Laserfiche WebLink
'`-r ^1'li±~ Control Commission <br />.. f .. .T..,~.1~ .....ef ea in.~ n~ ~{.n <br />•j~•w.i,~~l. i~cl e~ii~i~i ~; ~•Lwii~la~.7~ <br />~u:~'~ t'1C Nf'DLS zrmit Program <br />_ -q- <br />'^^ted: March 7, 1978 <br />i~.•~vec May 10> 1978 <br />(4) The no-salt discharge require^cnt may be .• <br />waived in those cases where the szlt lead froT <br />each discharger reaching the mainstc~ of the <br />Colorado River is less than one ton per day or <br />350 tons per year, whichever is less. Evaluation <br />will be made on a case-by-tase basis. <br />B. Existing facilities <br />• 1. The Department of Health may permit t!:e discharge of <br />salt uoen a satisfactory demonstration by t".e pe~r,.Stt=e <br />that it is not practicable to prevent the discharge of <br />all salt from an existing facility. <br />2. The demonstration by the applicant must includ=_ in- _ <br />formation, in addition to that required under 3.10.4, <br />Section I, A,l,b; the following factors relating to the <br />potential discharge: <br />a. Existing tonnage of salt diseherced and volume . <br />of effluent. <br />b. Cost of modifying existing industrial plant to <br />• provide for no salt discharge. <br />c. Cost of salt minimization. <br />3. In determining what permit eonditie~s shall be requir-~1, <br />the De;?art,!ent of Health shall consider th~ items as <br />fol loti~5: <br />(1) Where no-discharge is determined to be im~rac~ic~'~'~: <br />{a) The impact of the total prcpes~d salt <br />discharge of each alternative cn t!:e lov;~~ <br />mainstem in terms of both ten: per year and • <br />cercentration and the economic imptct of the <br />increased salt load. , <br />(b) Costs per ton of salt re~cved from the -. <br />discharge for each plan alternative. <br />(c) Capability of minimizing salinity dis- <br />charge. <br />and in addition, the annual costs of pte^.t mcdificatior:, <br />in terms of dollars per ton of salt rer,~ved for: <br />• a. No salt return <br />b. Minimizing salt return <br />