My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-05-06_PERMIT FILE - M2019022
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2019022
>
2019-05-06_PERMIT FILE - M2019022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2024 10:21:58 AM
Creation date
5/7/2019 1:15:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2019022
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
5/6/2019
Doc Name
Is It Mining?
From
Jed Sonnenshein
To
DRMS
Email Name
JLE
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PART 11 <br /> Permit No.: COR400000 <br /> ii. There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass, such as the use of auxiliary <br /> treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal <br /> periods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup <br /> equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering <br /> judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment <br /> downtime or preventive maintenance; and <br /> iii. proper notices were submitted to the division. <br /> N. UPSET <br /> 1. Effect of an upset <br /> An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with <br /> permit effluent limitations if the requirements of Part II.N.2. of this permit are met. No <br /> determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was <br /> caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, is final administrative action <br /> subject to judicial review in accordance with Regulation 61.8(3)(j). <br /> 2. Conditions necessary for demonstration of an Upset <br /> A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate <br /> through properly signed contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence <br /> that <br /> a. an upset occurred and the permittee can identify the specific cause(s) of the upset; <br /> b. the permitted facility was at the time being properly operated and maintained; and <br /> c. the permittee submitted proper notice of the upset as required in Part II.L.6.(24- <br /> hour notice); and <br /> d. the permittee complied with any remedial measure necessary to minimize or <br /> prevent any discharge or sludge use or disposal in violation of this permit which has <br /> a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment. In <br /> addition to the demonstration required above, a permittee who wishes to establish <br /> the affirmative defense of upset for a violation of effluent limitations based upon <br /> water quality standards shall also demonstrate through monitoring, modeling or <br /> other methods that the relevant standards were achieved in the receiving water. <br /> 3. Burden of Proof <br /> In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an <br /> upset has the burden of proof. <br /> 0. RETENTION OF RECORDS <br /> 1. Post-Expiration or Termination Retention <br /> Copies of documentation required by this permit, including records of all data used to <br /> complete the application for permit coverage to be covered by this permit, must be <br /> Page 28 of 33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.