Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ • <br /> <br />Mr. Fred Matter, P.E. ~ <br />October 22, 1982 <br />Page 5 <br />average total suspended solids ("TSS")); discharge points 2, 7, <br />14, and 17 (regarding daily and average total iron); and at dis- <br />charge point 1 (regarding pH). <br />Initially, there appear to be two errors in the listings of <br />violations. Specifically, the listings under discharge point 17 <br />for March 9, 1982, regarding both TSS and total iron appear to be <br />in error. See pages 6 and 7 of the NOV. The monitoring <br />information provided the Division by CYCC does not indicate <br />violations of either TSS or total iron parameters on that day. <br />All of the cited discharges of TSS for discharge points 1, <br />2, and 9 resulted from snowmelt or rainfall, except for the <br />discharge at point 1 on September 17, 1981. Data regarding <br />temperature, snow depth, and precipitation are set forth on <br />Exhibit 5, attached hereto. Thus, these discharges were exempt <br />under the Permit, which provides as follows at section A.1.A., <br />page 3: <br />"Any overflow, increase in volume of a discharge, or <br />discharge from a by-pass system, which is caused by ' <br />precipitation or snowmelt, shall not be subject to <br />the limitations set forth in PART 1-A Page 2 of this <br />permit. This exemption is available only if the <br />facility has met the 10-year, 24-hour containment <br />requirements." <br />The above exemption also applies to the figures which are <br />used in computing the monthly averages regarding TSS. That is, <br />if a discharge ie caused by enowmelt or rainfall, the resulting <br />TSS figure is exempt from the daily TSS limitations, and in addi- <br />tion may not be taken into account in determining the monthly <br />average. As shown on Exhibit 6 attached hereto, none of the <br />monthly averages o£ TSS for any of the discharge points exceeds <br />35 mg/1. <br />The total iron effluent limitation is also subject to the <br />above language of the Permit, regarding exemption for rainfall or <br />snowmelt. As set forth on Exhibit 5, the discharge occurring at <br />discharge point 2 on March 19, 1982, was caused by snowmelt or <br />rainfall or both. Therefore that excursion is exempt. In <br />addition, CYCC was cited for an excess monthly average of total <br />iron for discharge point 2 in March, 1982. Applying the above <br />storm exemption, none of the discharges may be taken into account <br />in determining the average for March, 1982. See Exhibits 5 and <br />6. Therefore the excess monthly average for total iron at <br />discharge point 2 is exempt. <br />