceW, 54 u90 NQMSM a1 .50 so d6 .33: Al sip. N5 15:4 .53 4.3 AD Mom"Ho' Oe CCIJUwtie..) Y90ug, OAN. MP' 24' .4 .till .0 <MA 5.0 00 A0. .0 00 <t0 t4: Wth,oent Ch'.x iOleM1ittemeltipnet 40 Nq& cdMOA49 4:0 5.0 AD so 45 A. 40 x59 e50.. X50 40 .S0 1.mao,ne CNod6 Qy MIOmn.a4aNtt 69904; D.,Mar AD AD IS .5D' +50 .SO No .5,0 so .30 40 so m"MoDene oou,o. No My c5 .50. 50 40 43 05 A0 44 K4 43 At .5.0 meDbolzbd& bb uqh NAM" 6i AD It 16D e53 <43 c4A 155 A4 e63 I&t 19 PM1tvYenlw- OD,g ppM1YM. NJ 40 am 40. 4.1 Al 40 02 53' 41 tt. 12. MW t$Ak OOW/Max < {00 OGA 'No 000 All 01 cc At m1 ai <H0 .Ti yMnne 67u9.t OeMYMa. ..i <1,0 so =2V 41 .1:1 so Al 42 Al It Am Tel+acHncelbylent(ParNooMoy.O 56'D, OaIw. Am Q0 '*::0 cc No .:0 41 40 AV No 20 Q0 to- 2.,& C.Mia69 Am .t0 .Y0 AA' -t4 a a A0 0A 0 00 ", Am to.. M"l P51i4. 00 00 00 0d c1A 00 00 00 0A <tt' 00 4 TnNfWttthylene(YCEa itidhloae[M1is2) 54.gk OaMYMbI 00 .0 <L0 .0 AA <10 <10 Am 0:0 .0 .0 Wo VInyECTbNbS [LM1I#a0.(IMt! td &tiyt O.A. 41 No 45 45 45 45 e25 05 40 45 As 5 Ndt'asoWht Land.nd UM[5'L.'sl�h1;tltlnytt01etl1'y DDml.. le er IRCooOb UNN. Ao. hdl WNW'DDI.oMQ lltlR. 14 &,2mulO DMR:Summary: Report paw 1 o5a 3M CO0094 Grove Center (MN3+591449) FwDMRm 1611998: SW WO Diaelmi 9e Station 50501 tr'txz €s a SgnH6ryCfA,xnt) Mlln+oeY: id66(PS:Rl1. P9!4. ➢3EWfilM:. SOD 64i6anM<WY 1:0No I 0 05 m' SOD CelMnflv'ews59sY bag4ry 0 R dd VU UMn A MVy CatlOtlaA7 T< a g2 olvim P . i cnlinAua+ Mal4asCr2. CIF : b9➢YM9x O0idm CtPOeryFIXe1 (v 6GU9B, v,X x F MPNti MCmMlna FhMr Rbd #e 9M1i Illm,,Arv1.CaIIdM, GaIMpGeaMn rf G' ca C 1 IP# I .'ad Vg ..l :Tdei LtaP;p9 Pbi 541up6. Q bdliyMoN Meri'roo(as Hpj 02IQA Da0MM4x li',iot, TOWN., N) oaa.y Diamx Nft". htmnMty U,i na.din14, Oa$Omy2 NI'm'x bl4 &Grsasx Trial 0.e4a6rable lPa..V fomg VAN. Exhe¢ml RH' 90519 CAn0. %, PW $.OSV CoNecA'n pN; Lenp4l aFYI�dWd1eION Eir:.Oriwi. 0 min CtmVT ee AH: PvrzeN W TO. Ica v4n9mU -11 1M COMM. PN, . Mop Exxrulsims Tcaw a5011an ➢IMPTa N vlail:Tdel. IsWaY CatMn?W0 F1tsnGs:Tval 3IIk9NBY ctmOvc, Pry.a ", D'oWila IhOrz slVvv. 6derviv(ry, YNetfos3el. Oat, aebym.v 6a1'M. Tdef 9i+.,pm0ai(T651 M5,.Mv, CaNWft St ,TrrtaLa&WS Vdeblisvl id600 xggay. clwamya %. 5[Xdz. TNBI5ti5pen,lM {LSSI 30.22 GtlIMOSq SGki. ThaISUSpeeGediT&Sl. dSMpL cix wwA Te1lNrmeNre; Mal on COMW.la'e. ZAtS.Tavflas Zrt) 240 CAL bellyvv = 2149 = m 230 3 &9 010 1.. 00 SS' etb 060 23 c'0 ¢2a <2 e2G +3,0 s5.0 'cc fi3: iio0 q90 VIVA 119 Ii 110;20 10639 12, 4S 14467 35} '3:74. 392 315 +5.d 15n '5:0 V50 0c02s Op029 00017 0016 *3d x50 a50 eS IY 0215 4164: 6100 004 c40: 1Sn V5a '59 60 8,0 50 64 67 72 F.a 6.3 a d O' 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "l N. xb50' 9235 091 *0:91 +09S •101 200' Va" Pa. 0120 390 s3 25' 11 100 350 +°,BA'.. 55 993V 2340 1380 '7?8 Ii 124 tRd 3.15 aT Q.4 +E4 7561' 84 79 036: 91. r 0 120d 120.E 4U E>ffir 6 i5 OtA 494 a0 s'0 a5 et sg c9 uno-n =Sh aan 3t B0 11 v 4 a n ve 00 88 o- 660 e1 D' a)0 20 M:9 2d me 744 280 1106 a0 10 x20 6A 2a Qd a ' I0 916 -"(0 208 18 T0242 94,05 341 S9] -50 a50 O0052 aObl? 'Ot '50 Sig 0341 R 160 A 11 73 12 d o- 0 a 0 0 '021 a25 094 0.90 0079' OY54 <Td 16 54 c00 43 s65 025 124 10 :4 S3 as ep 130 BWm "a 1459 no I= $Y8 63) 400E 100 3W 130 419:25 025 122,4 1.5 *1,ik 027 I.m i20 <2.0 6#. K 20 007 3;267 Y0 <20 20 • 0 Q0 98' :Op -50 $ 3'f0 13.115. =19 .IOU 1100 .,aa. <10o: 43 td 643 14.1" 0272 85.1' 696 70.92. 418 91. 209 2,84 213 2.63 1 :32 3.065 aid 156 <S.0 1502 11S0` 00075 0M25 90015 0005. 0'at,2 ODOT -'a0 '50 3.e' 114 16,0 11.0 O13d 0'.161 0391 Oa$ 0079 0.119. r50 60' 90 a£.R x5.0: 0:0 8:1 Y10 0) O3 82' 8:190 7:1 087 6.H' OS 66- 6.bt( 0 0 0 o o-. 0.0 0 0 9 o 010 6 0 0 0 0 40 :911: d1:75 0 DO 011 014 1012" W9i +068 672 am 067 ":I44 0652 oil 013 0084' 910, 0.098 110 11021 tad. u100 1100 14.36 s3tl +TH.d tbt V24d ''2220 30,525 Vag V360 505 V34D IN 243:823 11.4 124 071' @.4. " COW 2,4. =2:5 15 a21 2A 3]49 98' Im n BS: 37 ' &@5.3 10 1M0 <lOb AOL q0d 40.0 -O .0a @ DlsoFaigaStaborl SDM2 {NC Coaalmq vAe.�fi rMRuTP� :04lmnwxr Name Llmp,mn rmg6 Umll'NOe m mt92 = 9149 m E4m. Me &99. 1-- 1-103 11 12mg Lie PCb; 05 Pal 1.Il q 56 be0gMa6 4O 3A 130 60' 30 <2d SU QA +2A' 20' 120 20 3:714 NCe 83NhUW LbI�peOA llrAl3 Ldum aM1ILRiStleme#31aOPyxttaA6k [ i4mmMtwN,nbw pmp.,Od SSMk Mnaf3ltea6fng !!talk 15 Wimto DMR: Summary Report . Ra1a2at4 3M Cottage Grove Center NNW01448) Firs?.Olvk2: Oefta: iA lasts Surface Discharge 5tad'ron SODD2 (NC CDiatng S Starch litmd$} Pobyielet H. Loot and unno .. Mow lives =.. Ml M A M : M M M M .%QIQQ =n MU t 9W: Gemana[cG as INV70Caq a1 2111mgd -.. COW-11 03 033 120 to <A 120 I x20 <20 OA. n-. RA a,9 Lldainz reel Roolitt OmNt ooDMD, !bOt *024 <p ON •0 0 <1024 Bab =0:024 c0024 <0ON -0,024 11024 0024 0.0 %kw MG. CIlrsioo Ed02 "I W% 7065 3»H4. 0H.10 V13 °W9 911 809 too -- 74AU It. T6C CMMvaOg Voi 210 2"1 265 10 2" 2.81 312 5.01 Z5 207 2,21 2.582 or B:CV— T4al RteouMaClG M.Da ' ipmgM1 Ow- Drtev: x,10 N50 <a0 =5P 5.0 : <so *so =50 5,0 <50 <„d +60' Exkeevv PMr51:Mma 2d. m0A 9rt(fevol 016 035 O's a 0:19'V Ot43 O1 14 .14 1 bit tr;195. I m We S�sPd^d0.f?�RI: 'ACmp2 CafM44g 20 :4: 2 +2A 124 <A Y:0 i9 f`. e24 +2:4' K2.4: t.i89 DDIN, 5pp9:Tm865UepMeFd %YBSA MUm ®' 4 e2,4 -vA + 10 b0 122 c 4 + x.. ^4 3 T8100Fe1V�t. WWez U00,11 calso 0 »IA1M.0x o 5AA� }9 9 alto 9!ili To Y}. 111) 6 6 6B 'dG 6 6 0 6S o 5Y 5. 64 7 6 16 5G fiA,317 i stidate175oh91Qe'Statian51lDD3{ amiitked UuKaA §SGDi7q &SOOD2) fgamatN Norte MOD! and VYlIYS Lt. TVb I" On An 5-0 SIGH VVID be, M Aal JafSk 1M.. :1218 j<yIr' ChicrldP. Taal RCpAial O61mg1t, DBIiyMot W024 X024 +n 021 : m024 00 005 < ,Mot Wff'4 t Wv <0024 00A A0024 elms Taaaty IjQ feMiVCN ttibo { 0 ioto TO, D,R M , =10 Sulta.o-Giv fielgeStation 80004¢Akoao,my Gromdvatea Fonerglarcy Britons): ffAM20f : Lhndnmlunlix TS'u? 1#9.. tM XM AN "I M NOR MOA sort soma uMffi lots Ale Rev: Ma &norivit 4012 Ditab Ndf%$ Meal- 0002 te., NOS: Nopis X.01s Ne l 107' 0.6N A. SUM9G@ DISCharg.4. (Stoortboalef Frionger QY stypos6) Bamielee..Nam® l(enik a�N UnH¢ Lknitt Ntie I'M , 41U8': SRN.. HIW: '/N8 :; tONB Do 12 -9 A r. Ma o'niv»i NdNS N4iMS niter Knoll Nabs n4oeo MDrc NW NoBls UnNi, NODFV - nd011 5unace Discharge Staaao SOWS (PIMM is Saruar4 EM VOC it Seml-VGGB) P#YttMtol NYM1P ung,a UMis . IM 1.1 :M M 5M. UrOH 74-. M w. .MO I'$ 31 AA. l Y-y Teoto N,& DsdyMex <1.0 •fi1 <10 c1.0` 00 aTR 110 db OQ CO <to e1.0 tt;STdhtreOFibaOn 54 uNA a3PyMPr d nio 211k =),d <IO c10 *1.0 110 ufp e10 010 110 tt- fashwb,#entl 59,4. QSdyHLY F:0 4FY <16 <l0 c10 .10 <t9 <'IA 00 IQ <10 -IA i ,1- 6,WkY40N6no.ylOon+e<Idaidu) . 25tiy2 OaDPAIx, 0o +106 21:0 c10 +l 45: <10` z10 'I c10. c16 110 f1l a1. N the LAnlard Ub1l 1. .110., v.MltaBil.I -Leo. b.o. vIW»hMCausldgB,ti 16 WMA DMR Summary Report Pa093e14 3M Collage Grove Cantor (MNWD1449) ' Fbst DMR in Cella; 10/1998 Sivtace Discharge uatron WOOD {Process e. Sanitaiy Ent VCC 85emf- -vocSy P. g a. acme umLwWM UNT:oa Al Ul Lfl 4148 Sm FHB lt4.t of 248 nut nut 11:DS t2 +A- TnChM: 1enzene iARAR DAV., <D Ao 152 15.0 I5o A0 62' *5:2 150 152 <G4 15:1 1;2AueMarcbe�e*re 16M9h DAM OR .50. AD 00 .0.. 04 00 .0 x1':0 c10 40 do 1.2'aAdoi0. 6E"I G9IR., MA Y.1' " A0 00 A0 .0 A. A. A. AA 14.0 1,2;DMhbioa..- We& DAM A0 1A 21 A0 '40 rtA x10 so 00 00 do AD L .Tdmbux�agenx Nand 54 u45- DAM 00 .0 do A0 40 AN 16 .0 00 00 A0 stp 1xf1&jwvp A 200,& DAM AA .0 AD A0 AT AD A 0 on 00 .0 .0 .0 lo] L ooro,,mle as"a. Oe". 00 A0 MA atP d0 A0 et0 of0 do 00 <db: we 13-DM , -PYkna 44 . LL9Y DAM Ae A0 s2.5 Q:5 W 00 &A 55 A0 <t0. A0' 0,0 14014hKKSbitfYena N", DAM "A 40 AD AA .0 00 AD 4. AD A0 40 we 2:41TtAlaw.. Yt2ugR. DAW. 000 1.11R 110.0' M0 A2 Al old 00 ADD 000 02A a10A 2kDeauwwo bg a PeiryMax, 102 5.6 152 .a,0'. 04 M 02 52 <S,C. 32 -0.0 11 2kQ,WmooW 'Do"'L DAM x12' 1110 D2 110 c9 154 162 2 150 C52 1120: 6.1 240h4 {egetlme: 70%a, Dix x5.2 06 02 CO 09 144 <5_ G.2 "sD 5.2 '84. 159 zompow.. 941w±jll.. -AM <12' + 0 52 +Ng. 0. 04 152 152 <5D 07 eatl 11 CfaycYrY¢GN UM& DPIS4M 000 <ttd A" Ao AD .1. -10 AD 1100 1100 1120 1100 DflAch.d 69 mt DAM 1100 0t9 1100 ?14 02 s11'. 110. AD <YdD 1104 1120 x10,0 46RirNrouGtu?o1. 237 Uok R&yM 02. 156 112 x3A. *S.U'.. 1'54 057 152 15,0. :52. -60 15.1 xUr" ¢4s+anplepneeiW NN151pa1y Ugh DAM X5:1. <i;2 <,O +1 42. <9'.0 1 "1 AEenarJilhalz 55 uy+1 59 9DAM DAM <21 r. 12t 122 121 11.0: 11; - 1 4 Q: ?: 4 +'J1 .?f <2..'. p ey 12f AD. v' 6: r2,t :SbepaplUyWt 6.,k PAW. 5T:, . x22 r21 <,a X34 Q2: 01 121. t0= 12..1 e.4 12,1 AO0.0% wwk camom Ad' .0 OR .0 .0 0 No rn0 A. AD +ii0 AD MlhroAene. s"O& DAMex. <" <2 1 21. 11.0 124 52 41 41 Q& Q.1 1 14 Al nen[ertt lnd,N 'DAMOY. AA 150 110 do eY0 00 110 OR cc 00 AD 00 9eNdawnthrecene 59Ugh DAMpx "21 Q2 O'l 120 134 123 Q1 121 10 21 Q4' a ?i. IiMZgdMq.. M,& Dafiom Al <2 1f RA <14 No 101 12.1 00 or KC4 441 BewgpMDa'¢+lhcne 6, J4+ O.W. + 1 12 x21 I. t.d 122. 121 12t 15:0 Qf 1.4 � :t eanm4)rtuwemne..e: 55ugR D.000,x 41 122 12.1 r20 04 121 E21 *'41 12.0 < l .24' x21: f3isF {N(haloltlUEHF] bEUgh No'Max x33 156 <t2 ¢50' 69 ls{ 52 -52 AD X42 +ad s(vt GntbaFYetYpEllldldt N"I Dai{yM &A .0 A0 Am AD &A "10 00 00 AD W x1:0 Ce1eiS$al4gna(MDnahtaabensonc] Not DAM s'0 .v0 1(0 AA rte 1s0 A n 110' 00 00 xt U: M'D GTkrteiOnne. MDR& Do". A0. .0 At ato. 00 AD A. .0. A '. 110 A. ihp 004. H,& CefMw 00 AD AD 00 A6 MA AN MA 0.d 00 tlA; M6 chtdlAl,o 45tig2 D,O,Wx -10 00 00 do 116 cc 00 do AM 00 A. AU Qh}yzA 56ugfi D AMpx 13.1 +32 Al 12R c2 # < 2 1"1 a21 - C' Ql 2Ga. *'+1' mum Mlw.,o 50w 6ellytm +A9. 46 02 +SD 155 OA +32 Az HA 02. *a 61 NNd §GMII Aihe lAnitnM ltnMCtlMnnwhkn'sdaMe�ENerAby eltA5k311an Iota nl.m fleNf,nN.d Nm'rt N &tfWCaoYlnq;M1rld! IM Yd5 Y.85 17 wno0l6: DMRi Summary Report f eb° 3M Cottage Grove Center (MNaoQi 449) Flrs'f DMR rrrCetta' fW1998 8Sd8ce Dioo"rg96tation 80006 tprrzess & sardtartrEiA V9C & 9amcVc0s1 Pavinet' um6 am W. 14,11 a 1148 2tfffi. M 4.48 = 898 7188. 8t08 974$. 101+5 an .RUGS.. 94a DeeU}1 [rylXelple M.3 nB'omv, 15.2 lot K 2 <50 269'. 261 9.2 152 ." V2 26U <51. gO±.eHyipM9aikie 42'k D,1,Mn S52 156 1 $2 10 .50 15:a d2 s5..2 4.0 =52 1t0 151 F.Po}itienxEnt. n2 o9 Cnit&Abp "A v a25 125 11P. 119 Ile 0U. I, . ctp af0 -10 E1J*b0.o 1QB OyC OtAi'moI '75 Q5 It e2'5 qP 110 qe It L1ttl To dt c10 lairrnrhhane o"'r- 0.Bp k ", 222 211 e.0 123 13:2 <A 121 10 1,4 21 2, fkiaptiti; 55u,& 0e11'ttt. 2 1 =22. 131 120 a?A. S:2' 211 11 22:0 152 24 221 Ho-aown.ry O' 76.up0.. OBlVM9%. 252 dA c:2 250 255 .5,4 61 <!: e<0. e52 e6:0 3f 4fetnNlHdNte2anti 4949it Woov'x 152 *5.6 157 =5p 250 <a, c52 1" SiO "? I54 c5.1 ffezeACttUens.. 59 U4ti Nevmeu IS2. 2S•6 252 =50 259 - *514 052 5'2 15:0 SS :2 250 10 .f Woho CAIIXM6{dl aumniholve} Y811ugR. DwNmo, ato 10 SY,B st9 le e} It 110 e10 S10' 116'. c10 1:A' iA*tele chlnlle(Dio,f neto i itkak CavoA' 150 160 150 -50 "1 ' 14: C0 256: loo 150 Y:.1 e59 AkBMene Chluide VroMaIXnO.rta t VttoM1 No'Apx 15q c50 Sop '50. 250 150 250 150 <5:0 150 150 150 NaPNiha:ene 59001 ot5la 1E' 256 t59: 159 1tr' 16 25.2 15,0 -5 1 10.0 •3 Y: N4eaben[ene. 66it& Dvl, I s5T 25.6 152 It It 't 4R e5 252 15.0 257 to 31.. Fivnsrth- 59 mk De: W2 4A 222 111 U0 ' ?A 12;2 22,1 22,1 220 11 1 , 4 121 Ph.d 2kot. p0l9M" 1190 41 to 1100 effigy d2 1t, +10. <10 40D 1140 2120 at9 Gy'ene Snw& 6elyMnx +21 22 12.1 120. @t 1 212I 221 +2.1 120. 121 24 21 ?efV6efddeMNjune (Pa[CloruMyiahel %,A Oe Max <2P. 12 ..0 12" e2P <2,0 <29 a ?_0 129 22.0 Q0 270 120 Td.- at'k ce1A5NVp Std :16 aV 210 wR Sftt q6 R2 ao 1ao 0W ". to Tgludne B.u" DedyteI 40 '10 -1y -10 11k '10 +-19 dR q0 lie 2C e10 4.6' Ti3MlawIDylmb QC @NTrfohlaaNhSlei 54 U'll: ➢dit" 110 '40 dd AA 119 11d -10' 1,a 11_0 q0 410 ctp Mm CMonJe 1ChA=dheno) 26o.j D.IftI 125 125 It 125 125. 125 225 e25 . 125 25' 16 a25 Ndd' ebYA Ilue [aln P onlb'np4 WNpnwh(ChiSUOd@ftalHlry eYVM5k3 Vedn 1n4eNCnRM hfif,nNttM1atld NMSHIXxLeUYInQllRlif Receiving Water(s) Use Classification The receiving water is Mississippi River via an unnamed creek Class 213, 3C, 4A, 413, 5, and 6. The quality of Class 2B surface waters shall be such as to permit the propagation and maintenance of a healthy community of cool or warm water sport or commercial fish and associated aquatic life and their habitats. These waters shall be suitable for aquatic recreation of all kinds, including bathing, for which the waters may be usable. This class of surface waters is not protected as a source of drinking water. The quality of Class 3C waters of the state shall be such as to permit their use industrial cooling and materials transport without a high degree of treatment being necessary to avoid severe fouling, corrosion, scaling, or other unsatisfactory conditions. All stream classifications, including those not listed above, are listed in Minn. R. 7050.0220 through 7050.0227. In addition to those uses listed above agriculture and wildlife, aesthetic enjoyment and navigation, and other uses are listed in the use classification for the Mississippi River. Applicable state regulations include, but are not limited to 7050.0200, 7050.0210, 7050.0217, 7050,0218, 7050.0220, 7050,0400, 7050.0410, 7050.0450, and 7050.0470. 18 The annual 7Q10 low flow for the Mississippi River at surface discharge station SD003 has been estimated at approximately 1318.7 mgd. Impairments Perfluorooctane Sulfonate ( PhOS) This discharge enters into a reach of the Mississippi River which has a PFOS impairment due to a fish consumption advisory set by the Minnesota Department of Health. This is shown in the draft 2010 total maximum daily loads (TMDI,) list and the current 2008 TMDL list found at the MPCA Web site: http: / /www.pca. state. mn. us /water /tindl /tmdl- 303d]ist.htm]. At this time there is no TMDL developed for PFOS on this reach of the Mississippi River, as shown in the list of 303(d) waters which need a TMDL, which is found on the MPCA Web site: http: / /www.pca.state.mn.us /water /tmdl /tindl- 303dlist.html. H2 This discharge is going to a reach of the Mississippi River that is impaired for fish consumption due to mercury. The MPCA completed state -wide mercury TMDL in October 2009. The TMDL was approved by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) March 2007. See the MPCA Web site: http: / /www.pca.state.mn.us /water /tmdl /tmdl- approved.litml. See the MPCA Web site for the full mercury TMDL plan and Appendix B at: http: / /www.pea. state. mn. us / water /tmdl/tmdl- mercuryplan.litml. Existing Permit Effluent Limits Technology Based Effluent Limits (TBELs) See Appendix A and B below. Water Quality Based Effluent Limits (WQBELs) See Appendix A and B below. Proposed Permit Effluent Limits Technology Based Effluent Limits Since the Facility Wastewater Treatment Facility treats domestic wastewater /sewage, Minn. R. 7053.0215 REQUIREMENTS FOR POINT SOURCE DISCHARGES OF SEWAGE applies No other changes to technology based effluent limits have been made from the previous permit. See Appendix A and B. Water Quality Based Limits The MPCA uses the statistical approach explained in the 1991 EPA `Technical Support Document For Water Quality -Based Toxics Control (EPA /505/2 -90 -001)' to determine if there is a need for effluent limitations in regards to water quality standards (WQS) or water quality criteria (WQC). This process was used at the 3M facility. Antimony As discussed in Appendix A the existing permit contained the requirement for an antimony study. The study completed /dated May 31, 2007, concluded that the main source of antimony in the discharge from the 3M wastewater treatment plant (W WTP) originates from the 3M corporate hazardous waste incinerator. The study also concluded that the bulk of antimony 19 removal occurs during pretreatment at the incinerator and within the Phase 3 inorganic treatment train. Minimal removal was measured from the GAC system. In addition, antimony has not been shown to cause any acute toxicity in the effluents (Appendix A). MPCA staff has performed preliminary reasonable potential evaluations on the discharge monitoring data for antimony. The analysis found the Projected Effluent Quality (PEQ) of 1331 ug /1 exceeds the antimony final acute values (FAV) (180 ug /1). This analysis indicated reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above the applicable water quality standard in Minn. R. 7050. Based upon the reasonable potential evaluation, effluent limitations for antimony will be applied pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1) at SD003. Copper Routine discharge monitoring data for SD002 was evaluated during the preparation of this draft permit. Using preliminary reasonable potential evaluations procedures pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1), copper was identified as having a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a WQS excursion above the applicable WQS in Minn. R. 7050. An analysis of the data found the PEQ of 180 ug /I exceeds the copper FAV (93.2 ug /1). Based upon the reasonable potential evaluation, effluent limitations for copper will be applied pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1) at outfall SD002. NH3 -N The existing permit contains discharge limitations for unionized ammonia. As described in Appendix A, production processes responsible for the discharge of ammonia have closed. In addition, ammonia present in groundwater has decreased considerably over time. MPCA staff has performed additional review and preliminary reasonable potential evaluations on unionized ammonia. This analysis indicated no reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above the applicable WQS for SD00L Hence, no effluent limits are warranted pursuant to these evaluations. Because of the pre - existing ammonia concentrations in groundwater and unknown future activities at the site (with eventual discharge to the W WTP), the permit will continue to monitor total ammonia concentrations twice per week. Effluent limitations for unionized ammonia will be deleted pursuant to Minn. R. 7053.0275 Subp.2.B. Selenium Routine discharge monitoring data for SD001 was evaluated during the preparation of this draft permit. Using preliminary reasonable potential evaluations procedures pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1), selenium was identified as having a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a WQS excursion above the applicable WQS in Minn. R. 7050. A WQBEL analysis for selenium found the PEQ of 52 ug /1 exceeds the selenium FAV (40 ug /1). Based upon the reasonable potential evaluation, effluent limitations for antimony will be applied pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1) at outfall SD00L PFCs Routine discharge monitoring data for SD001 and SD002 was evaluated during the preparation of this draft permit. Using preliminary reasonable potential evaluations procedures pursuant to 40 CFR § 122.44(d)(1), PFOS was identified as having a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a site specific criteria excursion. Perlluorooctanoie acid (PFOA) and perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA) indicated no reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion of a site specific criteria. 20 Monitoring results for PFOS at SD001 include 32 data points (up through February 2010) at a calculated CV of 0.9176. PEQ is derived as an upper bound value from the highest value measured (3225 ng/1), and the determined variability (CV = 0.9176) and number of data points (32). The preliminary effluent limit (PEL) calculation assumes that the background PFOS concentration is at the water quality site specific chronic criterion (7.0 ng/1) when the listed stream impairment is for fish consumption advice. To assure that the discharge does not cause or contribute to a WQS excursion for PFOS impaired waters, the numeric water quality site specific criterion (7.0) is applied at the point of discharge for the mass balance equation for the subsequent preliminary effluent limit calculations. Where PEQ exceeds the PEL, there is reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a WQS excursion. Since PEQ does exceed the PEL in this case, reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above WQS is indicated. Monitoring results for PFOS at SD002 include 23 data points (up through February 2010) at a calculated CV of 0.2755. PEQ is derived as an upper bound value from the highest value measured (2190 ng /1), and the determined variability (CV = 0.2755) and number of data points (23). The PEL calculation assumes that the background PFOS concentration is at the water quality site specific chronic criterion (7.0 ng /1) when the listed stream impairment is for fish consumption advisory. To assure that the discharge does not cause or contribute to a WQS excursion for PFOS impaired waters, the numeric water quality site specific criterion (7.0) is applied at the point of discharge for the mass balance equation for the subsequent preliminary effluent limit calculations. Where PEQ exceeds the PEL, there is reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a WQS excursion. Since PEQ does exceed the PEL in this case, reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above WQS is indicated. As noted above, discharges from 3M enter into a reach of the Mississippi River that is impaired for PFOS. The TMDL is not yet underway for this water or impairment. In the interim 3M has been identified as contributing to the impairment. The Facility must meet 'final discharge effluent limitations not to exceed the water quality criterion (7 ng /L) for PFOS as soon as possible. The existing 3M Cottage Grove wastewater treatment facility cannot immediately comply with this limit. A compliance schedule to meet the water quality based effluent limit (WQBEL) for PFOS is included in the draft permit. This draft permit also authorizes the discharge of groundwater from outfall SD007, for an Extended Pilot Well Pump Test ( EPWPT), under a Remedial Design /Response Action Plan (RD/RA Plan). This RD/RA Plan was previously approved by the MPCA Remediation Division on Pebruary 1, 2010; for eventual remediation of PFC contaminated groundwater at the Facility. The goal of the EPWPT is to characterize groundwater responses to remediation activities required under the RD /RA Plan. Effluent from the EPWPT will be regulated pursuant to designated outfalls SD003, SD007, and WS001; and shall comply with specific textual requirements as detailed in Chapter 9 of this draft permit. Peak flow from the EPWPT is not expected to exceed 2.88 mgd. As stated above, the current Facility wastewater treatment facility cannot immediately comply with limits based on the current water quality criterion. In addition, data is not available to determine whether the proposed temporary GAC effluent filtration system will be able to comply with limits based on the current water quality criterion. Hence, a compliance schedule to meet the WQBEL for PFOS for all outfalls is included in Chapter 1 of the draft permit. 21 The draft permit also includes interim PFOS limits at SD003. Interim effluent limitations for SDO03 were based on the PFOS effluent data collected at the Facility between February 2007 and July 2010 inclusive. The limits were calculated using the data points from SD001 and SDO02 for the existing Facility. To verify that all data points were part of normal operating conditions, 3M investigated each sampling period. The investigations included review of the analytical data, wastewater treatment facility in- process data, site production records, potential upset conditions /spills at the site production areas, known maintenance or cleaning activities, and any anomalies with the well supply water. After reviewing the data, 3M reported that nothing is apparent to suggest an upset condition at the Facility, nor were there any ]mown maintenance or cleaning activities that could have caused anomalies in the data. In addition, 3M reported no changes to wastewater treatment facility operations prior to, during, or after sampling event; this included no changes to how the granular activated carbon system had been operated at wastewater treatment facility. The Facility believes all data points are representative and indicative of normal operations at the facility. For SD001, the PEQ of 9911 ng /l was set as the interim daily maximum. The PEQ is the statistically projected largest concentration of PFOS from this outfall. The PEQ comes from the aforementioned TSD statistical approach recommend by EPA. To determine the interim monthly average for PFOS at SD001, monthly average limits were developed using a ratio utilizing the actual monthly average (11 ng /1) and the actual daily maximum (23 ng /1) developed from the TSD process. The ratio is used to develop the interim monthly average because it is about the relationship between the actual monthly average and the actual daily maximum developed in the TSD process. This ratio of the actual monthly average divided by the actual daily maximum (11 ng /1 / 23 ng/1) resulted in a ratio of 0.478. The interim daily maximum of 9911 ng/I was then multiplied by the ratio of 0.478 to develop the interim monthly average. The calculations are as follows: SD001 Parameter (ugtl) PFOS mg /9 Plant Flow (mliters /d) 13.6 max design (mgd) 3.6 22 Final Acute Value 170000 279 ppm hard Waste Ld Allocation: WI-Acs 7 WLAms 31217936 Coeff of Variation -CV 1.011 Variance 0.7049 Std. Dev, 0.8396 Duration (n days) 30 Long Term Ave.-LTA 9010 # data points 50 PEQ factor 1.519850 Proj Effl Qual.(PEQ) U4 /U30 4 1.184176 u 5 4.648880 LTAcs 7 15.30359 u, 4 6299896. LTAms 5 Use LTAcs < LTAms: TRUE WQBEL: Daily Max. 23 0.413315 s z n 6 0.642896 S 3 1.329968 U 7 Mo.Av. (2x) 11 REASONABLE POTENTIAL Max Meas Effl Value 9010 # data points 50 PEQ factor 1.1 Proj Effl Qual.(PEQ) 9911 PEQ > Daily Max TRUE PEQ > FAV FALSE Reasonable Potential yes Notes: PFOS background set to chronic criterion due to fish consumption advisory. Original PFOS data with a CV of 1.011 set to determine interim limits. Interim limits: PEQ of 9911 ng /I is daily max. Ratio of true monthly Ave/ true daily max is ratio of 0.478= 11 ng /I / 23 /ng /I. Interim Monthly ave = ratio of 0.478 multiplied to interim daily max. 23 For SD002, the PEQ of 2475 ng /l was set as the interim daily maximum. The PEQ is the statistically projected largest concentration of PFOS from this outfall. The PEQ comes from the aforementioned TSD statistical approach recommend by EPA. To determine the interim monthly average for PFOS at SD002, monthly average limits were developed using a ratio utilizing the actual monthly average (8 ng /1) and the actual daily maximum (I I ng /1) developed from the TSD process. The ratio is used to develop the interim monthly average because it is about the relationship between the actual monthly average and the actual daily maximum developed in the TSD process. This ratio of the actual monthly average divided by the actual daily maximum (8 ng /l / I 1 ng /1) resulted in a ratio of 0.727. The interim daily maximum of 2475 ng /I was then multiplied by the ratio of 0.727 to develop the interim monthly average. The calculations are as follows: tier: Parameter (ug /1) PFOS mg/1) Plant Flow (mliters /d) 15.1 max design (mgd) 4 River 70 (mliters /d) 4991.2 (Class 2B) (mgd) 1318.68 Robt St. + 3 Metro(200mgd) 15640989.0 Background Cone, LTAms ;7 7'for Mississippi R. Continuous Std (cs) 7 260 hard ppm Maximum Std (ms) 85000 260 hard ppm Final Acute Value 170000 279 hard ppm Waste Ld Allocation: WI-Acs 7 WLAms 28104642 Coeff of Variation -CV 0.2722 Variance 0.0714 Std. Dev. 0.2673 Duration in days) 30 Long Term Ave. -LTA 1.83045085 U4 /U30 7 U 1.79598285 LTAcs 6.24438619 16.5297055 u 1 3 15640989.0 LTAms 2 Use LTAcs < LTAms: TRUE WQBEL: Daily Max. 11 24 s 0.03633711 0.19062295 s„ 2 1.81351429 U„ 6 Mo.Av. (2x) REASONABLE POTENTIAL Max Meas Effl Value 2250 # data points 42 PEQ factor 1.1 Prol Effl Qual.(PEQ) 2475 PEQ > Daily Max TRUE PEQ > FAV FALSE Reasonable Potential yes Notes: PFOS background set to the chronic criterion due to the fish consumption advisory. PFOS Interim Limits: PEQ of 2475 ng /I set as interim daily max. The ratio of the actual monthly ave (8 ng /1) /actual daily max ( 11 ng /1) resulted in ratio (8/11 = 0.727). Interim monthly ave = interim daily max multiplied by ratio of 0.727. Utilizing design flow and the projected effluent pollutant concentration, interim limits for PFOS at SDO03 have been set as follows: Interim Daily Max. = (13.6 mliters /d x 9911 ng /L) + (15.1 mliters /d x 2475 ng /L) 134.78 grams /day + 37.37 grams /day 172 grams per day Interim Monthly Avg. _ (134.78 g/d x 0.478) + (37.37 g/d x.727) 64.42 g/d + 27.17 g/d 91.59 grams per day These interim limits are also consistent with MPCA's "Guidance for Issuing NPDES Permits for Discharge to Impaired Waters;" with the goal of also being consistent with MPCA's "Permitting Strategy for Addressing Mercury in Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Permits." See http: / /www.pca.state.mn.us /index.php /water /water- types -and- programs /wastewater /wastewater.html for additional information. Interim intervention limits for SDO07 and WS001 have also been established at 1.72 g/d daily maximum and 0.91 g/d calendar month average. The intent of the intervention limits is to trigger corrective actions to preclude a violation of effluent limitations at SD003; from activities associated with the EPWPT under the RD /RA Plan discussed above. 25 Additional Requirements Compliance Schedules See Chapter 1 - Special Requirements (Section 1 - Compliance Schedule) in the draft permit. Within this permit cycle 3M must commence work to achieve final effluent limitations. Total Facility Requirements (TFR) See Federal Regulations 40 CFR §§ 122.41, 122.42, 136, 403, and 503; Minn. R. ch. 7001, 7001.0150, 7001.1090, 7041, 7045, 7050, 7052, 7053, 7060 and 7080; and Minn. Stat. ch. 115 and 116. Nondegredation and Anti - Backsliding In accordance with MPCA rules regarding nondegredation for all waters (that are not Outstanding Resource Value Waters), nondegredation review is required for any new or expanded significant discharge (Minn. R. 7050.0185). A significant discharge is (1) a new discharge (not in existence before January I, 1988) that is greater than 200,000 gallons per day or (2) an expanded discharge that expands by greater than 200,000 gallons per day that discharges to any non -ORV W water other than a Class 7 water or (3) a new or expanded discharge containing any toxic pollutant at a mass loading rate likely to increase the concentration of the toxicant in the receiving water by greater than one percent over the baseline quality. This Permit also complies with Minn. R. 7053.0275 regarding anti - backsliding. Any point source discharger of sewage, industrial, or other wastes for which a national pollutant discharge elimination system permit has been issued by the agency that contains effluent limits more stringent than those that would be established by parts 7053.0215 to 7053.0265 shall continue to meet the effluent limits established by the permit, unless the permittee establishes that less stringent effluent limits are allowable pursuant to federal law, under section 402(0) of the Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1342. 26 Appendix A Basis for Derivation of NPDES Discharge Limits Prepared by Don Kriens P.E., Principal Engineer, MPCA — November 2002 Appendix A describes the basis of derivation of the discharge limitations for this NPDES permit for discharges SO 001, SD 002, SO 003, SD004, and SD005. The MPCA may use standards based on Minnesota state water quality standards, federal categorical standards applicable to specific industrial categories, or a combination of these standards to derive the discharge limitations. In addition, the MPCA may also derive standards which are site specific to a particular discharge. These standards may be based on toxicity studies, best professional judgment analysis, technology based standards, and in some instances standards developed by other U.S. states or other governments if these standards are appropriate. For industrial categories the MPCA typically uses the federal categorical standards, required by Minnesota Rule and the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, and state standards if appropriate. SD 001 In accordance with Minnesota Rule the MPCA is required to apply federal categorical standards or effluent standards which may apply to specific industrial categories. This is stated under Minn. R. 7050.0212 Requirements for Point Source Dischargers of Industrial or Other Wastes. Subpart 1. as follows: Applicable effluent limitations. Any person discharging industrial or other wastes from a point source shall comply with the following requirements: A. Point source dischargers of industrial or other wastes shall comply with all applicable federal standards promulgated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under sections 301, 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, sections 1311, 1316, and 1317. Code of Federal Regulations, title 40, parts 401 through 469, are incorporated by reference. If no federal categorical treatment standards for a particular industry are available, or when the application of federal categorical standards to a specific industry is unclear, the MPCA may use its Best Professional Judgment (BPJ) in assigning standards or discharge limitations. This may be appropriate where industrial operations use similar chemistry, processes, or produce intermediate or end products similar to those described in a promulgated industrial source category. Using BPJ, the MPCA has determined that the specific industrial category and federal effluent guidelines that may be applied to the 3M facility are the federal effluent limitations guidelines (categorical standards) described under federal regulation 40 CFR Part 414 for the Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) industry subcategory. SD 001 is the process wastewater discharge location at the 3M facility which discharges effluent from the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). All process wastewaters generated at the facility including incinerator scrubber blowdown, inorganic wastewaters, and sanitary and organic wastewaters are discharged to the WWTP, or portions of the WWTP, for treatment. The Limits and Monitoring Section of the draft permit contains discharge limits at SD 001 for a number of volatile organic compounds, semi - volatile compounds, metals, and conventional parameters including BOD (biological oxygen demand), TSS (total suspended solids), ammonia, phenols, oil and grease, and pH. The discharge limits for SD 001 are based upon the following: Volatile Organic Compounds and Semivolatile Organic Compounds The permit contains effluent limitations for 56 volatile (purgeable) and semi - volatile (baselneutral extractables and acids) organic compounds. These limitations were derived on 27 the basis of federal effluent limitations guidelines (categorical standards) described under federal regulation 40 CFR Part 414 for the OCPSF industry subcategory. These guidelines are best available technology (BAT) guidelines promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the control of toxic pollutants that may be discharged from industries producing certain organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers. The MPCA evaluated the production processes and chemistry of processes used at the 3M facility and determined that 3M processes and products manufactured are similar or the same as those which are regulated under the OCPSF guidelines. Therefore, using its best professional judgment the MPCA has used the OCPSF guidelines for derivation of certain discharge limitations of the 3M permit. Specific subparts of the OCPSF guidelines regulate the discharge of organic chemicals including rayon fibers, other organic fibers, thermoplastic resins, thermosetting resins, commodity organic chemicals, bulk organic chemicals, and specialty organic chemicals. The OCPSF guidelines are applicable to process wastewater discharges from all establishments or portions of establishments that manufacture the organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers products or product groups specified in the subparts of the federal regulation. The products produced are described under certain SIC (standard industrial classification) codes. The MPCA determined that a number of products or product groups manufactured at the 3M facility were either covered, or similar to products covered, under these SIC codes. Specifically, the MPCA determined that SIC code 2821 under the OCPSF rule includes certain polymerization reaction processes that are the same as, or similar to, those at the facility which produce emulsion, bead, solution, and suspension polymers. Applicability of these polymerization processes to the OCPSF rule is described further under the EPA sector notebook for the Plastic Resins and Man - Made Fiber Industry. These polymer organic compounds are regulated under the Thermoplastic subpart of the OCPSF rule. The 3M facility also manufactures phenolic resins, certain fine chemicals, polyester resins, epoxy resins, urethane, and curative organic compounds which are the same as, or similar to, those regulated either the Thermosetting, Thermoplastic, or Specialty Organic Chemicals subparts of the OCPSF rule. The OCPSF rule contains specific BAT effluent limitations for 56 organic compounds and 6 heavy metals. The BAT portion of the rule applies to OCPSF industries whose total OCPSF product production is greater than 5,000,000 Ibs per year. The MPCA determined that the 3M facility produces more than 5,000,000 Ibs of OCPSF type products and therefore, using its best professional judgment, used the OCPSF limitations for derivation of certain discharge limitations. The specific discharge limitations are listed in Subpart I of 40 CFR Part 414 for direct discharge point sources that use end -of -pipe biological treatment. The OCPSF limitations described are mass -based in that the limitations are determined by multiplying the process wastewater flow for specific subparts or processes times the concentrations listed in subpart I. The MPCA, using best professional judgment, has used the OCPSF parameters to derive discharge limitations on a concentration basis for the following reasons: 1. The 3M facility has numerous process wastewater flows coming from various processes. Some of these organic process flows are unrelated to OCPSF production processes but may at times contribute to the organic compounds listed in the OCPSF rule. It would be difficult to assess a mass loading of organic compounds derived from these process sources that would be consistently accurate. 2. The process flows subject to the OCPSF rule come from many different areas at the 3M facility and the flows may be variable. Because of this variability, determining mass discharge limits for each applicable process flow and proportioning mass according to each individual flow would be inaccurate. 3. The 3M facility often undertakes pilot projects where specific products may be developed. The contributions of organic compounds from these pilot projects is subject to frequent change, and are not applicabel in any case to the OCPSF rule. Determining the impact of IN these pilot processes upon mass loading limitations related to OCPSF pollutants that would be consistent over time would not be possible. 4. The MPCA believes that regulation of the OCPSF pollutants on the basis of concentrations versus mass loading limitations is more environmentally protective since all flow from the plant would be regulated via concentration standards, irrespective of whether a flow was OCPSF related. The OCPSF concentration limitations for the organic parameters are also lower than any applicable MN state standards. For specific metals site specific toxicity criteria or MN state standards are applied in cases where these standards or site specific criteria are more restrictive than OCPSF standards, and more restrictive standards are deemed necessary. 5. In any case the installation of a granular activated carbon treatment system, proposed by the Permittee and described in a later section of this appendix, will serve to remove the OCPSF organic compounds to the lowest levels possible, generally to non - detectable concentrations. Granular activated carbon represents the best available technology for removal of these organic compounds. Therefore, OCPSF organic compounds will consistently be removed to the lowest levels possible using the most advanced treatment technology available, irrespective of whether the limitations are mass based or concentration based. The MPCA asked the EPA to review MPCA's assessment of the applicability of the OCPSF guidelines to the 3M facility. The EPA concurred with the applicability of the OCPSF guidelines to the 3M facility and the use of concentration based limitations, based on the concentrations listed in subpart I of the OCPSF guidelines provided that these concentration based limitations would provide adequate environmental protection. With the required installation of the activated carbon treatment system providing removal of organics to the lowest levels possible, maximum environmental protection will consistently be provided. The 3M facility has conducted priority pollutant scans on a quarterly basis which includes most of the organic compounds listed in the OCPSF rule. Based on MPCA review of these analyses the MPCA has decided to require monitoring 2 times per month for 5 of the organic compounds listed with the remainder to be monitored on a monthly basis. With installation of granular activated carbon it is expected that levels of the organic compounds will be well below the OCPSF concentration guidelines, typically at less than detectable levels using state -of- the -art low level analytical techniques. The activated carbon system should consistently reduce the concentrations of most volatiles and semi - volatiles to extremely low levels. MPCA may reduce or eliminate the monitoring frequency for those compounds consistently reduced to low levels after 18 months if operational data confirms this assumption. Metals The OCPSF guidelines contains limitations for the following metals: total chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. The OCPSF limitations, using concentrations listed in the rule, were compared with MN rule 7050 standards, as described in MN 7050.0222 Specific Standards of Quality and Purity for Class 2 Waters of the State; Aquatic Life and Recreation, subpart 3, Class 2Bd Waters to determine if state standards were more restrictive standards. In addition, LC50 values for zinc developed site - specifically for the SD 001 discharge were reviewed to determine if this value is more restrictive. (LC50 values are the lethal concentrations of a toxicant or toxicants which kill 50 percent of the exposed organisms in a specific time of observation. The LC50 concentration of a toxicant is an acutely toxic parameter that may be used as a maximum allowable discharge concentration.) The OCPSF guidelines were used as the basis to derive discharge limitations for total chromium and lead since they are more restrictive than applicable MN state water quality standards. The LC50 concentration value of 240 ug /I for zinc was used 29 as the daily maximum discharge limitation for zinc since it is more restrictive than the OCPSF or MN state water quality standards. The zinc LC50 value was determined pursuant to bioassay studies completed on the SD 001 discharge. The basis of the zinc limitation is explained more fully in Appendix B, Resolution of Acute Toxicity at SD 001. The copper discharge limitation applied is the MN water quality standard, final acute value, of 68 ug /I. This copper concentration is more restrictive than using the OCPSF standard for copper at 1450 ug /I daily maximum. Nickel toxicity standards based on either MN state or federal ( OCPSF) standards, or other federal nickel standards, may be inadequate with respect to protection of aquatic species for the 3M SD 001 discharge. This is because of potentially additive effects of metals in the SD 001 effluent. To assure non - toxicity related to these metals combinations the nickel discharge limitation proposed is much lower than the MN state nickel standard or the OCPSF nickel standard. A review of several other U.S. states nickel standards indicates that a wide range of acute toxicity nickel discharge standards exists, ranging from 458 ug /I (Florida) to about 1361 ug /I at 100 mg /I hardness for Wisconsin. The MN acute toxicity standard for nickel is 2836 ug /I at 100 mg /I hardness. Toxicity from nickel is hardness dependent with softer waters causing greater toxicity. The Ontario, Canada standard LC50 (acute toxicity) for daphnia magna is 260 ug /I to 480 ug /I depending on the hardness level. The federal standard for nickel is 940 ug /l, based on the federal CIVIC (criterion maximum concentration) of 470 ug /l. (The CIVIC is one half the final acute value). The MPCA is using best professional judgment to apply a daily maximum nickel discharge limitation of 480 ug /I, based on the Ontario, Canada standard for Daphnia Magna, one of the required 3M bioassay test species. The 480 ug /I Ontario standard would correspond to the higher hardness levels in the discharge. A review of the discharge data for SD 001 indicates that a daily maximum nickel limitation of 480 ug /I is consistently met. With recent improvements in pH adjustment and precipitation technologies implemented at the 3M facility, refinement of the pH setpoints for metals precipitation, and pollution prevention efforts, acute toxicity resulting from metals concentrations has been resolved. The permit requires monitoring for selenium and cadmium. No effluent limitations are applied for these metals because levels have generally not exceeded applicable MN Rule 7050.0222 final acute values. The permit also requires monitoring for antimony. Antimony has been found to be elevated at times in the SD001 discharge although antimony has not been shown to cause any acute toxicity in the effluents. Minimal information is available concerning antimony and aquatic toxicity compared to other metals. The USEPA Environmental Research Lab has completed studies on the aquatic toxicity of antimony. Acute toxicity of antimony to several freshwater species did not occur below the limits of solubility of antimony salts, however, acute toxicities to certain freshwater species varied from 500 to 21,000 ug /i. The acute toxicity of antimony is related in part to the antimony species or oxidation state present, oxygen concentrations present, chloride content, and attachment to particles and reactions with organics present. To ensure that antimony in the discharge remain non -toxic 3M will conduct an antimony impact study. The study may include determination of antimony species present, literature reviews of antimony aquatic toxicities, evaluation of potential toxicity of antimony in the discharge, and potential for reduction efforts if necessary. By January 1, 2004 3M will submit a study plan for evaluation of the potential impacts of antimony. The study will be conducted during the period 2004 -2007 and a final report with results will be submitted to the MPCA by June 1, 2007. Quarterly monitoring required to be completed for SD 001 will include analysis for all heavy metals. 30 Cyanide The OCPSF guidelines contain a discharge limitation for total cyanide. MN Rule 7050 contains a standard for free cyanide only. Cyanide has never been detected at the 3M discharges at appreciable levels. Therefore, the permit will not contain a discharge limitations for cyanide or routine monitoring. However, cyanide will continue to be monitored in conjunction with the quarterly priority pollutant analyses conducted for SD001. Mercury The existing permit contained a mass limitation for mercury of .0113 kg /day on a monthly average basis and .0398 kg /day as a daily maximum. These limitations were based on a waste load allocation calculation which determined an allowable daily maximum concentration of 2416 ng /I (2.416 ug /1) and monthly average concentration of 572 ng /I (.572 ug /1). The mass loading limitations of .0113 kg /day and .0398 kg /day were determined using an average process wastewater effluent flow rate. The new mercury limitation proposed is a daily maximum concentration of .2 ug /1. This mercury limitation is in accordance with MPCA policy to place a maximum allowable concentration limitation for mercury of .2 ug /I limitation in permits which previously contained a higher or less restrictive mercury limitation, with the .2 ug /I based on the pre- existing mercury analytical procedure detection limit of .2 ug /I. At the same time Permittees with pre- existing mercury limitations, or Permittees which may have mercury in their effluents, are required to conduct low level mercury analyses of their discharges. In this case 3M is required to conduct low level mercury analyses for SD 001 using the new EPA low level mercury analytical method (1631) which allows mercury detection to .2 ng /I (.0002 ug /1). The Minnesota mercury water quality standard is 6.9 ug /I, except for the Lake Superior basin where the standard is 1.3 ug /l. A water body that is impaired is not achieving the standard. In this instance the Mississippi River does not meet the standard, in part because fish consumption advisories in the Mississippi River do exist for mercury. The tool used to bring a water body into attainment or to a non - impaired status is the TMDL (total maximum daily load). The TMDL needs to account for all point and non point sources and is iterative in nature in that the TMDL will monitor progress in reduction towards attaining the standard. In order to develop the TMDL for mercury in the Mississippi River, analytical data for mercury in discharges is required. The recent promulgation of a new low level mercury analytical method (Method 1631) by the U.S. EPA will allow measurement of detectable levels of virtually all surface waters and discharges. The previous method was considerably less sensitive at 200 ng /I (.2 ug /I) and was largely incapable of providing any useful data. The new method allows reliable quantitation of mercury to about .5 ng /I (detection limit of .2 ng /1), and thus will allow development of a TMDL. The MPCA has chosen to take a phased approach to develop a mercury TMDL and mercury effluent limitations in reissued NPDES permits. The MPCA has found that most dischargers have never used the low level mercury analytical methods to monitor mercury. In the first phase (interim phase) existing dischargers will be required to monitor mercury using the low level technique. This requirement will be inserted as the permits are reissued. Monitoring will continue for the permit term of 5 years. Note that during this period if mercury levels are found to be high the permit can be reopened and modified to require a mercury limitation or a revised mercury limitation in the event a permit contains a prior mercury limitation. The purpose of this monitoring is to gather data to develop a TMDL and to establish the basis for a potential effluent limitation, required via the permit. These limits will be placed in the permits based on a determination of reasonable potential to cause or contribute to a water quality standards violation, or `reasonable potential', as described under 40 CFR 122.44(d)(1). The effluent limitation used to make the reasonable potential determination will be based on the MN state chronic mercury water quality standard applied directly to the discharge as a waste load 31 allocation. For those few dischargers with existing low level mercury data, and for those that will develop low level data in the next permit period, and reasonable potential is demonstrated, a limit will be included in the permit along with a compliance schedule to meet that limit. Requiring the low level mercury analysis in affected permits during the next 5 years will also allow the MPCA to conduct a TMDL so that mercury effluent limitations may also be determined in accordance with appropriate cost benefit analysis. 3M has implemented aggressive product review and waste management practices to prevent the introduction of mercury into wastewaters at the Cottage Grove site. These measures have been effective in maintaining the mercury concentration at or below the current method detection limit of 0.2 ug /I for many years. The 3M discharge does not have adequate low level mercury data to assess "reasonable potential' pursuant to the federal rule. Therefore, pursuant to the strategy described above for assessing mercury in discharges to develop any needed effluent limitation, the MPCA is requiring low level mercury analysis in the 3M discharge 2 times per month. Although most other Permittees are or will be required to conduct low level analysis on a quarterly basis, the 3M permit requires monitoring mercury using low level analysis more frequently at 2 times per month since the existing permit required mercury monitoring at a greater frequency than quarterly. 3M will be voluntarily installing an activated carbon treatment system as discussed in Appendix B, following a schedule described in this permit, that is likely to provide the best available technology that is economically achievable for mercury removal. Literature reviews and evaluation of wastewater treatability studies by the MPCA indicates that high levels of effluent solids removal offers effective removal of mercury to relatively low levels for certain wastewater effluents. MPCA literature review also found that granular activated carbon may offer the best available technology for end of pipe treatment for mercury removal in certain wastewaters, although full scale activated carbon systems have not been widely used to remove mercury to low part per trillion (ppt) concentrations. Research conducted by Oakridge National Laboratories indicates that granular activated carbon is probably the best available technology that is cost effective to remove mercury from wastewaters to low ppt levels, depending on the wastewater characteristics. Research conducted at Oakridge evaluated many treatment methods and activated carbon was shown to provide equivalent or superior treatment for mercury that may be present in the parts per trillion concentrations. BOD (Biological Oxygen Demand) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) The federal OCPSF categorical standards require that BOD and TSS be limited in accordance with limitations set forth by subcategories. The BOD and TSS standards are best practicable standards (BPT) which are applicable to conventional pollutants such as BOO and TSS. If more than one subcategory is applicable to the industry then a proportioned calculation according to subcategories is completed to derive the mass loading limitations for BOD and TSS. The specific subcategories applicable to the 3M facility are subpart D Thermoplastic Resins, subpart E Thermosetting Resins, and subpart H Specialty Organic Chemicals. The BOD mass discharge limitations for these 3 subcategories are based on BOD concentrations of 24 mg /I, 61 mg /I, and 45 mg /I monthly averages, and 64 mg /I, 163 mg /I and 120 mg /I daily maximum, respectively. The TSS mass discharge limitations for these 3 subcategories are based on TSS concentrations of 40 mg /l, 67 mg /l, and 57 mg /I monthly average, and 130 mg /I, 216 mg /I , and 183 mg /I daily maximum, respectively. The minimum MN state BOD and TSS standards applicable to secondary (biological treatment facilities) are 25 mg /I monthly average and 40 mg /I weekly average for BOD, and 30 mg /I monthly average and 45 mg /I weekly average for TSS. Because these standards are much lower than the applicable federal BPT standards for BOD and TSS the MPCA is applying MN 32 state BOD and TSS concentration standards in the permit for these conventional pollutants. In addition, MN Rule requires the application of a minimum of these state secondary standards in instances where there is a point source discharge of sewage as described under MN Rule 7050.0211 subpart 1. as follows: "Minimum secondary treatment for municipal point source and other point source dischargers of sewage. It is established that the agency shall require secondary treatment as a minimum for all municipal point source dischargers and other point source dischargers of sewage." The 3M facility discharges sanitary wastewater or sewage (up to 100,000 gallons per day) to its WWTP. Therefore, Minn. R. 7050.0211 subpart 1 is applicable. The application of Minnesota state secondary standards of BOD 25 mg /I monthly average, 40 mg /I weekly average and TSS 30 mg /I monthly average, 45 mg /I weekly average is more restrictive than the applicable BPT federal categorical standards for the OCPSF category. The existing permit discharge limitations for BOD and TSS were also based on state secondary standards but are mass based, using a specific process wastewater flow. The process wastewater flows used are higher than the actual flows which yielded mass limitations effectively based on BOD and TSS concentration values greater than Minnesota secondary BOD and TSS standards. The proposed BOD and TSS limitations will be concentration based using the BOD 25 mg /I monthly average /40 mg /I weekly average and TSS 30 mg /I monthly average /45 mg /I weekly average limitations in accordance with requirements of Minnesota Rules, which in effect are more restrictive than the existing discharge limitations and applicable BPT OCPSF standards. The activated carbon system should consistently reduce the concentrations of BOD and TSS to extremely low levels. MPCA may reduce the monitoring frequency from 3 times per week to 2 times per week after 18 months if operational data confirms this assumption. Oil and Grease The existing permit contains a monthly average discharge limitations for oil and grease of 10 mg /I and a daily maximum discharge limitations of 15 mg /I. The proposed new limitation for oil and grease is 10 mg /I daily maximum which is based on Minn. R. 7050.0222 Specific Standards for Quality and Purity for Class 2 Waters of the State; Aquatic Life and Recreation Subpart 3. 2Bd Waters. The standard applied is the final acute value of 10 mg /I for Oil. This limitation is more restrictive than the current discharge limitation of 15 mg /I daily maximum. The OCPSF guidelines do not contain a standard for oil and grease. 3M will be required to use the new U.S. EPA analytical technique for oil and grease using hexane. Ammonia The existing permit contains mass discharge limitations for ammonia. One of the prior 3M facility production processes included a so- called iron oxide plant or "mag- oxide" plant which manufactured a product used in magnetic tape production. This process produced large amounts of ammonia in wastewaters. The major portions of ammonia generated from this process were removed using a vapor compression technology, and the existing mass limitations were derived on the basis of the efficiency of this removal technology. The iron oxide production process has since been closed. However, some ammonia remains present in the SO 001 process wastewaters due to concentrations of ammonia present in the production wells (groundwater) at the facility used for process water makeup. The ammonia is present in the groundwater under the 3M facility site as a result of a past liner failure at the basin where concentrated ammonia waste (from the vapor compression treatment system) was stored. Ammonia present in groundwater has decreased considerably over time and is expected to eventually return to background levels. Because of the pre- existing ammonia concentrations in groundwater, eventually discharged to the WWTP, the permit will continue to limit unionized 33 ammonia concentrations. Total ammonia mass loading limitations will be deleted in the permit since total ammonia mass loading limitations are largely redundant due to termination of operations contributing mass loads of ammonia, and the primary controlling limitation of concern is unionized ammonia. 3M will continue to monitor total ammonia concentrations, however, in order to calculate an unionized ammonia concentration, and total ammonia concentration data will be maintained as required by the permit. Unionized ammonia is the molecular species of ammonia that is primarily responsible for acute toxicity of ammonia to aquatic organisms. Ammonia dissociates into ionized and unionized forms in accordance with an equilibrium equation, and the relative concentrations of unionized and ionized ammonia forms occur primarily in accordance with pH and, to a much lesser extent, temperature. The unionized ammonia fraction causing toxicity is relatively low in concentration, with its concentration increasing with increasing pH. Therefore the allowable total ammonia concentration in an effluent at higher pHs is lower due to the unionized fraction increasing with increasing pH. Unionized ammonia is limited in the existing permit at a daily maximum discharge limitation of 1.0 mg /I. This limitation will be lowered to a more restrictive limitation of .46 mg /I. The new unionized ammonia discharge limitation of .46 mg /I is derived using the EPA National Criterion for Ammonia in Freshwater (1999). The EPA National Criterion actually limits total ammonia concentrations. The EPA total ammonia concentration criterion therefore changes according to the effluent pH on any certain test. Therefore, the applicable total ammonia discharge limitations based on total ammonia could change day to day depending on the effluent pH on any particular day. Requiring a discharge limitation that may change day to day would be very cumbersome for the MPCA and a Permittee with respect to tracking compliance and anticipating the status of the effluent in order to respond to treatment needs. The MPCA, however, prefers to use the EPA data and criterion which is the most up to date toxicity evaluation for ammonia. Therefore, the MPCA has developed an unionized ammonia concentration limitation that is based on the EPA data set for total ammonia concentrations (criterion). This was accomplished by determining individual increments of unionized ammonia concentrations at specific pH increments of .10 pH corresponding to total ammonia concentrations at those pH increments in the EPA data set. A pH range of 6.5 to 8.5 was used which corresponds to a MN State pH standard range of 6.5 to 8.5. A temperature of 20 °C was used in the calculations. The average unionized ammonia calculated from the pH increments over this range was determined to be .46 mg /I. The MPCA believes that this new unionized ammonia limitation, much lower than the existing concentration of 1.0 mg /I, will be protective under all discharge conditions. In addition to the new unionized ammonia discharge limitation the permit also contains a condition that the Permittee may not adjust the pH for the purpose of meeting the unionized ammonia limitation, with the exception that the discharge pH may be adjusted during any upset conditions in order to meet the permit discharge pH limitations. This pH adjustment restriction does not affect pH adjustment done at wastewater treatment process units, such as pH adjustment for the purpose of optimizing metals removal, or at the VWVfP for optimization of treatment. The MPCA is prohibiting Permittees from using pH adjustment solely as a means to meet unionized ammonia limitations, rather than implementing more appropriate wastewater treatment methods such as nitrification to lower any excessive total ammonia levels. '=, a The permit contains mass based monthly average and daily maximum discharge limitations for total phenols. Total phenols in this instance refers to phenols analyzed by the 4- aminoantipyrine colorometric Standard Method that determines phenol, ortho, and meta substituted phenols and, under proper pH conditions, para substituted phenols. The limitations for total phenols were 34 derived in the existing permit on the basis of the WWTP performance using a long term average adjusted for monthly sample size for a monthly average limitation. The daily maximum for total phenols is based on the 95 percentile level of 127 past monitoring data points. The permit also contains a separate discharge limitation for the individual phenol compound which is based on the federal BAT OCPSF standards. Quarterly Organic Analysis The permit requires quarterly analysis of organics using EPA method 624 and 625, and metals analysis for SD 001 on a quarterly basis. In addition, any additional organics noted in chromatograhs with chromatograhh peaks more than 10 times the adjacent peak to peak background noise must be identified and quantified. SO 002 SD 002 is the facility cooling water discharge. Non - contact cooling waters (once through and recirculating), occasional stormwater runoff, and cooling waters from the Cogentrix co- generating facility adjacent to the 3M facility are discharged into a cooling pond on the 3M facility. In addition, groundwater from the 3M Woodbury groundwater protection system (barrier wells) is discharged to the 3M facility and used as process and cooling water at the 3M Cottage Grove plant. Therefore, this cooling water also eventually discharges to the process wastewater system (SD001) and the cooling pond (SD 002). A portion of the pond cooling water is diverted back to the Cogentrix facility for reuse as cooling water. The Cogentrix facility is regulated under a separate NPDES permit MN0062821. SD 002 discharges at an average rate of 3.8 MGD and a maximum rate of 5.5 MGD. Cooling waters are treated with biocides (chlorine). The SD 002 discharge from the pond is required to show nondetectable levels of total residual chlorine. The discharge limitations for SD 002 are as follows: BOD /TSS The existing permit contained BOD discharge limitations of 25 mg /I monthly average and 50 mg /I daily maximum and TSS discharge limitations of 30 mg /I monthly average and 60 mg /I daily maximum. These limitations will be maintained in the proposed permit and are consistent with MN state secondary treatment standards. Chlorine, Total Residual The existing permit required that total residual chlorine be non - detect (reported as 0 mg/1) in the SD 002 discharge which will be maintained in the permit. Oil and Grease The existing permit contains oil and grease discharge limitations of 10 mg /I monthly average and 15 mg /I daily maximum concentrations. This will be changed to a daily maximum discharge limitation of 10 mg /I which is more restrictive and consistent with current MN state standards described in MN 7050.0222 Specific Standards for Quality and Purity for Class 2 Waters of the State; Aquatic life and Recreation. Subpart 3. Temperature The existing permit contains a temperature limitation for SD 002 of 83 °F. This temperature limitation will be maintained in the permit. 35 Organic Analysis The permit will require continuation of organic analyses using EPA methods 624 and 625 and metals analysis for SD 002 on a semi - annual frequency. this requirement is described under Chapter 1 section 3.1 of the draft permit. The requirement also includes identification and quantification of any additional organics found, indicated by presence in gas chromatographic analysis where peaks on the chromatograms are more than 10 times higher than the adjacent peak to peak background noise. Organic analyses will continue to assure that the cooling water discharge, including groundwater pumped from the Woodbury well system, is not causing any environmental impact. SO 003 SD 003 discharge is the monitoring point for the combined discharges of SD 001 treated process wastewater and SD 002 cooling waters at the ravine. SD 001 and SD 002 currently discharge separately into a ravine (waters of the state). (Note that, as discussed in Appendix B, Surface Discharge Locations, SDO02 will be repiped to the parshall flume confluence with SDO01 in conjunction with installation of the activated carbon treatment systems and reconfiguration of polishing pond #1 and repiping projects, eliminating the separate SDO02 and SD001 discharges to the ravine.) SD 003 has the following discharge limitations: Chlorine, Total Residual The existing permit contains a discharge limitation for total residual chlorine of .04 mg /I in accordance with Minnesota state standards described under Minn. R. 7050.0222 subpart 3. The chlorine standard applies to conditions of continuous exposure, where continuous exposure refers to chlorinated effluents that are discharged for more than a total of two hours in any 24- hour period. The .04 mg /I limitation is derived by rounding off the .038 mg/I standard described in the rule. The .04 mg /I discharge limitation will be maintained. Toxicity, Whole Effluent SO 003 is required to meet a whole effluent toxicity maximum discharge limitation of .9999 TUa (toxicity units). Toxic units are described in Minn. R. 7050.0218 subp. 3. EE as follows: 'Toxic unit' means a measure of acute or chronic toxicity in an effluent. One acute toxic unit (TUa) is the reciprocal of the effluent concentration that causes 50 percent effect or mortality to organisms for acute exposures (100 /LC50); one chronic toxic unit (TUa) is the reciprocal of the effluent concentration that causes no observable adverse effect level on test organisms for chronic exposures (100 /NOAEL). Minnesota Rule states that an effluent is considered non -toxic if there is 50% mortality or less in 100% effluent. A 1.0 TUa concentration is equivalent to 50% mortality in 100% effluent. Therefore, the TUa discharge limitation must be less than 1.0 TUa in accordance with the rule. Accordingly the new limitation is < 1.0 TUa and is expressed numerically in the permit as .9999 TUa. Because the test methodology does not express results to the .9999 digit level, using a .9999 TUa limitation will not cause a conflict in assuring that toxicity results are less than 1.0 TUa. Whole effluent toxicity testing is required to be completed at SD 003 during June of each year, with testing methodology completed in accordance with the requirements described in the permit. 36 SD 004 SD004 is the Woodbury Groundwater Emergency Bypass. Barrier well groundwater from a 3M Woodbury site is pumped to the 3M Cottage Grove facility and is used in total for process water and cooling water purposes at the Cottage Grove plant. The Woodbury groundwater therefore is eventually discharged and monitored via the SD001 and SD002 discharges. On certain occasions during plant slowdowns or slowdowns in production excess pressure in the Woodbury pipeline causes a release of the Woodbury groundwater. This release is directed to the ravine adjacent to the plant site. 3M will be installing additional equipment that will allow this released water to be directed instead to the cooling pond for nearly all high pressure situations. Woodbury groundwater releases in the future to the ravine will be minimal, anticipated to be less than once per year only during higher setpoint pressures. During maintenance periods releases of Woodbury groundwater may also occur. SD004 requires flow monitoring only since the waters released are limited to groundwaters only, and are of the same as those waters normally discharged in any case via SD002. SD005 SD005 is the emergency stormwater bypass discharge for SD002 which will originate after the repiping project for cooling /stormwaters (SD002) is completed. The repiping of cooling /stormwaters for SD002 consists of construction of a pipeline carrying cooling and stormwaters from the final cooling /stormwater pond so that the discharge of SD002 will occur at the parshall flume confluence point of SD001. SD002 currently discharges to the ravine adjacent to the plant site. After the repiping project the separate ravine discharges for SD001 and SD002 will be eliminated. The repiping project will be completed in conjunction with the installation of proposed granular activated carbon systems and the reconfiguration of polishing pond #1. After completion of the repiping project for SD002, discharging SD002 to the parshall flume confluence point with SD001, all cooling and stormwaters will normally be discharged to that point. However, on certain infrequent occasions during high rainfall events a portion of the excess stormwater generated may overflow at a constructed weir at the final cooling pond. This overflow would occur only during infrequent events when stormwater runoff volumes exceed the design capacity of the pipeline carrying cooling /stormwaters. This would occur during rainfall events that typically exceed a once in 10 year occurrence interval over a 24 hour period. The overflow, designated SD005 Stormwater Emergency Bypass, would consist of cooling /stormwaters only and would be discharged to the ravine adjacent to the plant site. Only flow monitoring is required for this emergency discharge since the water discharged is the same as the portion of water discharged and monitored simultaneously at the SD002 discharge. 37 Appendix B Other Permit Requirements /issues Prepared by Don Kriens P.E., Principal Engineer, MPCA — November 2002 Surface Discharge Locations and Changes Current discharges at the 3M plant include the process wastewater discharge SD001, the cooling and stormwater discharge SD002, and SD003 which is the combined discharges of SD001 and SD002. After the WWTP and the polishing ponds, SD001 currently discharges to a parshall flume located near the last polishing pond and hence to the ravine located adjacent to the plant site. SD002 discharges from the last cooling pond to a separate point in the ravine. SD003 is the combined discharges taken at a point after combination of SD001 and SD002. 3M will be installing a new granular activated carbon treatment system for treatment of phase 1 and 2 wastewater streams and a separate new granular activated carbon treatment system for treatment of the phase 3 wastewater stream (incinerator scrubber wastewaters). The combined effluents from these granular activated carbon treatment systems will comprise SD001 after completion of these systems. SD001 will flow to the existing parshall flume for discharge. The activated carbon treatment system installation project will also include reconfiguration of polishing pond 1 and repiping of SD1002. The SD002 repiping project will allow treatment of cooling stormwater at the phase1 /2 activated carbon treatment system in the event of an emergency or spill to cooling waters. After the repiping project SD002 will be discharged to the parshall flume which also receives the SD001 effluent, and therefore the separate discharges of SD001 and SD002 to the ravine will be eliminated. SD003 will be the discharge monitoring point after the confluence of the SD001 and SD002 discharges at the parshall flume. SD003 will be the only discharge to waters of the state, with the exception of the infrequent bypass of Woodbury groundwater, and excess stormwaters discharged during infrequent high rainfall events, to ravine discharge points. SD001 and SD002 will continue to be monitored separately for flow and the parameters required pursuant to the permit. The permit requires that the applicable discharge limitations for these individual discharges be met prior to combining with each other. The combined effluents, designated SD003, will be monitored for acute toxicity and total residual chlorine. SD001 will be monitored for acute toxicity to demonstrate removal of toxicity after completion of the activated carbon treatment system and, upon successful demonstration of toxicity removal, toxicity testing at SD001 is eliminated. Toxicity testing will continue at SD003 on an annual basis. As defined in Appendix A, SD004, consisting of Woodbury groundwater used for cooling water purposes at the plant, may be discharged on very infrequent occasions. In addition, as defined in Appendix A, SD005, consisting of excess stormwaters generated during a high rainfall event typically exceeding the once in 10 rainfall interval, may also discharge to a point at the ravine. These bypasses are permitted and will be monitored separately. Resolution of Acute Toxicity at Surface Discharge 001 (SD 001) The existing permit required annual acute toxicity testing for both SD 001 and SD 003. SD 003 has been found consistently non -toxic and has met the existing discharge limitation of 1.0 TUa. SD 001 exhibited acute toxicity to aquatic test species during the period 1995 through 2000. Although SD 001 did not have a toxicity discharge limitation, in the event that the toxicity results at SD 001 demonstrated acute toxicity to any test species 3M was required to conduct further toxicity testing in order to determine the toxicity sources or causes and to conduct a toxicity reduction evaluation. 38 At the request of the MPCA 3M began a comprehensive study on the toxicity problem at SD 001 in January 2001 to determine the cause of the acute toxicity. This study, called the 3M Wastewater Toxicity Reduction Study, dated June 2001, is available in MPCA files for public review. The study determined that the occasional toxicity demonstrated at SD 001 during the period 1995 through 2000 was caused from elevated levels of zinc, nickel, and copper. The acute toxicity was demonstrated primarily in the Ceriodaphnia test species. Zinc was determined as the primary toxic metal contributor. As zinc became elevated to its LC50 level for Ceriodaphnia relatively low concentrations of nickel and copper, normally at levels which would not cause toxicity, would also contribute to acute toxicity at times due to the additive toxic effects of these 3 metals. Based on these evaluations, beginning in January 2001 3M adjusted the pH adjustment setpoints at the WWTP metals precipitation systems, which further maximized removal of zinc from the process wastewaters. It is believed that this has effectively removed the acute toxicity problem related to zinc, and any additive toxicity effects due to zinc, nickel, and copper. Results have shown that heavy metals concentrations are controlled below toxic threshold levels by the measures implemented to enhance zinc and metals removals. The proposed permit contains discharge limitations based in part on the 3M site - specific LC50 toxicity values developed for Ceriodaphnia, as described in the 3M Wastewater toxicity Reduction Study with zinc at 240 ug /I and copper at 68 ug /I. These discharge concentrations are more restrictive than MN state standards or the OCPSF standards. The nickel discharge limitation used for this permit is 480 ug /I, which is also more restrictive than MN standards or OCPSF standards, and lower than the LC50 of 940 ug /I used in the 3M Wastewater Toxicity Reduction Study. The basis for the proposed nickel discharge limitation is discussed more fully in Appendix A Basis for Derivation of NPDES Discharge Limits, Metals section. Beginning in the last quarter of 2000 and continuing through 2001, fathead minnows became the primary impacted species exhibiting acute toxicity. The fathead minnow toxicant is believed to be an organic compound. The 3M Wastewater Toxicity Reduction Study included an evaluation of 3M processes and chemistry, review of raw materials used in processes, chemical analysis of separate process streams, whole effluent toxicity testing, toxicity index evaluations, literature reviews, and treatability studies. The study concluded that the primary organic toxicant was related to an acrylamide latex emulsion process used in an automotive product production area at the 3M facility. The acrylamide latex process included alkyl phenol ethoxylates (APES) used in the raw materials. Further testing and evaluation determined that the APES were responsible for the acute toxicity impacts on the fathead minnow test species. The APEs are discharged from a building process at the 3M facility discharging into the phase 1 wastewater stream. The phase 1 wastewater stream is treated at the WWTP by a physical /chemical treatment system designed to neutralize acidic or basic wastewaters, provide for pH adjustment and precipitation of metals for removal, and sedimentation. It is not an organic oxidation process, therefore, organic compounds such as APEs would not normally be removed by the phase 1 treatment process. Published LC50s for many of these APE compounds indicate that acute toxicity can occur in the low ppm (mg /1) range. In particular 2 APEs, (2- [2 -[4- (1,1,3,3 - tetramethylbutyl) phenoxy]ethoxy]- ethanol and 4 -(1 ,1,3,3 - tetramethylbutyl) - phenol, were found at elevated concentrations in 3M tested effluents demonstrating acute toxicity to fathead minnows. Focused treatability studies conducted by a 3M consultant for this work found that carbon treatment effectively removed the toxicity present in the toxic phase 1 wastewater streams. Carbon or activated carbon therefore effectively removes the APE compounds responsible for acute toxicity. APE compounds are commonly used as surfactants in detergents and may also be used in a variety of applications including plastic additives, dispersants or wetting agents, emulsion 39 polymerizations, and pesticide formulations. APES have been found to cause acute toxicity to various aquatic species. APES have also been found to cause endocrine disruption, or cause oestrogenic effects in humans and animals. In general APEs biodegrade to alkyl phenols and alkylphenoxy carboxylic acids in wastewater treatments systems and the environment. There is some dispute as to whether APEs completely biodegrade or oxidize in biological wastewater treatment systems. Therefore, restrictions on APE use and regulations regarding the discharge of APEs is increasing. The MPCA does not have any current restriction requirements on the use and discharge of APEs. In some instances, however, the MPCA has requested Permittees to substitute APEs with linear alcohol ethoxylates (LAE), surfactant compounds which do not appear to cause oestrogenic impacts and more completely break down biologically, in those situations where biological wastewater treatment is not provided, such as in cooling water systems or relatively clean water discharges. The proposed permit requires that the acute toxicity at SD 001 be resolved. To accomplish this 3M has proposed to install a granular activated carbon treatment system for advanced treatment of the effluent from the existing WWTP. The granular activated carbon treatment system will effectively remove the acute toxicity caused by these compounds as well as eliminate any potential chronic impacts in the river, such as oestrogenic effects, caused by these compounds. Therefore, the permit contains a requirement for the installation of the granular activated carbon treatment system with a schedule for its installation. Granular Activated Carbon Treatment Systems 3M proposes to install granular activated carbon treatment systems for treatment of the WWTP effluents. An activated carbon treatment system will be installed for phase 1 and 2 treated effluents, and 3M proposes to install a separate granular activated carbon system for phase 3 treated effluent. The phase 1 and 2 activated carbon treatment system will be installed according to a schedule described in the permit. The activated carbon treatment system for treatment of phase 1 and phase 2 treated wastewater effluents will allow removal of any organic compounds causing acute toxicity in the SD 001 effluent. In addition, this activated carbon system will allow removal of organic compounds and will result in an additional system of removal in meeting the discharge limitations listed in the Limits and Monitoring Section. The complexity of the 3M facility, the varying nature of pollutant characteristics, and product development frequently done at the facility through pilot studies (reactors) leads to the intermittent generation of additional organic compounds and other pollutants. The activated carbon treatment at the 3M facility will enable enhanced removal of organic pollutants, that may not be totally removed by existing biological wastewater treatment, and help to assure that future generated organic pollutants are effectively removed. MPCA staff believes that an activated carbon treatment system is the best available technology that is economically achievable, or BAT, for end of pipe treatment of organic materials in general and for organic compounds causing acute toxicity in the phase 1 and 2 wastewaters. The MPCA believes that the addition of granular activated carbon treatment systems for tertiary treatment of phase 1, 2, and 3 effluents will likely enhance removal of low levels of mercury contained in these effluents. Most states and regulatory authorities recognize that the most effective option for reducing mercury in the environment is source control or pollution prevention (1 where mercury is removed through material substitution, recycling, or other P2 efforts thus minimizing or eliminating mercury from entry into wastewaters. However, in some cases end of pipe or wastewater treatment may also be necessary, or may be the only or most viable option, for mercury removal in wastewater effluents. Mercury may exist in several forms in wastewater effluents, including ionic or organic forms. The efficiency of removal by wastewater or removal technologies is significantly affected by the mercury forms present. Based on studies completed 40 at wastewater treatment facilities at numerous locations in the U.S. it has been found that often the majority of mercury is present in a particulate form, or attached to particles of solids in the wastewaters. Therefore, increasing the removal of effluent solids, or total suspended solids, in wastewater effluents has been found to provide for a significant increased removal of low level concentrations of mercury. A number of treatment technologies have also been evaluated for low -level mercury removal in wastewaters and water streams, beyond improved solids or effluent particulate removal. These technologies are more applicable to mercury in effluents in a "non-particulate" form. In general many of these technologies applicable to mercury removal are at an emerging or developmental state. These technologies range from activated carbon, impregnated activated carbon, enhanced precipitation, specific sorption technologies, reverse osmosis, and ion exchange. Certain advanced removal technologies such as reverse osmosis, ion exchange, and specific or specialty sorbents are typically only applicable to low flow streams due to the extraordinary high cost of these technologies. MPCA staff evaluated these technologies and believes that the best available technology that may be economically achievable, BAT technology, in general for end of pipe treatment of phase 3 wastewaters containing mercury is increased efficiency of effluent solids removal through sand filtration and activated carbon treatment. In some cases activated carbon may function both for improved solids removal and adsorption of mercury. This type of treatment system will allow for maximum removal of mercury attached to effluent solids, and maximum removal of forms of mercury amenable to removal by adsorption technologies (activated carbon). The MPCA believes that the treatment systems proposed to be installed on the 3M treated phase 3 effluent currently represents best available technology for mercury removal through end of pipe treatment technologies. The phases 1 and 2 treatment systems at 3M will initially be used as activated carbon treatment systems only, without using pre -sand filtration. However, the system will be designed to accommodate treatment of the effluents with sand filtration prior to activated carbon. 3M is proposing to install a granular activated carbon treatment system on the phase 3 effluent, in addition to the phase 1 and 2 activated carbon system. This is for the purpose of installing state of the art treatment technology and to proactively enhance mercury removal. Fluorochemical Analysis Requirement 3M produced fluorochemicals at the 3M Cottage Grove facility. These fluorochemicals were used in numerous consumer products and as a raw material used in products made by others. The major uses were as surface protectors and surfactants. One of the fluorochemicals produced by 3M was perfluorooctanesulfonyl fluoride (POSF) which was then used to create several fluorochemical product lines. POST is an eight carbon straight chain alkane with complete substitution of fluorine for hydrogen on the molecule. The carbon- fluorine bond formed by the process to make these fluorochemicals is very stable. POSF and POSF -based fluorochemical compounds ultimately degrade in the environment to perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and a few other perfluorinated forms. PFOS has been found to not degrade further in the environment. In 1997, after improving analytical techniques for these fluorochemical compounds, 3M discovered PFOS concentrations in the human blood sera of the U.S. population. This unexpected discovery prompted 3M to immediately proceed with further investigation. Further studies found PFOS in various species of animals across the world. It was determined that PFOS is bioaccu mulative and persistent. PFOS is distributed in blood serum and the liver in humans and animals. Recent data indicates that PFOS is present in human adult serum in the general population at about 37 ppb, taken from diverse locations in the U.S. 41 Because of the discovery of PFOS in the U.S. human population and the widespread distribution of PFOS in the environment 3M began a voluntary phase out in production of perfluorooctanyl chemistry including POST -based substances in year 2000. 3M is the sole producer of these specific fluorochemicals in the U.S. 3M also commissioned a great number of studies to evaluate the sources, dispersion, fate, and effects of these sulfonated fluorochemicals in the environment including environmental transformation /biodegradation studies, environmental distribution and transport studies, physical /chemical studies, environmental sampling studies, human exposure studies, ecotoxicity testing, and animal testing including carcinogenicity studies, etc. A large number of study reports are available and the studies are ongoing. These studies have been submitted by 3M to the EPA as 3M Fluorochemical EPA Submissions. The 3M Cottage Grove facility has produced some POSF based products and a related fluorochemical, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in the past. All of these production processes have been terminated. Related to the studies described above, in September- October 2001 3M found concentrations of these perfluorochemicals in the 3M Cottage Grove SD 001 treated discharge. Discharge concentrations ranged from an average of 11 ug/l to 346 ug/l, with PFOS and PFOA at averages of 262 ug/l and 216 ug /, respectively. 3M has also found low levels of PFOS in the groundwater under the 3M facility. The source of PFOS and related fluorochemicals in the groundwater discharge is unknown. Repeated dose studies to date demonstrate that the primary target organ of PFOS is the liver. High doses of PECS have caused some liver enlargement and alterations in liver metabolic processes in test animals. PFOS causes Liver enzyme elevations and hepatic vacuolization in rats and hepatic hypertrophy at high doses. Extensive toxicological research and laboratory animal studies have been completed and continue for the purpose of determining toxicological effects and potential health impacts, and to establish no effect levels in test animals, including rats and primates, for endpoints of importance. PFOS and related sulfonated perfluorochemicals, and PFOA have been found to be relatively non -toxic with respect to acute toxicity of aquatic organisms. The concentrations of these fluorochemicals found in the SD 001 discharge are well below any LC50s for any aquatic species. For example the 96 -FIR LC50 of PFOS for Fathead Minnows is 9.5 mg /l. The MPCA does not have any standards or discharge limitations for sulfonated fluorochemical compounds. However the MPCA believes that these compounds should be monitored. The activated carbon treatment system proposed to be installed by 3M will attenuate the PFOS and PFOA that may be present in these wastewaters. Activated carbon represents the best available technology for removal of these organics. The MPCA is evaluating a resolution to groundwater under the 3M facility contaminated by PFOS. 3M uses groundwater for its processes, supplied by production wells. Although PFOS, PFOA, and related fluorochemicals should have diminished in concentrations in wastewaters influent to the W WTP as a result of termination of production processes for these compounds, concentrations of these fluorochemicals will continue to be present in the influent wastewater for some time due to their low level presence in the groundwater. The activated carbon system has the potential to remove these compounds and thus serve, in part, as a remediation system for removal of these compounds from the groundwater. The fluorochemicals will be analyzed to detection levels pursuant to the method techniques developed for these compounds. 42 Wastewater Basin Liner Requirements The permit requires that the first polishing pond or basin #1 that immediately receives effluent from the wastewater treatment plant be upgraded with a new basin liner system. Basin I will continue to receive effluent from the existing wastewater treatment facilities at the site treating phase 1 and 2 wastewaters, and will serve as an "equalization" basin to direct treated wastewater effluent to the proposed new activated carbon treatment system. The liner will be upgraded to meet MPCA engineering design requirements for wastewater basins or ponds, in accordance with a schedule provided in the permit. The other existing polishing ponds at the W WTP system, polishing ponds 2 and 3 which successively follow polishing pond #1, will be taken out of operation after completion of installation of the activated carbon treatment system, reconfiguration of polishing pond #1 and liner installation, and the repiping project for SD002. After removal from operation these polishing ponds will receive only direct rainfall. At some point, at 3M's discretion, these ponds will be abandoned and sludges accumulated in the ponds will be removed and disposed of in accordance with federal and state rules. A portion of polishing pond 2 may be converted for use as a stormwater retention basin at pond abandonment. In that event 3M will submit plans for such conversion to the MPCA for review. 43