Draft NPDES and SDS Permit to Rahr Malting Co.; for Permit ... Permit... · Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 3 of 69 . 1. Permitted facility description . The Rahr Malting

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System

MN0031917 Permittee: Rahr Malting Co.

Facility name: Rahr Malting Co.

Receiving water: Minnesota River - Class 2B, 3C, 4A, 4B, 5, 6 water

City or Township: Shakopee County: Scott

Issuance date: [enter date]

Expiration date: [enter date]

Modification date: [enter 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 reduce pollutant levels in point source discharges and protect water quality in accordance with the U.S. Clean Water Act, Minnesota statutes and rules, and federal laws and regulations. This permit is effective on the issuance date identified above. This permit expires at midnight on the expiration date identified above.

Signature: Theresa Haugen This document has been electronically signed. for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Theresa Haugen, Supervisor Water Section Industrial Division

Submit eDMRs Questions on this permit? Submit via the MPCA e-Services at For eDMR and other permit reporting issues, contact: https://rsp.pca.state.mn.us/TEMPO_RSP/Orchestrate.do?initiate=true

Sheri Woitalewicz 507-476-4271

Submit other WQ reports to: For specific permit requirements, please refer to: Attention: WQ Submittals Center Cara Omana ([email protected]) 651-757-2891 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North Wastewater Permit Program general questions, contact: St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 MPCA, 651-282-6143 or 1-800-657-3938.

https://rsp.pca.state.mn.us/TEMPO_RSP/Orchestrate.do?initiate=true

https://rsp.pca.state.mn.us/TEMPO_RSP/Orchestrate.do?initiate=true

Table of Contents

Page

1. Permitted facility description ....................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Location map of permitted facility ............................................................................................................................... 4 3. Flow diagram ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 4. Summary of stations and station locations.................................................................................................................. 6 5. Permit requirements .................................................................................................................................................... 7 6. Submittal action summary ......................................................................................................................................... 23 7. Limits and monitoring ................................................................................................................................................ 25

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 3 of 69 1. Permitted facility description The Rahr Malting Co facility (facility) is located at 800 1st Avenue W, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1148, Scott County. Major components of the facility include: • Activated Sludge - extended aeration • Activated Sludge - sequencing batch reactor • Chemical Feed System • Effluent Aeration • Effluent Equalization • Effluent Polishing Filter (with backwash) • Effluent filtration (membrane) • Phosphorus Removal (chemical addition) • Preliminary treatment - fine screen • Preliminary treatment - flow equalization • Pumping (Lift) Station • Solids Disposal - Land Application • Solids Thickening - Belt Filter Press • Solids Treatment - Aerobic Storage Tank The combined, and parallel, treatment trains (SBR & MBR) are designed to treat a peak hourly wet weather flow of 2.41 mgd (see the Updated Engineering Design Report, Rahr Malting Company, Wastewater Treatment Facility Phase II, revised November 2006; and the Rahr Malting Company Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion and Koda Energy Biomass Combined Heat and Power Plant Environmental Assessment Worksheet, 2007). The process wastewater treatment facility effluent (SBR & MBR) is monitored at station SD002. Noncontact cooling water (NCCW) is also discharged from the Rahr Malting facility. NCCW consists of a mixture of untreated well water & treated process wastewater effluent after SD002; and is discharged at a design average and maximum rate of 1,500,000 gallons per day and 3,500,000 gallons per day, respectively. The NCCW discharge is monitored at station SD001. Both the NCCW and the treated process wastewater are discharge to the Minnesota River (Class 2B). Monitoring/sampling for SD001 & SD002 is done discretely. Sanitary wastes are discharged to the municipal sanitary sewer. Sludges generated at the facility will be handled pursuant to the MPCA's Industrial By-Product permit, SDS General Permit No. MNG960040. Changes to the facility may result in an increase in pollutant loading to surface waters or other causes of degradation to surface waters. If a change to the facility will result in a net increase in pollutant loading or other causes of degradation that exceed the maximum loading authorized through conditions specified in the existing permit, the changes to the facility are subject to antidegradation requirements found in Minn. R. 7050.0250 to 7050.0335. 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 NPDES permit has been issued by the MPCA that contains effluent limits more stringent than those that would be established by Minn. R. 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(o) of the Clean Water Act, United States Code, title 33, section 1342.]

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 4 of 69 2. Location map of permitted facility

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 5 of 69 3. Flow diagram

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 6 of 69 4. Summary of stations and station locations

Station Type of station Local name PLS location SD 001 Effluent To Surface Water Non-Contact Cooling

Water Discharge T115N, R23W, S01, NW Quarter of the SE Quarter of the SE Quarter

SD 002 Effluent To Surface Water WWTP Facility Effluent T115N, R23W, S01, NW Quarter of the SE Quarter of the SE Quarter

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 7 of 69 5. Permit requirements SD 001 Effluent To Surface

Water

Facility Specific Limit and Monitoring Requirements

5.1.1 The Permittee shall submit a monthly DMR : Due by 21 days after the end of each calendar month following permit issuance. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.1.2 Sampling Location. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.1.3 Samples for Station SD001 shall be taken at: a point immediately downstream from the facility's cooling water system before it mixes with the process wastewater effluent stream. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.1.4 The Permittee shall submit monitoring results in accordance with the limits and monitoring requirements for this station. If conditions are such that no sample can be acquired, the Permittee shall report "No Flow" or "No Discharge" on Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and shall add a Comments attachment to the DMR detailing why the sample was not collected. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

SD 002 Effluent To Surface Water

Facility Specific Limit and Monitoring Requirements

5.2.1 The Permittee shall submit a monthly DMR : Due by 21 days after the end of each calendar month following permit issuance. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.2.2 Sampling Location. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.2.3 Samples for Station SD002 shall be taken at: a point immediately downstream from the combined SBR & MBR wastewater treatment systems but prior to the point at which the SBR & MBR WWTP effluents mix with the cooling water effluent. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

5.2.4 The Permittee shall submit monitoring results in accordance with the limits and monitoring requirements for this station. If conditions are such that no sample can be acquired, the Permittee shall report "No Flow" or "No Discharge" on Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) and shall add a Comments attachment to the DMR detailing why the sample was not collected. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)]

Acute Toxicity Requirements

5.3.5 General Requirements. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.6 This permit does not include an acute whole effluent toxicity limit; however the facility is required to conduct acute toxicity tests for Surface Discharge Station SD002. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.7 Toxicity, Whole Effluent (Acute) The Permittee shall submit annual acute toxicity test battery results : Due by 180 days after permit issuance, and annually thereafter. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.8 Reserved for future use => 5.3.8 through 5.3.11. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.9 Edit or delete this requirement as needed. [Minn. R. 7001]



5.3.12 Species and Procedural Requirements. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.13 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 is equal to or exceeds

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 8 of 69

a total ammonia concentration of 5 mg/l shall use the carbon dioxide-controlled atmosphere technique to control pH drift. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.14 Test organisms for each test battery shall include the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas)-Method 2001.0, Ceriodaphnia dubia-Method 2002.0, and Daphnia magna-Method 2021.0 or any updates to those methods. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.15 Static renewal acute serial dilution tests of the effluent shall consist of a control 12, 25, 50, 75 and 100 percent effluent. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.16 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. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.17 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. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.18 Quality Control and Report Submittals. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.19 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. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.20 Positive Toxicity Result for WET. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.21 Should a test exceed 0.9999 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 TUa remains present for any test species. For both retests, if no toxicity is present above 0.9999 TUa for any test species, the Permittee shall return to the test frequency specified by the permit. If either of the repeat test batteries indicate toxicity above 0.9999 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 plan 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. Following successful completion of the TRE the Permittee shall conduct one year of quarterly testing, with the results of the first quarterly test due the first full calendar quarter following TRE completion (For example, if the TRE is completed on April 28, the first quarterly results are due by September 30.). [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.22 Following successful completion of the TRE the Permittee shall conduct one year of quarterly testing, with the results of the first quarterly test due the first full calendar quarter following TRE completion (For example, if the TRE is completed on April 28, the first quarterly results are due by September 30.) Following completion of one year of quarterly testing the return to routine annual acute toxicity testing is subject to the discretion of the MPCA. Amendments to the initial TRE shall be approved by MPCA staff and the schedules identified therein. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.23 WET Data and Test Acceptability Criteria (TAC) Submittal. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.24 All WET test data and TAC shall be submitted to the MPCA by the dates required by this section of the permit using the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Ceriodaphnia dubia Toxicity Test Report and/or Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Fathead


Minnow Toxicity Test Report and associated instruction forms. 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 551554194. [Minn. R. 7001, Minn. R. 7041.1400]

5.3.25 Permit Re-opening for WET. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.26 Based on the results of the testing, the permit may be modified to include additional toxicity testing and a whole effluent toxicity limit. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.27 Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement Definitions. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.3.28 "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 daphnia magna and ceriodaphnia dubia or 96 hours for fathead minnows. An LC50/EC50 (lethal/immobile concentration) less than or equal to 100 percent effluent constitutes a positive for toxicity. [State Definitions]

5.3.29 "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 LC50/EC50 for daphnia magna and ceriodaphnia dubia or 96 hour LC50/EC50 for fathead minnows in %). [State Definitions]

5.3.30 "Test" refers to an individual species. [State Definitions]

5.3.31 "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. [State Definitions]

MN0031917 Rahr Malting Co

Surface Discharge Station General Requirements

5.4.1 Sampling Location. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.2 Analysis Requirements. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.3 Reserved for future use. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.4 Dissolved Oxygen, pH, Specific Conductance, Temperature and Total Residual Chlorine analyses shall be conducted within 15 minutes of Sample collection. [Minn. R. 7053]

5.4.5 Representative Samples. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.6 Samples and measurements required by this permit shall be representative of the monitored activity. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.7 Surface Discharge Prohibitions. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.8 Floating solids or visible foam shall not be discharged in other than trace amounts. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.9 Oil or other substances shall not be discharged in amounts that create a visible color film. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.10 The Permittee shall install and maintain outlet protection measures at the discharge stations to prevent erosion. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.11 Winter Sampling Conditions. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.12 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. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.13 Phosphorus Limits and Monitoring Requirements. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.14 Phosphorus Calculation Definitions. [Minn. R. 7001]


5.4.15 "12-Month Moving Average" is a rolling average. To calculate, add all of the monthly average values during the last 12 months and divide by 12. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.16 "12-Month Moving Total" is a rolling total. To calculate, for each month multiply the total volume of effluent flow (MG) by the monthly average concentration and by a 3.785 conversion factor to get kg/month. Then add all of the monthly values (kg/mo) during the last twelve months, starting with the monthly total for the month of the current reporting period. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.17 Nitrogen Limits and Monitoring Requirements. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.4.18 "Total Nitrogen" is to be reported as the summation of the Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and Total Nitrite plus Nitrate Nitrogen values. [Minn. R. 7001]


Special Requirements

5.5.20 The Permittee shall submit an annual CBOD5 Nonpoint Load Reduction Monitoring Report each year that the Permittee discharges CBOD5 (including years beyond the term of this permit) by January 31 of each year in accordance with Attachment #3 to this permit - Rahr Malting Permit Trading Language. => submit report : Due annually. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.5.21 See Attachment #1 - Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations. See Attachment #2 - Point-Nonpoint Source Trading Summary. See Attachment #3 - Rahr Malting Permit Trading Language for specific trading requirements. All three Attachments are considered an enforceable portion of the permit. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.5.22 The Permittee shall submit all well water sampling analysis data/reports for wells 1 through 5 (including years beyond the term of this permit) by December 31 of each year. Sampled parameters shall include, but not be limited to, Sulfate, Phosphorus and flow. Complete data sheets for each well shall be submitted. Phosphorus shall be tested by a method with a detection level of 0.03 mg/L. => submit monitoring reports : Due annually. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.5.23 A 10.2 kg/d calendar month average limit (June - September only) is applied for SD002 based on a wasteload allocation of 4.83 kg/d. This limit applies from June to September. => Wasteload allocation = maximum design flow x categorical concentration x conversion => 4.83 kg/day = 2.41 mgd x 0.53 x 3.785 => Monthly mass limit = "2.1" variability of treatment multiplier x wasteload allocation => 10.2 kg/day = 2.1 x 4.83 kg/d. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.5.24 Reserved for future use => 5.5.24 through 5.5.62. [Minn. R. 7001]








































Industrial Process Wastewater

5.6.63 Prohibited Discharges. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.64 This permit does not authorize the discharge of 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. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, Subp. 1(A)]

5.6.65 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. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, Subp. 1(A)]

5.6.66 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. [Minn. R. 7049.140, Subp. 2]

5.6.67 Toxic Substance Reporting. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.68 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, 1mg/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. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, Subp. 2]

5.6.69 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. [Minn. R. 7001.1050, Subp. 2(J)]

5.6.70 Hydrotest Discharges. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.71 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. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, Subp. 1(A)]

5.6.72 This permit does not authorize the construction or installation of pipeline facilities. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.73 Mobile and Rail Equipment Service Areas. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.74 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. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.75 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. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.76 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. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.77 Mobile and rail equipment maintenance and repairs shall not be conducted in wash bays. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.78 Hazardous materials shall not be stored or handled in wash bays. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.79 Wastewater containment systems, including pipes shall be inspected regularly. Leaks that are detected shall be repaired immediately. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.80 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. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.81 Spill cleanup procedures shall be posted in mobile and rail equipment maintenance and repair areas. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.82 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.83 PCBs, including but not limited to those used in electrical transformers and capacitors, shall not be discharged or released to the environment. [Minn. R. 7001.150, Subp. 2]

5.6.84 New Proposed Dewatering. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.85 The Permittee shall obtain a permit modification before discharging from a new dewatering outfall. [Minn. R. 7001.170]

5.6.86 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. [Minn. R. 7001.170]

5.6.87 Application for Permit Reissuance. [Minn. R. 7001, Minn. R. 7001]

5.6.88 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. [Minn. R. 7001.50]

5.6.89 The permit application shall contain all information required pursuant to Minnesota Rules including, but not limited to, Minnesota Rules 7001.1050. The permit application shall include all analytical data as required pursuant to Minnesota Rules including, but not limited to, Minnesota Rules 7001.1060. Should total mercury sampling be required, the permittee shall utilize EPA method 1631. [Minn. R. 7001, Minn. R. 7001.50]

5.6.90 The Permittee shall include, as part of the application for reissuance of this permit: a. a current topographic map; b. complete/comprehensive flow schematic(s); c. and an updated water balance for the facility. [Minn. R. 7001, Minn. R. 7001.50]

General Requirements

5.7.91 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.


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. Such a contract shall include: 1. The certified operator's name, business, and certificate number. 2. The contract period and renewal provisions. 3. The number of facility visits per month, and the time span of each visit. 4. The operator's responsibilities. 5. Provisions to notify the MPCA at least 30 days before the contract ends. The Permittee shall notify the MPCA no later than 30 days after a change in operator certification or contract status. [Minn. R. 7001]. [Minn. R. 7001]

Total Facility Requirements (NPDES/SDS)

5.8.92 Definitions. Refer to the 'Permit Users Manual' found on the MPCA website (www.pca.state.mn.us) for standard definitions. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.93 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. ch. 115 and 116. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.94 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(E)]

5.8.95 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. 1(A)]

5.8.96 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]

5.8.97 Property Rights. This permit does not convey a property right or an exclusive privilege. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3(C)]

5.8.98 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(O)]

5.8.99 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(D)]

5.8.100 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(A)]

5.8.101 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(B)]

5.8.102 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 are held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected thereby. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.103 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. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.104 Inspection and Entry. When authorized by Minn. Stat. ch. 115.04; 115B.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(I)]

5.8.105 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, subp. 3(F)]

5.8.106 Sampling. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.107 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(j)(1)]

5.8.108 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(E)]

5.8.109 Certified Laboratory. A laboratory certified by the Minnesota Department of Health and/or registered by the MPCA shall conduct analyses required by this permit. Analyses of dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, specific conductance, 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. R. 4740.2010, Minn. R. 4740.2050 through 2120]

5.8.110 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. [40 CFR 136, Minn. R. 7041.3200]

5.8.111 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, 2(B and C)]

5.8.112 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: 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;


d. the analytical techniques, procedures and methods used; and e. the results of the analysis. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, 2(C)]

5.8.113 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 units specified. Required forms may include DMR Supplemental/Sample Value Form Individual values for each sample and measurement shall be recorded on the DMR Supplemental/Sample Value Form which, if required, will be provided by the MPCA. DMR Supplemental/Sample Value Forms shall be submitted with the appropriate DMRs. You may design and use your own supplemental form; however it shall be approved by the MPCA. Note: Required summary information shall also be recorded on the DMR. Summary information that is submitted ONLY on the DMR Supplemental/Sample Value Form does not comply with the reporting requirements. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, 1(D), Minn. R. 7001.150, 2(B)]

5.8.114 Submitting Reports. DMRs, DMR supplemental forms and related attachments must be electronically submitted via MPCA e-Services after authorization is approved. DMRs and DMR Supplemental Forms shall be electronically submitted by the 21st day of the month following the sampling period or otherwise as specified in this permit. Electronic DMR submittal shall be complete on or before 11:59 PM of the 21st 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. Other reports required by this permit shall be postmarked by the date specified in the permit to: MPCA, Attn: WQ Submittals Center, 520 Lafayette Road North, St Paul Minnesota 551554194. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, 2(B), Minn. R. 7001.0150, 3(H)]

5.8.115 Incomplete or Incorrect Reports. The Permittee shall immediately submit an electronically 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. If it is impossible to electronically amend the report or DMR, the Permittee shall immediately notify the MPCA and the MPCA will provide direction for the amendment submittals. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, 3(G)]

5.8.116 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 shall 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, shall be certified by a registered professional engineer. [Minn. R. 7001.0540]

5.8.117 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. 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, 2(B)]

5.8.118 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, 3(H)]

5.8.119 Confidential Information. Except for data determined to be confidential according to Minn. Stat. ch. 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 shall follow Minn. R. 7000.1300. [Minn. R. 7000.1300]

5.8.120 Noncompliance and Enforcement. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.121 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. Stat. ch. 115.071 and 116.072, including monetary penalties, imprisonment, or both. [Minn. R. 7001.1090, 1(B)]

5.8.122 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, 3(G), Minn. R. 7001.1090, 1(G and H), Minn. Stat. ch. 609.671, 1]

5.8.123 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)]

5.8.124 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. If the permittee discovers that noncompliance with a condition of the permit has occurred which could endanger human health, public drinking water supplies, or the environment, the Permittee shall within 24 hours of the discovery of the noncompliance, orally notify the commissioner and submit a written description of the noncompliance within 5 days of the discovery. The written description shall include items a. through e., as listed below. If the Permittee discovers other non-compliance that does not explicitly endanger human health, public drinking water supplies, or the environment, the non-compliance shall be reported during the next reporting period to the MPCA with its Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). If no DMR is required within 30 days, the Permittee shall submit a written report within 30 days of the discovery of the noncompliance. This description shall include the following information: a. a description of the event including volume, duration, monitoring results and receiving waters;


b. the cause of the event; c. the steps taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent reoccurrence of the event; d. the exact dates and times of the event; and e. steps taken to reduce any adverse impact resulting from the event. [Minn. R. 7001.150, 3(K)]

5.8.125 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 Permittee, 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. [Minn. R. 7001.1090]

5.8.126 Release. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.127 Unauthorized Releases of Wastewater Prohibited. Except for discharges from outfalls specifically authorized by this permit, 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, Minn. Stat. ch. 115.061]

5.8.128 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 or (651)649-5451 (metro area) immediately upon discovery of the release. You may contact the MPCA during business hours at 1(800)657-3864 or (651)296-6300 (metro area). 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 and/or the Wetland Conservation Act authority) for implementation of additional clean-up or remediation activities in wetland or other sensitive areas. [Minn. R. 7001.1090]

5.8.129 Sampling of a release. Upon discovery of a release, the Permittee shall: a. 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 Permittee 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. b. Submit the sampling results on the Release Sampling Form (http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=18867). The Release Sampling Form shall be submitted to the MPCA with the next DMR or within 30 days whichever is sooner. [Minn. R. 7001.1090]

5.8.130 Bypass. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.131 Anticipated bypass. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if the bypass is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation of the facility. The permittee shall submit prior notice, if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass to the MPCA. The notice of the need for an anticipated bypass shall include the following information: a. the proposed date and estimated duration of the bypass; b. the alternatives to bypassing; and c. a proposal for effluent sampling during the bypass. Any bypass wastewater shall enter waters of the state from outfalls specifically authorized by this permit. Therefore, samples shall be collected at the frequency and location identified in this permit or two times per week for as long as the bypass continues, whichever is more frequent. [40 CFR 122.41(m)(2 and 3), Minn. R. 7001.1090, 1(J)]

5.8.132 All other bypasses are prohibited. The MPCA may take enforcement action against the Permittee for a bypass, unless the specific conditions described in Minn. R. Ch. 7001.1090 subp. 1, K and 122.41(m)(4)(i) are met. In the event of an unanticipated bypass, the permittee shall: a. Take all reasonable steps to immediately end the bypass. b. Notify the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer at 1(800)422-0798 or (651)649-5451 (metro area) immediately upon commencement of the bypass. You may contact the MPCA during business hours at 1(800)657-3864 or (651)296-6300 (metro area). c. Immediately take 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 directed by the MPCA, the Permittee shall consult with other local, state or federal agencies for implementation of abatement, clean-up, or remediation activities. d. Only allow bypass wastewater as specified in this section to enter waters of the state from outfalls specifically authorized by this permit. Samples shall be collected at the frequency and location identified in this permit or two times per week for as long as the bypass continues, whichever is more frequent. The permittee shall also follow the reporting requirements for effluent violations as specified in this permit. [40 CFR 122.41(m)(4)(i), Minn. Stat. ch. 115.061]

5.8.133 Operation and Maintenance. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.134 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, 3(F)]

5.8.135 In 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, 1(C)]

5.8.136 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, Minn. R. 7041]

5.8.137 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, 3(F), Minn. R. 7001.150, 2(B)]

5.8.138 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, 3(F), Minn. R. 7001.150, 2(B)]

5.8.139 Changes to the Facility or Permit. [Minn. R. 7001]

5.8.140 Permit Modifications. Except as provided under Minnesota Statutes, section 115.07, subdivisions 1 and 3, 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. Permittees that propose to make a change to the facility or discharge that requires a permit modification shall follow Minn. R. 7001.0190. If the Permittee cannot determine whether a permit modification is needed, the Permittee shall 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0030]

5.8.141 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0030]

5.8.142 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, 3(M)]

5.8.143 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. Safety Data Sheet (SDS) which shall include aquatic toxicity, human health, and environmental fate information for the proposed additive. The aquatic toxicity information shall include at minimum the results of: a) a 48-hour LC50 or EC50 acute study for a North American freshwater planktonic crustacean (either Ceriodaphnia or Daphnia sp.) and b) a 96-hour LC50 acute study for rainbow trout, bluegill or fathead minnow or another North American freshwater aquatic species other than a planktonic crustacean; 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]

5.8.144 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0170, Minn. R. 7001.0180]

5.8.145 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 CFR 122.44.l.2.i., 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. [40 CFR 122.44(l)(2)(i)]

5.8.146 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, 3(N)]

5.8.147 Facility Closure. The Permittee is responsible for closure and post-closure 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, post-closure 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. ch. 116.07, 4]

5.8.148 Permit Reissuance. If the Permittee desires to continue permit coverage beyond the date of permit expiration, the Permittee shall submit an application for permit reissuance : Due by 180 days prior to 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 Permittee 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 Permittee 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0160]

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 23 of 69 6. Submittal action summary SD 001 Effluent To Surface

Water

Facility Specific Limit and Monitoring Requirements 6.1.1 The Permittee shall submit a monthly DMR : Due by 21 days after the end of each

calendar month following permit issuance. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)] SD 002 Effluent To Surface

Water

Facility Specific Limit and Monitoring Requirements 6.2.1 The Permittee shall submit a monthly DMR : Due by 21 days after the end of each

calendar month following permit issuance. [Minn. R. 7001.0150, Subp. 2(B)] Acute Toxicity Requirements 6.3.2 Toxicity, Whole Effluent (Acute) The Permittee shall submit annual acute toxicity test

battery results : Due by 180 days after permit issuance, and annually thereafter. [Minn. R. 7001]

MN0031917 Rahr Malting Co Special Requirements 6.4.1 The Permittee shall submit an annual CBOD5 Nonpoint Load Reduction Monitoring

Report each year that the Permittee discharges CBOD5 (including years beyond the term of this permit) by January 31 of each year in accordance with Attachment #3 to this permit - Rahr Malting Permit Trading Language. => submit report : Due annually. [Minn. R. 7001]

6.4.2 The Permittee shall submit all well water sampling analysis data/reports for wells 1 through 5 (including years beyond the term of this permit) by December 31 of each year. Sampled parameters shall include, but not be limited to, Sulfate, Phosphorus and flow. Complete data sheets for each well shall be submitted. Phosphorus shall be tested by a method with a detection level of 0.03 mg/L. => submit monitoring reports : Due annually. [Minn. R. 7001]

Total Facility Requirements (NPDES/SDS) 6.5.3 Permit Reissuance. If the Permittee desires to continue permit coverage beyond the

date of permit expiration, the Permittee shall submit an application for permit reissuance : Due by 180 days prior to 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 Permittee 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 Permittee 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. [Minn. R. 7001.0160]

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 25 of 69 7. Limits and monitoring

Subject item Parameter

Discharge limitations Monitoring requirements Quantity /Loading avg.

Quantity /Loading max.

Quantity /Loading units

Quality /Conc. min.

Quality /Conc. avg.

Quality /Conc. max.

Quality/ Conc. units Frequency Sample type

Effective period

Notes

SD 001 Non-Contact Cooling Water Discharge

Flow Monitor only. calendar month total

million gallons

Monitor only. calendar month average

Monitor only. calendar month maximum

million gallons per day

once per week

Estimate Jan-Dec


pH 6.0 calendar month minimum

9.0 calendar month maximum

standard units

once per week

Grab Jan-Dec


Temperature, Water (C) Monitor only. calendar month minimum


30 calendar month maximum

degrees Celsius

once per week

Grab Jan-Dec

SD 002 WWTP Facility Effluent

BOD, Carbonaceous 05 Day (20 Deg C)

96.5 calendar month average


kilograms per day

12 calendar month average


milligrams per liter

3 times per week

24-Hour Flow Composite

Jan-Dec


Flow Monitor only. calendar month total

million gallons



million gallons per day

once per day

Measurement, Continuous

Jan-Dec


Nitrite Plus Nitrate, Total (as N)

Monitor only. calendar month

kilograms per day

Monitor only. calendar month


once per month


Jan-Dec






Quality /Conc. min.

Quality /Conc. avg.

Quality /Conc. max.


Effective period

Notes

average average


Nitrogen, Ammonia, Total (as N)


kilograms per day



3 times per week


Jul-Sep




kilograms per day



3 times per week


Jun




kilograms per day



3 times per week


May




kilograms per day



3 times per week


Oct




kilograms per day



3 times per week


Nov




kilograms per day



3 times per week


Dec-Apr


Nitrogen, Kjeldahl, Total Monitor only. calendar month average

kilograms per day


milliliters per liter

once per month


Jan-Dec


Nitrogen, Total (as N) Monitor only. calendar

kilograms per day

Monitor only. calendar


once per month


Jan-Dec






Quality /Conc. min.

Quality /Conc. avg.

Quality /Conc. max.


Effective period

Notes

month average

month average


Oxygen, Dissolved 6.0 minimum calendar week average


once per day

Grab Apr-Nov


Oxygen, Dissolved 7.0 minimum calendar week average


once per day

Grab Dec-Mar


pH 6.0 calendar month minimum

9.0 calendar month maximum

standard units

once per day

Grab Jan-Dec


Phosphorus, Total (as P) 11 calendar month average

kilograms per day



3 times per week


Oct-May


Phosphorus, Total (as P) 10.2 calendar month average

kilograms per day



3 times per week


Jun-Sep


Phosphorus, Total (as P) 3329 12-month moving total

kilograms per year

once per month

Calculation Jan-Dec


Solids, Total Dissolved (TDS)

Monitor only. calendar


once per month


Mar, Sep






Quality /Conc. min.

Quality /Conc. avg.

Quality /Conc. max.


Effective period

Notes

month average


Solids, Total Suspended (TSS)



kilograms per day




3 times per week


Jan-Dec


Sulfate, Total (as SO4) Monitor only. calendar quarter average


once per quarter


Mar, Jun, Sep, Dec


Temperature, Water (C) Monitor only. calendar month minimum



degrees Celsius

once per day

Grab Jan-Dec


Attachment #1 Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)/State Disposal System (SDS) Permit MN0031917

Updated October 2, 2018, see italics text Proposed changes to this permit attachment shall follow the permit modification procedures outlined in the permit, including the public notice process. If the proposed modification of this permit attachment may result in a positive or negative change to the phosphorus trade credits already approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) under this permit, the MPCA shall clearly identify the amount of this potential change in the public notice for the proposed modification. The previously approved trades for Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD) credits listed below shall remain current at the credit level established:

Location Project Type(s) Pounds per day of CBOD equivalent credits

Minnesota River, New Ulm, MN Riparian area natural and woody vegetation establishment

71.8

Cottonwood River, New Ulm, MN Riparian area natural and woody vegetation establishment

28.9

Fruhwirth Farm Site, New Ulm, MN Livestock exclusion and bank stabilization

13.4

Dean Hathaway Bluff Site, Henderson, MN

Bluff stabilization 98.7

Total 212.8 These four prior approved sites combine for a total of 212.8 pounds per day of CBOD equivalent credits. Should credits for these sites become inactive and revoked for any reason, or should additional credits be sought by the Rahr Malting Company representatives, all new pollutant trading credit calculations will utilize the process outlined below. The facility can acquire trades utilizing either point-point trades or point-nonpoint trades.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 30 of 69 Point-Point trades will be made on a trade by trade basis as needed. A Trade Ratio of at least 1.2 to 1 will apply. A contract with any legitimate wastewater discharger containing phosphorus and willing to reduce below the current permitted phosphorus load will be required. The contract will need to be reviewed and approved by the MPCA prior to signing by both parties. Monitoring and reporting requirements to provide for tracking actual reductions will be required. This process requires the buyer’s and seller’s permit to be modified to account for the adjustment of the limits.

Point Nonpoint Trades will be facilitated as follows. “High Delivery Zone” means the corridor of land along a stream, river or other watercourse that demonstrates high interaction of the soils with the watercourse. High Delivery Zones may include floodplains with a high flood return frequency, or land with convex slopes toward the watercourse that does not allow eroded materials to redeposit before overland flow enters the watercourse. The MPCA shall determine whether a proposed site is a High Delivery Zone or not. The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) shall be used to project the soil erosion rates from sheet, rill, and ephemeral gullies. The local Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD) staff shall determine the USLE and RUSLE coefficients for proposed trade sites in their respective local areas. Credits under more than one Best Management Practice (BMP) for the same site shall not be allowed unless adequate justification is provided demonstrating that the accumulative credits are additive. The following trade credit calculations are to be modified by an additional 0.5 multiplier if applied in the Chippewa Watershed at and above Chippewa River Mile 10. This reduction by 50% is to account for the medium and high flow diversion of approximately 50% of the total annual flow from the Chippewa River into the Lac Qui Parle Lake. The Lake has assimilation capacity that is currently removing phosphorus before being discharged downstream of the Minnesota River and therefore reductions of phosphorus loading following this pathway are not eligible for pollutant trading credits targeted at the lower 25 miles of the Minnesota River. Trade crediting calculations are based on conservative professional estimates. The Permittee is required to achieve and maintain MPCA-approved credits according to the permit. These requirements are based upon a trading ratio of 2.6 which is determined as follows: · 1.0 (Basic 1:1 Trading Ratio Requirements) · +0.6 (Engineering safety factor reflecting potential site-to-site variations)

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 31 of 69 · +1.0 (Net reduction factor to achieve load reductions that improve water quality. This reduction factor is based on considerations including

the MPCA water quality interim target for the Minnesota River Basin, the MPCA Total Maximum Daily Load limitation to address problems of low dissolved oxygen in the lower Minnesota River, and the MPCA Phosphorus Strategy.)

· =2.6 (Overall Trading Ratio) The following list of calculations for resulting phosphorus reductions will be multiplied by 8:1 ratio to account for the phosphorus to algae to CBOD correlation. 1. Soil Erosion BMPs Soil erosion BMPs are BMPs to reduce the impacts of sheet, rill, and ephemeral gully erosion; gully erosion; stream, river, and ditch bank erosion; and erosion at surface tile inlets. The following process shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from soil erosion BMPs. Step 1: Calculate the reduction in soil erosion. The following methods of estimating the erosion rate apply, based on the erosion mechanism: A. Sheet, Rill, and Ephemeral Gully Erosion: Calculate the site erosion rate before and after installing the BMP using the USLE or RUSLE. (The

equation used shall be that currently used by the local NRCS and SWCD.) Express the results in tons/acre/year (SEDb and SEDa). B. Streambank and Gully Erosion:

1. Using the existing contours, determine the volume of soil removed by gully erosion and/or streambank erosion (VOL). 2. Using the land operator as a reference, determine the amount of time in years it has taken to produce the gully and/or streambank

erosion (VOL/YRs). 3. Using the Soil Density Values below, convert the volume per year determination to tons/year (SEDb). SEDa shall be equal to zero.

Soil Density Values

Soil Textural Class Dry Density (tons/ ft3) Sands, loamy sands 0.055 Sandy loam 0.0525 Fine sandy loam 0.05


Loams, sandy clay loams, sandy clay 0.045 Silt loam 0.0425 Silty clay loam, silty clay 0.04 Clay loam 0.0375 Clay 0.035 Organic 0.011

Step 2: Calculate the reduction in sediment delivered to the watercourse. A. Sheet, Rill, and Ephemeral Gully Erosion: Using the Delivery Ratio (DR) Table below, enter the sheet and rill erosion category to calculate the

delivery ratio for the site before and after implementation of BMP(s). Sediment reduction in tons (SEDRT) equals the difference between these values times the acres that the practice is applied over. SEDRTb = Area * (SEDb*DRb) and

SEDRTa = Area * (SEDa*DRa).

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 33 of 69 Delivery Ratio Table

Surface Tile Inlets Absent Surface Tile Inlets Area High

Delivery Zone

Non-High Delivery Zone less than ¼

mile from watercourse

Non-High Delivery Zone greater than

¼ mile from watercourse

Without a Standpipe

With a Standpipe

Gully Erosion Channelized to Watercourse

95% 95% 50% NA NA

Gully Erosion Non-

Channelized to Watercourse

NA 15% 5% 20% 10%

Sheet, Rill Erosion

95% maximum

15% 5% 20% 10%

Streambank Erosion

95% NA NA NA NA

B. Streambank and Gully Erosion: Using the Delivery Ratio Table above, select the appropriate delivery ratio (DRb). Multiply the soil erosion

rate (SEDb in tons/year) by the delivery ratio to determine the amount of soil reaching the Minnesota River Basin drainage downstream of the Lac Qui Parle Reservoir dam and upstream of River Mile 25 (Sediment Reduction Delivery Calculation - SEDRDC), excluding the Chippewa River watershed and landlocked areas or watershed divides within the site. The results shall be in tons/year delivered. SEDRDC = SEDb * DRb.

Step 3: Determine the phosphorus values associated with the sediment runoff. A. Sheet, Rill, and Ephemeral Gully Erosion: To determine the annual phosphorus mass reduced (SEDRTP), take the sediment tons per acre

before and after (similar to step 2, without the area; SEDRTPb = SEDb * DRb and SEDRTPa = SEDa * DRa) and enter the Phosphorus Enrichment Table. Phosphorus enrichment values represent the phosphorus attachment potential of different soil types combined with the settling characteristics of the different particles. The phosphorus attachment in the parent material is as presented in the table below for each soil type (e.g., 1.00 pound/ton for silt), however, as sands deposit out and clays continue on the move and the soil that remains on the move contains more P per ton of soil. This table is from the CREAMS model algorithm for sediment-attached phosphorus and adjusts for


phosphorus content of the parent material type. To determine the enrichment, take the phosphorus content results (phosphorus) for the “before value” and subtract the “after value” from the table. (Pb and Pa), Phosphorus Reduction Delivery Calculation: PRDC = Pb * Area- Pa. * Area.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 35 of 69 B. Streambank and Gully Erosion: Determine the phosphorus values associated with the sediment. Using the default values in the table below,

calculate the amount of phosphorus delivered (PDEL) to the Minnesota River Basin drainage downstream of the Lac Qui Parle Reservoir dam and upstream of River Mile 25, excluding the Chippewa River watershed and landlocked areas or watershed divides within the site (PDEL). PDEL = SEDRDC * PhosContent.

Soil Type Sand Silt Clay Peat Phosphorus Content Factor 0.85 lb/ton 1.00 lb/ton 1.15 lb/ton 1.50 lb/ton NOTE: The values used in Step 3 are conservative. At certain trade sites, soils may have enriched phosphorus content due to past application of fertilizers. Higher phosphorus levels may be justified through site-specific soil sampling. However, to account for uncertainties associated with the sample process, site-specific values shall be multiplied by a safety factor of .75 to calculate the amount of phosphorus delivered, unless a site-specific soil sampling plan is approved in advance.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 36 of 69 Phosphorus Enrichment Table

Sediment Delivery Rate (tons/ac/year)

Phosphorus Enrichment Value (lbs/acre)

Clay Silt Sand Peat 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.06 0.02 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.10 0.03 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.15 0.04 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.18 0.05 0.17 0.15 0.12 0.22 0.06 0.19 0.17 0.14 0.25 0.07 0.22 0.19 0.16 0.29 0.08 0.24 0.21 0.18 0.32 0.09 0.27 0.23 0.20 0.35 0.1 0.29 0.25 0.22 0.38 0.2 0.51 0.44 0.38 0.66 0.3 0.70 0.61 0.52 0.92 0.4 0.88 0.77 0.65 1.15 0.5 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.4 0.6 1.2 1.1 0.9 1.6 0.7 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.8 0.8 1.5 1.3 1.1 2.0 0.9 1.7 1.5 1.2 2.2 1 1.8 1.6 1.4 2.4 2 3.2 2.8 2.4 4.2 3 4.4 3.9 3.3 5.8 4 5.6 4.8 4.1 7.3 5 6.7 5.8 4.9 8.7 6 7.7 6.7 5.7 10.1 7 8.7 7.6 6.4 11.4 8 9.7 8.4 7.2 12.7 9 10.7 9.3 7.9 13.9

10 11.6 10.1 8.6 15.1 11 12.5 10.9 9.3 16.3 12 13.4 11.7 9.9 17.5


13 14.3 12.4 10.6 18.7 14 15.2 13.2 11.2 19.8 15 16.0 14.0 11.9 20.9 16 16.9 14.7 12.5 22.0 17 17.7 15.4 13.1 23.1 18 18.6 16.1 13.7 24.2 19 19.4 16.9 14.3 25.3 20 20.2 17.6 14.9 26.3 21 21 18.3 15.5 27.4 22 21.8 19.0 16.1 28.4 23 22.6 19.6 16.7 29.5 24 23.4 20.3 17.3 30.5 25 24.1 21.0 17.8 31.5 26 24.9 21.7 18.4 32.5 27 25.7 22.3 19.0 33.5 28 26.4 23.0 19.5 34.5 29 27.2 23.6 20.1 35.5 30 27.9 24.3 20.7 36.4

2. Cattle Exclusion Cattle exclusion means fencing and an alternative water supply that provides a separation distance protecting the waters of the state and their shorelands. The following process shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from cattle exclusion. Step 1: Determine the number of head and size of animals. The maximum grazing density for cattle that can be supported without supplemental feeding is one animal per acre (head/ac) over a 5-month grazing season for steers. Other cattle pasture operations shall determine the land’s capacity and document the assumptions. The animal count shall be determined by the typical weight categories given in the Midwest Plan Service’s Livestock Waste Facilities Handbook (MWPS-18). Keep separate counts for each animal category presented (HEAD). Step 2: Determine the manure load generated by the herd. The MWPS-18 lists standard production rates for phosphorus (MP): MP = HEAD * MWPS-18 P MTP = Phosphorus from all the animal categories presented

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 38 of 69 Step 3: Determine the field layout before and after cattle exclusion has been implemented. The pasture area shall be divided into a High Delivery Zone and a non-High Delivery Zone. For large pastures, the non-High Delivery Zone shall be divided based on the delivery ratio as shown below:

Area High Delivery Zone

Non-High Delivery Zone less than ¼ mile from watercourse

Non-High Delivery Zone greater than ¼ mile from watercourse

Delivery Ratio 100% 40% 20% Step 4: Determine the amount of phosphorus delivered in each portion of the pasture before and after implementation of the BMP. Deposition of manure in pasture areas shall be directly proportional to the amount of time spent by the animals in each area. The following time distribution shall be used for cattle having unrestricted access in the riparian zone:

Month Time in High Delivery Zone May 25% June 25%

July 1–15 25% July 16–31 36%

August 36% September 25%

Average 28% The alternative water supply shall be located in the pasture, as specified in the operation and maintenance plans, to minimize the time the cattle are next to the exclusion fencing. Time not spent in the High Delivery Zone shall be spread equally throughout the upland pasture area in the following distribution: the ratio of the total field size to the portion less than ¼ mile or greater than a ¼ mile from the watercourse. The amount of phosphorus deposited in each portion of the pasture shall be calculated based on the ratio of the field size to the portion of land less than or equal to ¼ mile and greater than or equal to ¼ mile. For example, if 20 percent of the field exceeds ¼ mile then 20 percent of the manure shall be allocated the 20 percent delivery ratio after the cattle exclusion is implemented. Example time distributions (TD) are shown below (in this example zero percent of the field is located more than ¼ mile from the watercourse):

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 39 of 69 Example Time Distributions

Pasture Area Cattle Management Before Cattle Exclusion After Cattle Exclusion High Delivery Zone 28% 0% Non-High Delivery Zone less than ¼ mile from watercourse

72% 100%

Step 5: Determine amount of phosphorus delivered. The amount of phosphorus delivered shall be calculated from the amount deposited in each pasture area multiplied by that area’s delivery ratio, and shall be adjusted according to:

v Herd Size: If a substantial portion of the pasture would fall under a conservation easement, the herd size shall be reduced in the calculations

to reflect the decreased carrying capacity after the implementation of cattle exclusion.

v Filter Strips: Filter strip credit may be allowed for management areas where flow characteristics and vegetation are such that filtering out of solids is enhanced. The minimum width of the easement for application of a filter strip function is 25 feet for stem grass vegetation and 50 feet for woody vegetation. Filter strips are assumed to remove 30 percent of particulate pollutants and 0 percent of soluble pollutants. The relative distribution of soluble/particulate fractions shall be 50 percent/50 percent for manure-based phosphorus.

LPDRB = MTP * THZ * DR + MTP * TG1/4 * DR + MTP * TL1/4 * DR LPDRA = MTP * TG1/4 * DR + MTP *TL1/4 * DR DR = Delivery Ratios as determined by table on Delivery ratios THZ = time assumed to be in High Delivery Zone (28% of the time)

TG1/4 = time determined to be spent in pasture more distant than a ¼ mile TL1/4 = time determined to be spent in pasture closer than a ¼ mile

MTP = Phosphorus from all the animal categories presented

Filter Strip Crediting

FilterLE = LPDRB - LPDRA – (LPDRA * TE* Solidf)


TE = equals a treatment efficiency of 30% removed of particulate matter. Solidf = equals the assumption of 50% of manure being in solid versus soluble.

3. Rotational Grazing with Cattle Exclusion The operation and maintenance plans for rotational grazing shall include a description of the enhanced forage species for the pastures, including the vegetation criteria to determine over-grazed pastures from properly rotated pastures.

Rotational grazing with cattle exclusion shall be credited similar to Cattle Exclusion except for the time spent in distant pastures and reductions in the delivery ratio attributed to manure rates being closer to agronomic rates. More credit may be obtained if rotational grazing documents more time spent in the pastures farther than ¼ mile from the watercourse. Acceptable documentation includes establishing a rotational grazing plan and recording the rotational movement in that operation, and an annual “T” transect of the forage grasses present. The “T” transect shall consist of determining the vegetation species found every foot along two 100-foot lines perpendicular to each other in each field paddock. If the paddock shaping has dimension(s) of less than 100 feet then the count may be reduced to every six inches along a 50-foot length. The vegetation ratios shall meet the enhanced forage vegetation criteria included in the project operation and maintenance plan. Over-intensive grazing shall identify which grass species dominate the “T” transect, for example, a pasture that is dominated by Kentucky bluegrass or bare soils. Steps 1-2. Follow Cattle Exclusion Steps 1-2. Step 3: Determine the field layout before and after cattle exclusion with rotational grazing has been implemented. The pasture area shall be divided into a High Delivery Zone and a non-High Delivery Zone. For large pastures, the non-High Delivery Zone shall be divided based on the delivery ratio as shown below: Area High Delivery

Zone Non-High Delivery Zone less

than a ¼ mile from watercourse

Non-High Delivery Zone greater than a ¼ mile from watercourse

Delivery Ratio 100% 20% 10% Step 4. Follow Cattle Exclusion Step 4. Example time distributions (TD) are shown below: Example Time Distributions

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 41 of 69 Pasture Area Cattle Management Before Cattle Exclusion After Cattle Exclusion High Delivery Zone 28% 0% Non-High Delivery Zone less than ¼ mile from watercourse

36% 50%

Non-High Delivery Zone greater than ¼ mile from watercourse

36% 50%

Step 5. Follow Cattle Exclusion Step 5. 4. Critical Area Set Aside Critical area set aside means changing the principal land use to reduce high erosion levels. The following process shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from critical area set aside. Set asides may be credited for this permit only if it is verified that the land being credited is not eligible for the Minnesota River Watershed Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), and the land is not within the Beaver Creek Watershed. (CREP-eligible land within the Beaver Creek Watershed only may be proposed for critical area set aside trade credits.) The permit credit may be used to extend the CREP corridor on land adjacent to the watercourse. If the CREP program sets aside a site stream corridor but does not set aside the whole site, critical area set aside phosphorus credits under this permit may be available for the non-corridor portion of that site. River Flood-Scoured Areas Step 1: Determine portion of field subject to scour excavation. This information may be obtained by direct observation of field conditions, or through physical records including maps and photographs. The erosion volumes shall be calculated by averaging the previous events in a documented manner. (AREA, VOL). The volume of the soil is determined by multiplying the area by the depth of scour over that area if evenly eroded or, if irregular in shape, determining that volume voided as described in Soil Erosion BMPs. Step 2: Determine the period of time the scouring occurred. This may be determined from topographic map records, or as determined and justified by a professional engineer (TIME).

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 42 of 69 Step 3: Using the soil density values under Soil Erosion BMPs calculate the weight of the soil eroded (SED) by multiplying the dry density and the volume (tons/acre). SED = VOL * Density. Step 4: Determine the erosion rate (VER): VER = SED/TIME (tons/acre/yr). Step 5: Follow Soil Erosion BMPs Step 3B, assuming a 95 percent delivery ratio. SEDP = VER * DR * PhosContent (lbs of P/yr). Bluffs The calculations for bluff critical area set asides shall follow the soil erosion calculations under the Soil Erosion BMPs that most closely apply to the type of erosion at the site. In addition, the special practices needed to maintain soil stability during set aside installation and throughout the project trade duration shall be detailed. The design shall consider protecting the site against upland contributing flows from surface and ground water sources, and providing stability at the toe of the bluff. Restored Wetlands The calculations for restored wetlands critical area set-asides shall follow the sheet, rill, and ephemeral gully erosion calculations under the Soil Erosion BMPs. In addition, it shall be demonstrated that restored wetland contributing areas shall remain hydraulically unconnected with the watershed to which it previously drained. If a restored wetland contributing area remains hydraulically connected with the watershed to which it previously drained, it is not eligible for Critical Area Set Aside credits, but may be eligible for Constructed Wetlands Treatment Systems credits. 5. Constructed Wetland Treatment Systems Constructed wetland treatment systems shall be designed, constructed, operated and maintained as follows: 1. Water contact recreation and consumptive fishing shall be discouraged in the wastewater treatment system. 2. The wetland shape shall be simple to encourage good water circulation. The length shall be three to five times the width for maximum

detention efficiency and the inlets and outlets shall be widely spaced to minimize short-circuiting. Lower length to width ratios shall be allowed if justified based on the design flows and/or energy of the unchannelized water in the wetland.

3. The inlet and outlet areas shall be protected from scour erosion.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 43 of 69 4. Minimum and maximum depths of the wetland shall be considered. The depth shall not be such that anoxic layers readily develop. The

bounce of the wetland shall not vary sufficiently to impair aquatic emergent vegetation in the wetland. 5. Maximum flows to be treated shall be designed for by providing adequate detention times and emergency spillway or flow bypasses. The

design shall address the capture and long-term storage of the sediment and phosphorus. 6. The water level bounce and vegetation shall be controlled such that at least seventy percent of the permanent pool remains vegetated with

emergent varieties. The following equation shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from constructed wetland treatment systems: ln[C0/Ci] = -k/q where: C0 = outlet mean annual phosphorus concentration in mg/L Ci = inlet mean annual phosphorus concentration in mg/L k = first order rate constant set at 12.1 meters depth per year (23.7 meters depth per year may be used instead when intensive and

continuing monitoring and assessment is provided for a site-specific treatment efficiency; a monitoring and assessment project shall be a minimum of three years long but no longer than six years; upon completion of the assessment at the site the long term average treatment efficiency shall be used)

q = loading rate in meters of depth per year Sediment trapping phosphorus reduction credits shall be based on the difference in flow-weighted mean annual water concentration of total phosphorus of the inlet and the outlet. Other forms of estimating the inlet concentrations other than monitoring will be reviewed upon submittal to the MPCA. The volume treated shall be determined by the design flows based on the average year’s cycle as determined by flow data (if available) at the location. Wetland intensive and continuing monitoring and assessment shall be targeted at assessing the performance of wetland treatment sites in Minnesota. This monitoring and assessment may be provided by another partner or non-trade participant. For wetland treatment sites using the 23.7-meter depth rate constant, a multiplier of 1.3 times the credit shall be applied to remove site-variability safety factor. (This multiplier reflects the use of known data instead of estimates.) (C0- Ci)*(volume in million gallons/year)*8.34=pounds reduced. 6. Alternative Surface Tile Inlets

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 44 of 69 Surface tile inlets are a length of pipe, slotted or not, which connects the surface water ponding in depressions directly to the subsurface tile. Alternative surface tile inlets means changing past, traditional surface tile inlets by using rock filters and/or buffered areas. The following process shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from alternative surface tile inlets. Step 1. Determine the area in the subwatershed feeding the surface tile inlet. (A=AREA). Step 2. Determine the RUSLE/USLE erosion rate for that portion of the site in this subwatershed. (ER=Erosion Rate). Step 3. Determine the sediment treatment efficiency of the pre-existing surface tile inlet. The tile inlet shall have been installed before 1998. The following factors shall be considered in determining the treatment efficiency: v Slope of field at inlet v Type of inlet at site

Surface Inlet Delivery Ratio = SIDR

Tile Inlet Method of Delivery No Standpipe With A Standpipe Delivery Ratio 20% 10%

Step 4. Determine the prior sediment delivery mass. SedDRb = ER * A * SIDR. Step 5. Determine the after sediment delivery mass. SedDRa = ER * A * SIDR *TE.

TE = Surface Tile Inlet Alternative Treatment Efficiencies

Method Treatment Efficiency Buffered 35% Rock Filter 50%

Step 6. Determine the phosphorus content of the soil by using the SedDRb and SedDRa values to enter the Phosphorus Enrichment Table under the Soil Erosion BMPs. PSIDRb, PSIDRa.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 45 of 69 Step 7. Determine the phosphorus reduction by subtracting PSIDRa from PSIDRb. Step 8. Determine the phosphorus credit estimate for the site: PCREST = PSIDRb – PSIDRa. 7. Cover Cropping Cover cropping means using small grain crops planted in the spacing between row crops, or using small grain crops planted after the harvest of the cash crop such as peas, to increase the residue cover for soil protection against erosion. The establishment criteria for the cover crop for each cash crop shall be provided according to the permit. The following process shall be used to calculate the phosphorus credits from cover cropping. Step 1: Calculate the site erosion rate before and after installing the BMP using the USLE or RUSLE. (The equation used shall be that currently used by the local NRCS and SWCD.) Express the results in tons/acre/year (SEDb and SEDa). The cropping management factor “C” will be the only change in the calculation for before and after BMP calculations. The “C” factor shall be calculated by the local NRCS and/or SWCD or, in the case of sugar beet acreage, by those familiar with those calculations for that crop, such as the NRCS office in St. Peter, Minnesota. Step 2: Using the Delivery Ratio Table below, enter the sheet and rill erosion category to calculate the delivery ratio for the site before and after implementation of BMP(s). Sediment reduction in tons equals the difference between these values times the acres that the practice is applied over. SEDRb = SEDb * DR. SEDRa = SEDa * DR. Delivery Ratio Table

Area Less than a ¼ mile from watercourse

Greater than a ¼ mile from

watercourse

Surface Tile Inlets Without a Standpipe

Surface Tile Inlets With a Standpipe

Sheet, Rill Erosion 15% 5% 20% 10% Step 3: To determine the annual phosphorus mass reduced, take the sediment tons per acre before, SEDRb, and after, SEDRa, and enter the Phosphorus Enrichment Table under Soil Erosion BMPs (Pb, and Pa) Phosphorus enrichment values represent the phosphorus attachment potential of different soil types combined with the settling characteristics of the different particles. To determine the enrichment, take the

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 46 of 69 phosphorus content results (phosphorus) for the “before value” and subtract the “after value” from the table. (Pb and Pa), PRDC = Pb * Area - Pa. * Area. 8. CBOD BMPs BMPs installed for reduction of CBOD will be allowed for trades when the estimates are based on standard methods in a 1985 Waste Load Allocated impaired reach or within three miles upstream of the impaired reaches. The calculation for BOD reduction credit estimation will be based on a public domain model (such as P8 or similar rigor) or standard method that has received prior approval by the MPCA Commissioner before significant time and effort is expended on the nonpoint source reduction calculations. The limit on proximity reflects the reduction that occurs within three river miles of channel assimilation in shallow river settings. The proximity of the Rahr Malting Company surface water discharge outfall pipe to the tributary or discharged load entry point of the reduced loading will be considered using the following table that prorates remaining load from 100% at the location equal to the outfall pipe or downstream and reduces the allowable credit linearly for the next three miles.

Table for Consideration of Channel Assimilation River Mile above Rahr Malting Company

Surface Discharge Outfall Location or downstream mainstem Minnesota River

reach

Percent of Reduced Load Remaining Available for Approvable Credits

0 100.0% 0.1 95.7% 0.2 92.4% 0.3 89.1% 0.4 85.8% 0.5 82.5% 0.6 79.2% 0.7 75.9% 0.8 72.6% 0.9 69.3% 1 66.0%

1.1 62.7% 1.2 59.4% 1.3 56.1%


1.4 52.8% 1.5 49.5% 1.6 46.2% 1.7 42.9% 1.8 39.6% 1.9 36.3% 2 33.0%

2.1 29.7% 2.2 26.4% 2.3 23.1% 2.4 19.8% 2.5 16.5% 2.6 13.2% 2.7 9.9% 2.8 6.6% 2.9 3.3% 3 0.0%


Attachment #2 Point-Nonpoint Source Trading Summary

Finalized For Rahr Malting Permit (MN0031917) On January 8, 1997

Updated On July 5, 2007, See Italics Text Updated on July 3, 2012, See Underlined Text

Updated on October 2, 2018, See Underlined Italics text This document was originally included as an attachment to the Rahr Malting NPDES permit issued January 8, 1997, along with the Nonpoint Source Trade Crediting Calculations attachment. This revised attachment includes incorporation of the Nonpoint Source Trade Crediting Calculations document and is now considered an attachment for the re-issued Rahr Malting NPDES permit along with the Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations (RMWQTCC) attachment. If there are discrepancies between this document and the RMWQTCC document, the RMWQTCC document shall govern. Executive Summary The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) welcomes the opportunity to resolve the issue associated with Rahr Malting Company’s (Rahr) proposed discharge to the Minnesota River in an innovative manner that provides flexibility to the Permittee while ensuring a degree of water quality protection that is equal to or better than that which would have resulted from a more traditional approach. The substitution of upstream nonpoint source pollutant loading reductions for at-plant Biochemical Oxygen Demand discharge loading addresses the problem of dissolved oxygen sag in the lower reach, while providing additional water quality benefits both upstream and downstream of the Total Maximum Daily Load zone. The agreement described above meets the basic guidelines for pollutant reduction trading developed by the Water Quality Division as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Draft Framework for Watershed Based Trading. The funds provided by Rahr appear to be sufficient to obtain the specified reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loading, provided that best management practices (BMPs) are selected and sited using the methodology prescribed in the Nonpoint Source Trade Crediting Calculations document, and care is taken not to overcompensate landowners for implementing BMPs. A permit for the proposed discharge from Rahr was issued on January 8, 1997. The permit expired on January 8, 2002. Rahr continued to operate under the expired permit, as allowed per federal and state requirements, until the permit was reissued on August 23, 2007. Rahr was able to obtain the specified reductions in nonpoint source pollutant loading. In fact, Rahr was able to obtain more reductions than originally required in the permit. The permit required Rahr to obtain 150 pounds per day of CBOD equivalent credits (credits). They obtained a total of 212.8 credits. Introduction Rahr Malting Company has proposed to combine at-plant limits on phosphorus and Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand as determined by the five day test (CBOD5) with nonpoint source pollutant reduction trades. These two approaches are targeted to provide adequate treatment of the waste loads to remain within the requirements of the 1985 (amended 1987) Waste Load Allocation for the lower Minnesota River. The Rahr wastewater currently is being treated at

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 49 of 69 the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services MCES Blue Lake wastewater treatment plant (Blue Lake). Rahr wishes to control future wastewater treatment operation costs while providing a beneficial reuse of the sludge associated with only the malting process (not domestic waste) by treating the process wastewater in a separate system and discharging the effluent into the lower Minnesota River. A portion of Rahr’s wastewater is still currently being treated at Blue Lake. However, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) has informed Rahr that they no longer will be taking Rahr’s process wastewater. The schedule for this disconnection is currently being negotiated. Rahr is currently planning to expand their wastewater treatment facility to allow treatment of all of their process wastewater and provide required plant redundancy. Rahr expanded their wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) during the term of the permit issued to them on August 23, 2007. Hence all of Rahr’s process wastewater can now be treated through the Rahr WWTP. Rahr’s domestic wastewater is treated at the Blue Lake POTW. Background The EPA and the MPCA established a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) at the Minnesota River below river mile 25. The TMDL was established in 1988 for the seven-day, ten-year low flow (7Q10) and is set at 53,400 pounds per day of CBOD ultimate. Many factors contribute to the oxygen demand of the river in this reach. The following is a list of significant contributors to the demand: (a) metropolitan WWTP loading; (b) upstream loading from the River; (c) loading from tributaries to the Minnesota River below river mile 25; (d) sediment oxygen demand; and (e) nitrogenous oxygen demand. Two of these are of direct relevance to the Rahr request for a discharge permit: · The first is the loading of oxygen demand generated upstream of river mile 25. This loading comes from other municipal WWTP discharges and nonpoint

sources of nutrients which generate biological productivity and sediment uptake of oxygen. · The second is the metropolitan WWTPs of Blue Lake and MCES-Seneca (Seneca) which discharge into the TMDL reach of the Minnesota River. These plants

are not operating at their capacity. It may take years for the WWTPs to reach design loads. MPCA staff estimates conservatively a ten-year window exists before the total loading allocated to Blue Lake WWTP will be utilized at the current rate of growth after Rahr’s discharge is removed. Until this time, the CBOD5 loading from the proposed Rahr treatment facility would fall well within the amount authorized by the TMDL. Blue Lake has seasonal CBOD5 effluent limits as show in the table below. Also shown in the table below is the effluent data from 2014 through 2017.

Season CBOD5 Effluent Limit - kg/day CBOD5 Effluent Data - kg/day October through February 3,024 170 March through May 3,969 236 June through September 1,678 196 A comparison of the effluent limits to the effluent data shows that Blue Lake is still discharging well below their permitted values.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 50 of 69 Complicating the use of the TMDL is how the BOD has traditionally been allocated to point source and nonpoint discharges upstream. A wastewater treatment plant discharge has an organic load which is assumed to be treated by the assimilation process which exists in nature. The treatment plant’s impact studied to determine discharge limits have concentrated on the local reach. However, investigations indicate that during low flow periods, the River is overloaded with a BOD load from upstream which impacts the lower reach. The river is most vulnerable to BOD loading during low flows. To address this, a paper by Erwin Van Nieuwenhuyse, Ph.D., formerly of the MPCA, documented the association of nutrients, specifically phosphorus, with chlorophyll concentrations in rivers world wide. This provides the foundation for river eutrophication similar to lake eutrophication data linking phosphorus and chlorophyll. The paper also focused specifically on the relationship between chlorophyll and BOD in the Minnesota River finding a strong correlation. This concept of nutrient load to chlorophyll to BOD is significant to all BOD related loading studies. The nutrient loading from discharges and nonpoint sources convert into a BOD load as the biology takes in the nutrient, then grows and then dies, extending the length downstream of a source’s BOD impact. This is important when considering BOD loading demands in a river. All sources of nutrients upstream are uptaken by algae and other plant growth, and then can exert a BOD demand in the lower reach as the algae dies and decays. Hence, nature is constantly converting nutrients into organic material and organic material back into available nutrients while exerting an oxygen demand. The impact of the nutrient conversion to organic material and then algae to a BOD load is increased when the river slows down and deposits of organic material are allowed to build up in one location, as is the case of the Minnesota River in the metropolitan area. If the river flows sufficiently to maintain a flushing process, the BOD load is minimized. However, during lower flows, the organic loading builds up in a section of the river and exceeds the assimilation capability in that reach. The foundation of trading then is a reduction of a persistent nutrient loading upstream, such as phosphorus, which accomplish reductions in oxygen demand in the lower reach of the Minnesota River. MPCA has used Dr. Van Nieuwenhuyse’s paper for a basis to evaluate the projected relationship between phosphorus and BOD for the Minnesota River. MPCA staff estimates that one pound of phosphorus is equal to eight pounds of BOD at the city of Jordan. The relationship between phosphorus and BOD is variable dependent on the nutrient needs of the biological life forms, flows, turbidity impacts on photosynthetic activity and the bio-availability of phosphorus. In upstream reaches where phosphorus is considered the limiting growth factor, one pound of phosphorus could generate 17 pounds of BOD based on average stream value correlations. In contrast, as the river proceeds through the metropolitan area, phosphorus is so abundant that significant reductions will be necessary before the nutrient again becomes the most limiting factor in algae growth. Nitrogen exerts an oxygen demand in a similar manner. Based on stoichiometry, each pound of total Kjeldahl nitrogen(TKN) (organic nitrogen plus ammonia) requires 4.6 pounds of oxygen to be assimilated. Because nitrogen can be lost to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas, it is less persistent in the river system. Also, the oxygen demand from nitrogen is generally exerted more rapidly than the phosphorus-related oxygen demand from a given nutrient source. The travel time of the river also must be considered. Algal cells produced in the metropolitan area travel downstream before exerting the oxygen demand in the Mississippi River, where as the algal cells produced upstream exert their oxygen demand on the metropolitan reach. Therefore, reductions in phosphorus in the Minnesota River upstream of Jordan have a higher BOD to Phosphorus ratio, and at the same time, will help to minimize the overabundance of phosphorus in the reaches below the metropolitan WWTPs.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 51 of 69 Concept of Point - Nonpoint Source Trading Point-nonpoint source (P-NPS) pollutant trading refers to the substitution of nonpoint source pollutant load reductions for point source pollutant load discharge requirements by a discharger permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). To meet the TMDL goals, Rahr will treat its effluent discharge beyond what the MPCA would propose and participate in P-NPS trading. MPCA will require that such trades result in pollutant reductions that are:

· Equivalent to the point source discharge in their water quality impact. Equivalence refers to the physical substitution of nonpoint reductions traded for point source loads, taking into account all relevant factors, for example, differences in time, place and chemical form of point and nonpoint source loadings and the sensitivity of the receiving water. In this trade it has been determined that sufficient safety factors for nonpoint BMPs are in place to meet this definition.

· Additional to NPS reductions that would be likely to occur in the absence of a trade. Additionality requires that nonpoint source load reductions that

are credited to a point source in a P-NPS trade would not have occurred otherwise, in the absence of P-NPS trading. For example, in this trade feedlot corrections or conservation tillage are not allowable trade credits because there is a regulatory program for feedlots and a cultural trend of adoption of conservation tillage already existing.

· Accountable so that the NPS measures proposed in the trade will be implemented and maintained to achieve their intended result on water quality.

Accountability refers to the need to ensure that a P-NPS trade satisfies the above criteria of equivalence and additionality, and that terms of the trade agreement are being lived up to. Only the nonpoint source BMPs verifiable by field inspections or other physical measures have been selected.

A framework for P-NPS trading has been developed for the Rahr permit. In order to implement P-NPS trades, the following definition of what constitutes a trade has been developed. Trade: A trade is a direct reduction in NPS load which is applied against Rahr’s point source load. Trading parameters have been identified for phosphorus, nitrogen, BOD and sediment. In order to address the relative persistence of these compounds in the river system and the spatial variability of BMP sites, NPS load reductions are converted to pollutant reductions or units. The “gold standard” for the Rahr trades is the presence of CBOD5 load in the lower Minnesota River, where 1 pound per day (lb/day) of CBOD5 in the TMDL zone equals 1 unit. Phosphorus, nitrogen, CBOD5, and sediment from nonpoint sources all have varying degrees of persistence in the river system and mechanisms for exerting oxygen demand. The conversion of load reductions to trading units takes into account the relative persistence of the compound and the spatial variability of BMP sites. The pollutant equivalency credits are summarized in Table 1 - Pollutant Equivalency Credits and Table 2 - CBOD5 Percent Credit Table.

Table 1 Pollutant Equivalency Credits


Trade Parameter

Measured Value

Metro Reach BMP CBOD5 Credit

Upstream BMP CBOD5 Credit

Phosphorus 1 pound 8 units 8 units CBOD5 1 pound 1 unit Determined by Table 2

Nitrogen 1 pound 4 units 1 unit Sediment 1 ton 0.5 units 0.5 units

Exertion of oxygen demand within the river system from NPS BOD loading is highly variable, depending on the location of the NPS loading, the river flow, and the velocity. Within the TMDL zone, 1 pound of CBOD5 will be credited at 1 unit. A “BOD trading zone,” which extends upstream from the TMDL to river mile 107, or equivalent tributary distances, has been established based on the exertion of BOD oxygen demand during the 7-day 10-year low flow (7Q10). Upstream of the “BOD trading zone,” minimal trading credit will be given for CBOD5 reductions since most of this oxygen demand will have already been exerted prior to the TMDL zone. A trade credit of one percent of the pounds removed is credited. Table 2 determines the calculated percent remaining BOD credits. To satisfy the criterion of equivalence in the case of Rahr, then it will be necessary to identify types and quantities of BMPs that can be expected to achieve the necessary NPS reduction to remain within the Waste Load Allocation.


Table 2 - CBOD5 Percent Credit Table

CBOD5 CBOD5 River Percent Miles from River Percent Miles from Mile Remaining Shakopee Mile Remaining Shakopee

25 100% 0 70 29% 45 26 96% 1 71 29% 46 27 93% 2 72 28% 47 28 91% 3 73 27% 48 29 89% 4 74 26% 49 30 86% 5 75 26% 50 31 84% 6 76 25% 51 32 82% 7 77 24% 52 33 80% 8 78 24% 53 34 77% 9 79 23% 54 35 75% 10 80 22% 55 36 73% 11 81 22% 56 37 71% 12 82 21% 57 38 70% 13 83 21% 58 39 68% 14 84 20% 59 40 66% 15 85 20% 60 41 64% 16 86 19% 61 42 62% 17 87 19% 62 43 61% 18 88 18% 63 44 59% 19 89 18% 64 45 58% 20 90 17% 65 46 56% 21 91 17% 66 47 55% 22 92 16% 67 48 53% 23 93 16% 68 49 52% 24 94 15% 69 50 50% 25 95 15% 70 51 49% 26 96 15% 71 52 48% 27 97 14% 72 53 46% 28 98 14% 73 54 45% 29 99 13% 74 55 44% 30 100 13% 75


56 43% 31 101 13% 76 57 42% 32 102 12% 77 58 41% 33 103 12% 78 59 40% 34 104 12% 79 60 38% 35 105 11% 80 61 37% 36 106 11% 81 62 36% 37 107 11% 82 63 35% 38 >107 1%

>82

64 35% 39 65 34% 40 66 33% 41 67 32% 42 68 31% 43 69 30% 44

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 55 of 69 Assumptions The P-NPS trade proposal assumes many physical process restraints. The following is a list of conditions which selection of BMPs are based on: 1. The BMP must occur upstream of the Rahr discharge point in the Minnesota River basin.

2. The Phosphorus unit value is based on phosphorus conversion to chlorophyll and the chlorophyll death and decay resulting in a CBOD5 load on the river.

3. Phosphorus will be treated as a conservative and persistent compound. The phosphorus entering the watershed at any location will cycle down stream and

exert a load on the lower reach of the Minnesota River at some future date.

4. The Midwest Plan Service publication, which provides the manure estimates, reflects the current professional estimates of manure content for the parameters of CBOD5, phosphorus, and nitrogen.

5. The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and later the Revised Soil Loss Equation (RSLE) reflect the current professional expertise for projecting soil erosion rates from sheet, rill and ephemeral gullies. Local Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Soil and Water Conservation Service Districts (SWCD) will determine the equation coefficients for sites in their respective areas.

6. Delivery ratios of sediment and phosphorus contents of soils are based on conservative professional estimates unless justification of higher rates can be provided.

7. As with any estimation process using average or conservative numbers, the use of several sites increases the probability that the averages or conservative estimates are reflective of the sites in the whole base. When using several sites the variance of a specific site below the estimated average value is accounted for by the excess of a different site in the population. The system developed has an overall safety factor of approximately two worked in to the conservative estimating process. Therefore, the administration for rigorous inspection and enforcement of BMP sites will be avoided and replaced by initial inspections and periodic checks.

8. The choices of average or conservative values is constantly improving as the knowledge base on the nonpoint sciences improve and the number of research sites increase. As documentation increases and modifications to the following calculations are justified this document may be updated to remain current. Previously approved trades will remain credited at the values previously agreed to; modifications will only apply to trade sites yet to be approved by the MPCA through permit modification.

9. The phosphorus to CBOD5 trading ratio will be 1:8 for the life of the BMP site. This is based on current estimates of the ratio at the city of Jordan. The ratio increases above the Minnesota River at Jordan, the ecoregion mean estimates a value closer to a 1:17 ratio for phosphorus to CBOD5 correlation. As the Minnesota River is cleaned up the ratio will move toward the ecoregion values. This trend provides a portion of the conservative estimation that is desirable in trading versus command and control regulation.


10. Nitrogen will be considered as a trade parameter. The protection of drinking water, the Gulf of Mexico hypoxia issue, nitrogen’s eutrophication links and

ammonia’s direct demand on oxygen are all considered valuable objectives for this allowance. Nitrogen is assimilated, however, it creates eutrophic conditions in a more complex interaction cycle than phosphorus. Therefore, trading credits for nitrogen will be given after factoring in a 50 percent decay rate prior to loading the surface water and the nutrient will not be treated as a persistent or given constant rate in the pollutant crediting units.

11. The term “surface water entry points” will be defined as streams, rivers, wetlands, ditches, and surface tile intakes which are connected to the main stem of the Minnesota River. The connection may be at some point down stream. Watersheds entering lakes have a greater assimilative capacity and therefore must be justified prior to use in this agreement.

12. Land locked areas, and watershed divides within a larger BMP implementation site will be factored out of all pollutant reduction calculations by estimating only contributing acres associated with the Minnesota River.

Minimization of Associated Risks The use of nonpoint source BMPs to trade for a controlled point source discharge does pose some risk. The effectiveness of BMPs in reducing NPS loading depends on the type of BMP selected, its location on the landscape, and the quality of its design and maintenance. It also depends on weather. BMPs are effective during normal storm events and may not operate during drought or extreme storms. Risks associated with BMP implementation will be reduced by conservative estimates of pollutant credit units. Specific examples include: · The phosphorus to BOD crediting ratio will be 1:8 for the life of the BMP site. This is based on current estimates of the ratio at the city of Jordan,

Minnesota. The ratio increases upstream of Jordan, and the ecoregion mean estimates are closer to 1:17. As the Minnesota River is cleaned up, the actual ratio should move toward the ecoregion values.

· In calculating phosphorus loading from soil erosion, conservative estimates of the soil phosphorus content are used. In the event that site-specific soil sampling justifies a higher phosphorus content, a safety factor of 0.75 will be used in the crediting calculations.

· The maximum credit for nitrogen is 1:4 in the TMDL zone. The actual oxygen demand associated with the nitrogen loading is 4.6 pounds of oxygen per pound of TKN.

· Calculation of nitrogen will assume a “field loss factor” of 50 percent to account for ammonia volatilization and nitrogen assimilation prior to transport into the surface water.

· A delivery ratio (DR) of 100 percent for NPS in the riparian zone will be used. However, a DR of 20 percent will be used for lands within a one-quarter mile of the stream and a DR of ten percent will be used for areas further away. These DRs are highly conservative on sites being targeted in this process.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 57 of 69 · Land locked areas and watershed divides within larger BMP sites will be factored out of the pollutant credit calculations. To ensure the appropriate use of these ranges by Rahr, site visits by MPCA staff are to be coupled with communications with the Soil and Water Conservation District staff during the selection process. These factors are multiplicative in the equations used. The conservative nature of the numbers for phosphorus per ton and delivery ratios will result in underestimating the phosphorus reduced by at least a factor of two on “typical” sites. It is, therefore, important to have many sites in the trade so that “typical” conditions are the normal occurrence. To make a final selection of BMPs, it is necessary to go beyond the question of equivalence to address the criteria of additionally and accountability. Which combination of BMPs would result in pollutant reductions that probably would not have occurred in the absence of trading? Which BMPs most lend themselves to accountability? That is, for which ones would installation, effectiveness and maintenance be easiest to confirm? What type of BMP could be implemented through the fewest possible number of enforceable contracts with landowners? Any currently regulated practice cannot be used in the trade as the permitting program would require the change anyway. Some BMPs, such as reduced tillage, are being widely adopted because they make economic sense, and further adoption is likely with or without payments from a trade. Trading eligible BMPs that have been identified to date include: 1. Soil Erosion BMPs, including sheet, rill and ephemeral gully erosion, gully erosion, stream, river, and ditch bank erosion. 2. Livestock Exclusion, separating livestock from waterways for protection against bank erosion and direct manure impacts. 3. Rotational Grazing With Livestock Exclusion, to enhance forages for pollutant reductions from filtering processes and plant nutrient uptake. 4. Critical Area Set Aside, of highly erodible land. 5. Wetland Treatment Systems, for nutrient removal. 6. Alternative Surface Tile Inlets, which connect surface water ponding to subsurface tile. 7. Cover Cropping, to increase the residue cover for soil protection against erosion. 8. CBOD BMPs, for BMPs installed for reduction of CBOD. As trading practices become adopted on a more widespread basis, it is likely that additional BMP categories will be identified. These additional BMP categories can be added to the list during permit reissuance or a permit modification. The variety of BMPs which can be implemented all contain aspects of their establishment or performance which require special considerations by the operator. Some the changes will be new to the operator and technical assistance will be required as part of the BMP set up (i.e., rotational grazing of livestock may bring forage questions to bear and technical assistance through the establishment period will be provided). All BMPs with vegetative components will require an establishment criteria to ensure a dense stand. In addition, some BMPs which treat sediment by filtering or settling require ongoing maintenance:

· To ensure sheet flow conditions are maintained in upland flow areas. · To remove sediment build-ups which obstruct the operation of the BMP. · To reestablish a structure or plant life after major storm events or fire.


· To remove harmful infestations (such as, carp from treatment wetlands, destructive insects in vegetation and beavers from bioengineering sites). At the time of the site crediting and approval the responsibilities and technical assistance proposed to address the above issues for the site will be considered. There are many alternative ways of achieving the required NPS load reduction. To evaluate the effectiveness and cost of some of the most promising BMPs, the MPCA has used a newly developed system of BMP crediting that estimates the reductions in NPS loading that can be expected to result from the implementation of BMPs. 1. Soil Erosion BMPs Sources of sediment, nitrogen, phosphorus and BOD occur naturally throughout the basin. The transport of these pollutants to the river is accelerated by intensive land use management such as roads, drainage, construction activities and agricultural practices. In addition, some land use activities provide increased sources of nutrients for vegetative needs such as cropping or lawns. The BMP Soil Erosion crediting system is based on established programs. The first is soil erosion protection. The U.S. Department of Agriculture NRCS has been successful in defining soil movement from sheet and rill formations with the use of an equation which is based on soil type, field slope, length of slope, vegetation, and management practices. The Universal Soil Loss Equation, as it is called, is used to predict the erosion tons generated at the field in tons per acre per year. For large gullies or bank erosion, soil loss is estimated by calculating the area which has been eroded divided by the number of years during which the process took place. Once the volume has been established by either of these methods, a conservative value of nutrient content of the soil is calculated. Then a coefficient is used to conservatively estimate how much of the field or bank erosion is transported to the nearest surface water. 2. Livestock Exclusion The increased density of animals for agricultural production can also increase the NPS loading associated with storm runoff. The elimination of direct deposits of manure in the riparian zone and bank erosion from animal traffic can be credited. The riparian zone typically has higher delivery ratios associated with it due to its proximity to the water body. The estimated time, number of animals and manure produced is necessary to credit the existing scenario changes in delivery when the animals are no longer allowed access. Likewise, the current bank erosion recession rates are used to estimate future protection provided by stabilizing the current bank and preventing future access. 3. Rotational Grazing With Livestock Exclusion Pastured areas not currently classified as feedlots may still contribute significant loads of nutrients, CBOD5 and sediment. The MPCA has a feedlot permitting process for sites where animals are concentrated to such an extent that natural vegetation is destroyed. However, most existing animal grazing systems which maintain vegetation can greatly reduce the delivery of manure to the water. Livestock exclusion when combined with rotational grazing and the use of buffers or easements can be practiced to lower the amount of nutrient impacts on the water body. To estimate this process, the number of animals, the manure content and the time spent in relation to the water is all estimated for the before conditions. This is then compared with the post conditions where the time spent in close relation to the water is eliminated. Delivery of manure volumes from each “paddock” can then be compared with each scenario to predict whole

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 59 of 69 farm reductions of manure delivered to the water. In addition, the management scenarios need to estimate the time the animals occupy each paddock or area of the pasture to rotate the animals sufficiently to prevent a “feedlot” situation and improve the quality of the vegetative stand. The water quality benefit comes from combinations of: (a) improved rotation management providing a better forage, improved nutrient uptake as the plant is in a growth phase and added soil cover; (b) the use of vegetative filter strips which separate livestock from the water and filter sediment and associated nutrients in runoff; and (c) the dispersion of manure throughout the pasture providing more opportunities for nutrient uptake due to proximity of the upper end of the pasture and the water body. 4. Critical Area Set Aside Critical area set aside refers to the conversion of land use practices in areas which are excessively vulnerable to soil erosion. Traditional soil conservation sites have been steep sloped bluffs or hills, where removal of vegetation or plowing of soil had greatly accelerated the erosion rate. Combining this concept with criteria that is concerned with the proximity to a hydraulic system that delivers the eroded soil to the river, will allow small changes in vegetative management or bio-engineering to provide large protective savings in river load. The targeting of riparian corridors, steep slopes directly connected to the river, and restoring previously drained isolated wetlands, all fit into this category. Many areas in the Minnesota River floodplain are still in row crop production. An example of scour erosion rates on cropland fields within the floodplain is 75 tons/ac/year, and that establishing a good permanent vegetative cover would reduce this to 3 tons/ac/year (Scott County SWCD), if a woody vegetative cover is placed with some structural BMPs in the channel the scour situation can be altered to one of deposition. Placing these areas under conservation easement and/or adding bio-engineering would result in substantial NPS reductions. 5. Wetland Treatment Systems The construction of wetland treatment systems specifically for water quality enhancement defines the wetland treatment system nonpoint source trading BMPs. Wetlands are a valuable watershed management tool in any basin. Wetlands help stabilized hydraulic peaks, provide necessary habitat for the many species critical to the food chain and settle sediments out of the runoff. However, not all wetlands remove nutrient loading from the watershed. Some wetlands act as sinks for phosphorus much of the year only to pulse the mass of nutrients stored out during stressful times such as after drought periods or snow melt. The constructed wetland treatment system is designed to control the way the nutrients are captured and stored or converted so that the mass of nutrients are not available to be released downstream. By maximizing optimum depths, surface area and detention time, criteria nitrogen is volatilized off to the atmosphere, while the phosphorus is captured and buried. This type of wetland may limit some types of habitat use, but is targeted specifically for chemical and sediment treatment. The science of nutrient treatment by wetlands is relatively new to the design processes in colder climates. Mixed results have often been obtained. Excellent results have been obtained by a system on the Des Plaines River near Chicago, Illinois. The basic concepts designed for with this constructed wetland provide controlled depths ranges to prevent resuspension of sediments, prevention of short circuiting of flows and adequate detention times which all provide for the loading rates for settling characteristics.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 60 of 69 Wetland Research will be targeted at assessing the performance of wetland treatment sites in Minnesota. The research can be provided by another partner or non-trade participant. Constructed wetland treatment systems will use the following guidelines for planning considerations, as adapted from Robert Pitt, November 2, 1993:

1. Treatment systems can have poor water quality and water contact recreation and consumptive fishing should be discouraged.

2. Keep the wetland shape simple to encourage good water circulation. The length should be about three to five times the width for maximum detention efficiency and the inlets and outlets need to be widely spaced to minimize short-circuiting. Lower length to width ratios will be allowed if justification can be provided based on the design flows, vegetation establishment and/or energy of the unchannelized water in the wetland.

3. Protect the inlet and outlet areas from scour erosion.

4. Minimum and maximum depths of the wetland need to be considered. The depth should not be such that anoxic layers readily develop. Nor should the bounce of the wetland be too high.

5. Maximum flows to be treated will be designed for by providing adequate detention times and emergency spillway or flow bypasses. These design aspects can be met in many varying alternatives. However, the main planning consideration driving a treatment wetland is the capture and long term storage of the sediment and nutrients. The approved system will strongly address these issues in the site design.

6. A routine maintenance schedule will be developed, which will address: · The sediment accumulation. · Provisions for unforeseen circumstances (such as carp resuspending the sediments). · The inspection and replacement of structures. · Establishment and maintenance of the vegetation.

The trading credits for a wetland treatment system will be divided among site participants as follows: Wetland costs for installation will be totaled. All parties (i.e., Rahr, LGUs, state and federal offices, private organizations, etc.) contributing to the installation costs and estimation of maintenance costs will determine the percent credits. Operation and research costs provided by third parties will not be calculated in the crediting process. 6. Alternative Surface Tile Inlets Surface tile inlets are a length of pipe, slotted or not, which connects the surface water ponding in depressions directly to the subsurface tile. Alternative surface tile inlets means changing past, traditional surface tile inlets by using rock filters and/or buffered areas.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 61 of 69 7. Cover Cropping Cover cropping means using small grain crops planted in the spacing between row crops, or using small grain crops planted after the harvest of the cash crop such as peas, to increase the residue cover for soil protection against erosion. The establishment criteria for the cover crop for each cash crop shall be provided according to the permit. 8. CBOD BMPs BMPs installed for reduction of CBOD will be allowed for trades when the estimates are based on standard methods in a 1985 Waste Load Allocated impaired reach or within three miles upstream of the impaired reaches. The calculation for BOD reduction credit estimation will be based on a public domain model (such as P8 or similar rigor) or standard method that has received prior approval by the MPCA Commissioner before significant time and effort is expended on the nonpoint source reduction calculations. The limit on proximity reflects the reduction that occurs within three river miles of channel assimilation in shallow river settings. The proximity of the Rahr Malting Company surface water discharge outfall pipe to the tributary or discharged load entry point of the reduced loading will be considered using a table located in the Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations document that prorates remaining load from 100% at the location equal to the outfall pipe or downstream and reduces the allowable credit linearly for the next three miles. Structure of the Trade Agreement The Rahr Malting Company will achieve CBOD5 nonpoint source load reduction by setting up a fund dedicated to projects that encourage adoption of nonpoint source reduction practices. The trust fund will have a board of citizens made up of people concerned with water quality conservation from grass roots organizations, state offices and Rahr representatives who will oversee the selection of BMP sites for trading. MPCA approval is required for all selected sites and the use of the pollutant reduction estimates. All pollutant reduction estimation calculated for the January 8, 1997 permit followed the formulas in the document entitled: Nonpoint Source Trade Crediting Calculations. All pollutant reduction estimation in the future will follow the formulas in the document entitled: Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations. The trust fund will be established with $200,000 up front and be augmented by $50,000 over the permit life. Additional members may be added to the board if other contributors wish to add to the trust fund. A non-profit organization was set up as a part of the permit. However, it is no longer in existence due to a number of factors. The requirement to set up a fund dedicated to projects that encourage adoption of nonpoint source reduction practices is no longer a requirement. Rahr Malting Company’s January 8, 1997, NPDES permit contains the following: 1. A permit limit which authorizes a maximum monthly average discharge up to a 150 pounds per day of CBOD5.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 62 of 69 2. The Permittee has accepted a phosphorus limit of 2 mg/l instead of the 3 mg/l limit MPCA would otherwise propose at this time. Due to this, a 30 unit

credit may be applied to the cumulative load reduction during the year 2001 and subsequent years provided the Permittee’s phosphorus limit remains 2 mg/l or less. In addition, up to 10 units of the phosphorus credit may be used in either 1998, 1999 or 2000 for permit compliance purposes to satisfy any shortfall in that year’s nonpoint source load reduction requirement. As basin wide NPDES phosphorus reductions are implemented by the MPCA, the relative benefits of the Rahr phosphorus limit will decrease. Therefore, it is likely that the trading credit for the effluent phosphorus limit may be terminated in a future permit cycle. The Permittee has accepted a year round CBOD5 limit of 12 mg/l instead of the limit MPCA would otherwise propose at this time of 12 mg/l CBOD5 from June through September and 25 mg/l CBOD5 from October through May. Due to this, a 30 unit credit may be applied to the cumulative value for the year 2001 and subsequent years provided the Permittee’s year round CBOD5 limit remains 12 mg/l or less.

Rahr Malting Company’s new permit includes a phosphorus limit of 1 mg/L instead of the previous 2 mg/L. Other Trade Values Exist A trade of nonpoint controls to mitigate for point source CBOD5 discharges has several other valuable contributions to the environment. This trade was set up considering primarily the NPS contribution to the reduction goals of CBOD5 in the metropolitan area of the Minnesota River. In addition, NPS reductions from the Minnesota River are an essential part of the emerging strategy to improve the water quality of Lake Pepin on the Mississippi River. Both upstream and downstream improvements in non-metro counties will contribute to the achievement of important water quality goals, and are valuable side benefits of the trade. Basin planning allows for the right blend of conservation adoption and economic growth. This trade has a high potential to make that blend happen. In addition, the Rahr trade is a pioneering agreement which could help Minnesota break new ground in environmental protection. It provides a flexible means of compliance for the Permittee, and allows industrial expansion to proceed while ensuring a degree of water quality protection that is equal to or better than that which could have resulted from a more traditional approach. Lessons learned from this experience could lead to significant improvements in water quality protection programs.


Attachment #3 Rahr Malting Permit Trading Language

Finalized For Rahr Malting Permit (MN0031917) on October 2, 2018

This language was originally include in the text of the permit but has now been included as an attachment to the permit. Even though it is no longer included in the text of the permit, it is considered a portion of the permit. Chapter 1. Surface Discharge Stations 1. General Requirements 1.1 The Permittee is authorized to discharge CBOD5 in accordance with the following effluent limitations in addition to those in the limits and monitoring section. One unit of trading credit is the equivalent of 1 pound per day of CBOD5 discharged. Items 1.2 through 1.8 were included in previous permits and are included here to identify how the Permittee was originally required to comply with the nonpoint load reduction goals through the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). 1.2 The Permittee shall comply with the cumulative CBOD5 nonpoint load reduction specified in the table below or obtain CBOD5 nonpoint load reduction equal to or greater than its actual CBOD5 discharge. The actual CBOD5 discharge shall be measured as the annual average or the highest monthly average when the river flow at the Jordan USGS gauging station is less than 500 cfs as a monthly mean during June through September, whichever is greater. 1.3 DATE NONPOINT LOAD REDUCTION CUMULATIVE

December 31, 1997 0 units 0 units December 31, 1998 30 units 30 units December 31, 1999 30 units 60 units December 31, 2000 30 units 90 units Permit Expiration Date 60 units* 150 units

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 64 of 69 1.4 * The Permittee originally accepted a phosphorus limit of 2 mg/l instead of the 3 mg/l limit MPCA would otherwise would have propose. Due to this, a 30 unit credit may be applied to the cumulative load reduction during the year 2001 and subsequent years provided the Permittee's phosphorus limit remains 2 mg/l or less. In addition, up to 10 units of the phosphorus credit may be used in either 1998, 1999, or 2000 for permit compliance purposes to satisfy any shortfall in the year's nonpoint source load reduction requirement. The Permittee has accepted a year-round CBOD5 limit of 12 mg/l instead of the limit MPCA would otherwise propose at this time of 12 mg/l CBOD5 from June through September and 25 mg/l CBOD5 from October through May. Due to this, a 30-unit credit may be applied to the cumulative value for the year 2001 and subsequent years provided the Permittee's year-round CBOD5 limit remains 12 mg/l or less. 1.5 The Permittee shall obtain 20 units of nonpoint load reduction prior to start-up of their wastewater treatment facility if start-up is after December 31, 1997. 1.6 The Permittee shall spend all of the $250,000.00 dedicated to CBOD5 nonpoint source load reduction within 5 years of permit issuance to obtain CBOD5 nonpoint source load reduction by implementing projects approved by the MPCA. If 150 units of actual nonpoint source load reduction are obtained for less than $250,000.00 during the five-year period, the time period for full expenditure of the $250,000.00 will be extended to ten years from the date of permit issuance. 1.7 The Permittee shall achieve the nonpoint source load reduction units specified above by undertaking projects subject to (1) land purchase or (2) easement(s) or other contractual obligation(s) in place for the duration of CBOD5 discharge. Projects shall be Soil Erosion BMPs, Livestock Exclusion, Rotational Grazing With Livestock Exclusion, Critical Area Set Aside or Wetland Treatment Systems. The Permittee shall submit such proposed projects to the MPCA for review in accordance with the Point-Nonpoint Source Trading Summary dated January 8, 1997, and the Nonpoint Source Crediting Calculations dated January 8, 1997. The permit language shall control if any inconsistency arises from the referenced pollutant trading documents. The Commissioner is solely responsible for determining the amount of creditable CBOD5 nonpoint source load reduction to be credited for projects. The Permittee shall obtain written approval for each project from the Commissioner. 1.8 If the Permittee has not obtained 150 nonpoint source load reduction units within the term of this permit because the Permittee's actual CBOD5 discharge, in accordance with this part, is less than 150 pounds per day and if the Permittee is authorized to continue to discharge 150 pounds per day CBOD5, the Permittee shall obtain the remainder of the 150 nonpoint source load reduction units within 10 years of the issuance of this permit. 1.9 The Permittee has obtained 212.8 nonpoint source load reduction units during the terms of the previous permits.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 65 of 69 Replacement Trade Requirements for Existing Trades 1.10 The permittee currently has 212.8 nonpoint source load reduction units. This permit does not authorize the permittee to obtain additional nonpoint source load reduction units above 212.8 pounds CBOD5 per day. The following section applies to replacement trades that may be necessary should one of the previous trades no longer exist, or are no longer available. No additional nonpoint source load reduction units shall be credited to the permittee should future trades, required for replacement purposes, exceed the current 212.8 nonpoint source load reduction units. 1.11 The Permittee shall maintain CBOD5 nonpoint load reduction equal to or greater than its actual CBOD5 discharge. The actual CBOD5 discharge shall be measured as the annual average or the highest monthly average when the river flow at the Jordan USGS gauging station is less than 500 cfs as a monthly mean during June through September, whichever is greater. 1.12 The Permittee shall achieve the required nonpoint source load reduction units by undertaking BMPs subject to (1) land purchase or (2) easement(s) or other contractual obligation(s) in place for the duration of CBOD5 discharge. BMP projects shall be Soil Erosion Practices, Cattle Exclusion, Rotational Grazing With Cattle Exclusion, Critical Area Set Aside, Constructed Wetland Treatment Systems, Alternative Surface Tile Inlets or Cover Cropping. The Permittee shall calculate the proposed trade credits for these BMPs according to the terms of this permit and the "Rahr Malting Water Quality Trade Crediting Calculations" appended to and incorporated into this permit. The permit language shall control if any inconsistency arises from the referenced pollutant trading document. The MPCA is responsible for approving the number of trade credits for the proposed BMPs. The Permittee shall obtain written approval for each BMP from the MPCA. 1.13 BMPs, other than those specified above, cannot be employed without prior MPCA approval. 1.14 A contractual arrangement that the Permittee enters into for trade BMPs shall require the performance of what the MPCA has approved for the BMPs. However, the Permittee retains responsibility for the proper construction, installation, operation and maintenance of the BMPs the MPCA has approved for trade credits under this permit notwithstanding the contractual arrangements that the Permittee may have entered into regarding the BMPs. 1.15 Credits generated from this program, in excess of those required by this permit, may be eligible to be transferred to other Permittees, if approved in writing by the MPCA. 1.16 It is the intent of this permit that the Permittee shall achieve and maintain MPCA-approved trade reduction active credits for the life of the wastewater treatment plant discharge to surface waters.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 66 of 69 1.17 Trade credit BMPs shall not include activities required to be permitted by the MPCA and/or by other entities according to MPCA rules. 1.18 Trade credits shall not be proposed or approved for BMPs which simultaneously generate credits for the same pollutant for other environmental programs, including but not limited to wetland mitigation under the Wetland Conservation Act. If a BMP for which trade credits already have been approved or granted under this permit is enrolled in another environmental program, the Permittee shall immediately inform the MPCA. Approved trade credits for that BMP shall be revoked if they are being used to simultaneously generate credits for the same pollutant for other environmental programs. 1.19 Trade credit BMPs shall be additional to those occurring prior to 1999 for existing trade BMPs and for cover crop BMPs in general and during at least the previous five years for new BMPs proposed for trade credits. 1.20 One hundred percent (100 %) of the required credits shall be located in the Minnesota River drainage basin, excluding landlocked areas, lakes, or reservoirs with significant phosphorous assimilative capacity. 1.21 In the event that additional trades are required in the future, forty-five percent of the BMPs potential credits shall be granted when the MPCA approves a proposed BMP. 1.22 In the event that additional trades are required in the future, forty-five percent of the BMPs potential credits shall be granted when construction is complete, according to the MPCA-approved plans and specifications, and the MPCA's requirement for review has been satisfied. 1.23 In the event that additional trades are required in the future, ten percent of the BMPs potential credits shall be granted when vegetation establishment criteria have been achieved at the site, the Permittee submits required documentation, and the MPCA's requirement for review has been satisfied. 1.24 Credits shall not be considered active until they have been granted as described above. 1.25 The MPCA may at any time revoke previously approved trade credits. In order to revoke credits, the MPCA shall make the following findings:

1. The BMP as credited by the MPCA was not constructed or installed as approved; or 2. The BMP as credited by the MPCA was not operated or maintained as approved; or 3. The BMP contractual arrangement(s) have not been honored.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 67 of 69 1.26 To propose a BMP for trade credit approval by the MPCA, the Permittee shall provide to the MPCA, at least 90 days before the Permittee expects to receive an approval response from the MPCA, the following information for the site:

1. Site name and location, as detailed on a USGS 7.5-minute quad map with lat/long location identified to the nearest second. Identification of the major and minor watersheds, and HUC reach codes, in which the site is located. The extent to which lakes or reservoirs are downstream of the site. 2. Landowner name and mailing address. 3. Documentation, including photos as needed, of the vegetation species, land use and specific drainage practices at the site over the previous 5 years. 4. Type of BMPs proposed to be implemented at the site. 5. Copy of the signed contractual arrangement that stipulates future management requirements and length of term and that stipulates that the construction will not begin until MPCA approves the BMP. 6. Plan view of the BMP, and engineering plans, specifications and, for structural practices, the professional engineer's certification, for the BMP, if needed. Operation and maintenance plans. 7. Vegetation establishment and maintenance criteria and plans to achieve 100 percent active crediting for the BMP. 8. The total annual units of credit applied for, and the basis for this value, including the detailed calculations. 9. Those BMPs with vegetative components shall include establishment and maintenance criteria and plans to ensure a dense stand, including the dates of seeding.

1.27 Those BMPs that treat sediment by filtering or settling shall include operation and maintenance plans that include, but are not limited to, procedures to:

1. Ensure sheet flow conditions are maintained in upland flow areas; 2. Remove accumulated sediment that may hinder the operation of the BMP; 3. Inspect and, if needed, reestablish a structure or vegetation after major storm events or fire; and 4. Remove harmful infestations, including carp from treatment wetlands, destructive insects from vegetation, and beavers from bioengineering BMPs.

1.28 The MPCA shall in writing approve, or deny with comments, the proposed BMP. The MPCA shall, in its approval of proposed BMP, certify that appropriate contractual arrangements are in place for the BMP, confirm the BMPs potential trade credits, and shall specify the information required to document construction completion and clarify the auditor's responsibilities.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 68 of 69 1.29 The Permittee shall receive credit for projects that have been funded by the Permittee and/or the landowner of the BMP site. In cases where cost sharing and/or grant funding occurs, the rules and agreements governing the project’s funding may specify BMP credit generation eligibility, including the proportion of credit ownership between the funding entity and the Permittee. BMP Construction/Implementation, Documentation, Auditing, and Credit Approval 1.30 BMP Construction shall not begin until MPCA written approval for the BMP is received. 1.31 The Permittee shall retain an independent auditor to certify BMP completion:

1. For engineered BMPs designed by a registered professional engineer, the auditor shall be a registered professional engineer. The professional engineer shall provide a construction documentation report for the BMP and the engineer shall certify that the BMP was completed in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications. The MPCA may require that photographs and/or record drawings be included in the report, depending upon the BMP complexity. 2. For cover crops, the auditor can be a registered professional engineer, a certified crop advisor, or a representative of a local watershed interest. The Permittee shall provide the list of MPCA approved cover crop contracts and the auditor shall select at least 10% at random for a site inspection. The Permittee shall submit its implementation report to the MPCA and the auditor. The auditor will compare audit site information to Permittee's report, noting any inconsistencies in the auditor’s report submitted. 3. For other BMPs, or for portions of BMPs not designed by the registered professional engineer, the auditor can be a registered professional engineer, a certified crop advisor, or a representative of a local watershed interest. The auditor shall inspect the construction site as needed to confirm and document that the BMP was completed in accordance with the approved BMP. 4. For BMPs where vegetation establishment is required, the auditor shall provide written verification that the vegetation establishment criteria have been achieved. 5. The auditor will prepare a report to submit to the MPCA and the Permittee, the report will provide documentation required for that BMP. If the BMP was completed as approved, the report will recommend issuance of construction credits.

1.32 The MPCA shall respond to the Permittee's documentation reports and auditor's certification reports and either issue or deny construction credits or vegetation establishment credits.

Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 69 of 69 4. Reporting Requirements 4.1 The Permittee shall submit an Annual CBOD5 Nonpoint Load Reduction Monitoring Report each year that the Permittee discharges CBOD5 (including years beyond the term of this Permit) by January 31 to the following address: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Attn: WQ Submittals Center 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 The Annual Report shall verify compliance with the Permittee's effluent limitation for CBOD5 nonpoint load reduction in accordance with this part. 4.2 The Permittee shall certify in the Annual Report that the active BMPs approved by the MPCA for trade credits, remain active according to the MPCA approval. 4.3 The Annual Report shall include photographs of each BMP taken during the previous year (these photographs shall correspond in view and detail to the initial photographs provided to the MPCA for that BMP) or landowner's written certification that the BMP remains in-place and effective.

Documents

Draft NPDES and SDS Permit to Rahr Malting Co.; for Permit ... Permit... · Permit issued: MN0031917 Permit expires: Page 3 of 69 . 1. Permitted facility description . The Rahr Malting