ANTIDEGRADATION REVIEW APPLICATION

UTAH DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY

Introduction

The objective of antidegradation rules and policies is to protect existing high quality waters and set forth a process for determining where and how much degradation is allowable for socially and/or economically important reasons.

In accordance with Utah Administrative Code (UAC R317-2-3), an antidegradation review (ADR) is a permit requirement for any project that will increase the level of pollutants in waters of the state. The rule outlines requirements for both Level I and Level II ADR reviews, as well as public comment procedures. This application is intended to assist the applicant and Division of Water Quality (DWQ) staff in complying with the rule but is not a substitute for the complete rule in R317-2-3.5. Additional details can be found in the Utah Antidegradation Implementation Guidance and relevant sections of the guidance are cited in this application form.

ADRs should be among the first steps of an application for a UPDES permit because the review helps establish project design expectations. ADRs are also required for any project taking place within a stream channel and for applications to fill wetlands as part of the Army Corps of Engineers 404 permitting process. The level of effort and amount of information required for the ADR depends on the nature of the project and the characteristics of the receiving water. To avoid unnecessary delays in permit issuance, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) recommends that the process be initiated at least one year prior to the date a final approved permit is required.

This antidegradation application must be completed and approved by DWQ before any UPDES permit can be issued. DWQ will determine if the project will impair beneficial uses (Level I ADR) using information provided by the applicant. The applicant is responsible for conducting the Level II ADR, if necessary. For the permit to be approved, the Level II ADR must document that all feasible measures have been undertaken to minimize pollution for social or economically beneficial projects resulting in any increase in pollution to waters of the state.

Parts A, B, D, and G are required for all permits, whereas Parts C, E, and F are only required for Level II ADRs.

Once the application is complete, it should be signed, dated, and submitted to the DWQ staff member who is responsible for the UPDES permit or 401 Certification.

For additional clarification on the antidegradation application process and procedures, please contact Nicholas von Stackelberg (801-536-4374) or Jeff Ostermiller (801-536-4370).

Antidegradation Review Application

Part A: Applicant Information

Facility Name:

Facility Owner:

Facility Location:

Application Prepared By:

Receiving Water:

What Are the Designated Uses of the Receiving Water (R317-2-6)?

Domestic Water Supply:

Recreation:

Aquatic Life:

Agricultural Water Supply:

Great Salt Lake:

Category of Receiving Water (R317-2-3.2, -3.3, and -3.4):

UPDES Permit Number (if applicable):

Effluent Flow Reviewed:

What is the application for? (check all that apply)

An application for a UPDES permit for a new facility or project.

An expansion or modification of an existing wastewater treatment works that will result in an increase in the mass or concentration of a pollutant discharged to waters of the state.

A permit renewal requiring limits for a pollutant not covered by the previous permit.

An expansion or modification of an existing wastewater treatment works that will result in an increase in volume discharged over the volume used to obtain previous permit limits.

A proposed UPDES permit renewal with no changes in facility operations.

Part B. Is a Level II ADR required?

This section of the application is intended to help applicants determine if a Level II ADR is required for specific permitted activities. In addition, the Executive Secretary may require a Level II ADR for an activity with the potential for major impact on the quality of waters of the state (R317-2-3.5a.1).

B1. The receiving water or downstream water is a Class 1C drinking water source.

Yes	A Level II ADR is required (Proceed to Part C of the Application)

No	(Proceed to Part B2 of the Application)

B2. The UPDES permit is new or is being renewed and the proposed effluent concentration and loading limits are higher than the concentration and loading limits in the previous permit and any previous antidegradation review(s).

Yes	(Proceed to Part B3 of the Application)

No	No Level II ADR is required and there is no need to proceed further with application questions.

B3. Will any pollutants use assimilative capacity of the receiving water, i.e. do the pollutant concentrations in the effluent exceed those in the receiving waters at critical conditions? For most pollutants, effluent concentrations that are higher than the ambient concentrations require an antidegradation review? For a few pollutants such as dissolved oxygen, an antidegradation review is required if the effluent concentrations are less than the ambient concentrations in the receiving water. (Section 3.3.3 of Implementation Guidance)

Yes	(Proceed to Part B4 of the Application)

No	No Level II ADR is required and there is no need to proceed further with application questions.

B4. Are water quality impacts of the proposed project temporary and limited (Section 3.3.4 of Implementation Guidance)? Proposed projects that will have temporary and limited effects on water quality can be exempted from a Level II ADR.

Yes	Identify the reasons used to justify this determination in Part B4.1 and proceed to Part G. No Level II ADR is required.

No	A Level II ADR is required (Proceed to Part C)

B4.1 Complete this question only if the applicant is requesting a Level II review exclusion for temporary and limited projects (see R317-2-3.5(b)(3) and R317-2-3.5(b)(4)). For projects requesting a temporary and limited exclusion please indicate the factor(s) used to justify this determination (check all that apply and provide details as appropriate) (Section 3.3.4 of Implementation Guidance):

Water quality impacts will be temporary and related exclusively to sediment or turbidity and fish spawning will not be impaired.

Factors to be considered in determining whether water quality impacts will be temporary and limited:

The length of time during which water quality will be lowered:

The percent change in ambient concentrations of pollutants:

Pollutants affected:

Likelihood for long-term water quality benefits:

Potential for any residual long-term influences on existing uses:

Impairment of fish spawning, survival and development of aquatic fauna excluding fish removal efforts:

Additional justification, as needed:

Level II ADR

Part C, D, E, and F of the application constitute the Level II ADR Review. The applicant must provide as much detail as necessary for DWQ to perform the antidegradation review. Questions are provided for the convenience of applicants; however, for more complex permits it may be more effective to provide the required information in a separate report. Applicants that prefer a separate report should record the report name here and proceed to Part G of the application.

Optional Report Name:

Part C. Is the degradation from the project socially and economically necessary to accommodate important social or economic development in the area in which the waters are located? The applicant must provide as much detail as necessary for DWQ to concur that the project is socially and economically necessary when answering the questions in this section. The social and economic importance of publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) are typically considered self-evident and do not require detailed explanation. More information is available in Section 6.2 of the Implementation Guidance.

C1. The facility is a POTW and is necessary for economic and social growth of the serviced community.

Yes	(Proceed to Part D of the Application)

No	(Proceed to Part C1 of the Application)

C1. Describe the social and economic benefits that would be realized through the proposed project, including the number and nature of jobs created and anticipated tax revenues.

C3. Describe any environmental benefits to be realized through implementation of the proposed project.

C4. Describe any social and economic losses that may result from the project, including impacts to recreation or commercial development.

C5. Summarize any supporting information from the affected communities on preserving assimilative capacity to support future growth and development.

C6. Please describe any structures or equipment associated with the project that will be placed within or adjacent to the receiving water.

Part D. Identify and rank (from increasing to decreasing potential threat to designated uses) the parameters of concern. Parameters of concern are parameters in the effluent at concentrations greater than ambient concentrations in the receiving water. The applicant is responsible for identifying parameter concentrations in the effluent and DWQ will provide parameter concentrations for the receiving water. More information is available in Section 3.3.3 of the Implementation Guidance.

Parameters of Concern:

Rank	Pollutant	Ambient Concentration	Effluent Concentration
1
2
3
4
5

Pollutants Evaluated that are not Considered Parameters of Concern:

Pollutant	Ambient Concentration	Effluent Concentration	Justification

Part E. Alternative Analysis Requirements of a Level II Antidegradation Review. Level II ADRs require the applicant to determine whether there are feasible less-degrading alternatives to the proposed project. More information is available in Section 5.5 and 5.6 of the Implementation Guidance.

E1. The UPDES permit is being renewed without any changes to flow or concentrations. Alternative treatment and discharge options including changes to operations and maintenance were considered and compared to the current processes. No economically feasible treatment or discharge alternatives were identified that were not previously considered for any previous antidegradation review(s).

Yes	(Proceed to Part F)

No or Does Not Apply	(Proceed to E2)

E2. Attach as an appendix to this application a report that describes the following factors for all alternative treatment options (see 1) a technical description of the treatment process, including construction costs and continued operation and maintenance expenses, 2) the mass and concentration of discharge constituents, and 3) a description of the reliability of the system, including the frequency where recurring operation and maintenance may lead to temporary increases in discharged pollutants. Most of this information is typically available from a Facility Plan, if available.

Report Name:

E3. Were any of the following alternatives feasible?

Alternative	Feasible	Reason Not Feasible/Affordable
Pollutant Trading
Water Recycling/Reuse
Land Application
Connection to Other Facilities
Upgrade to Existing Facility
Total Containment
Improved O&M of Existing Systems
Seasonal or Controlled Discharge
New Construction
No Discharge

E4. From the applicant’s perspective, what is the preferred treatment option?

E5. Is the preferred option also the least polluting feasible alternative?

Yes

No

If no, what were less degrading feasible alternative(s)?

If no, provide a summary of the justification for not selecting the least polluting feasible alternative and if appropriate, provide a more detailed justification as an attachment.

Part F. Optional Information

F1. Does the applicant want to conduct optional public review(s) in addition to the mandatory public review? Level II ADRs are public noticed for a thirty day comment period. More information is available in Section 3.7.1 of the Implementation Guidance.

No

Yes

F2. Does the project include an optional mitigation plan to compensate for the proposed water quality degradation?

No

Yes

Report Name:

Part G. Certification of Antidegradation Review

G1. Applicant Certification

The application should be signed by the same responsible person who signed the accompanying permit application or certification.

Based on my inquiry of the person(s) who manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information in this application and associated documents is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete.

Print Name:

Signature:

Date:

G2. DWQ Approval

G2.1 To the best of my knowledge, the ADR was conducted in accordance with the rules and regulations outlined in UAC R-317-2-3.

Water Quality Management Section

Print Name:

Signature:

Date:

G2.2 To the best of my knowledge, all feasible treatment options were examined and a final treatment option was selected that represents the least degrading, yet affordable (as defined in R-317-2-3.5(c) treatment option. This signature is only required for Level II reviews.

Permitting Section

Print Name:

Signature:

Date:

REVISED: 4/12/2011

1

8

Level II Antidegradation Review Form

Nvonstackelberg

2011-05-18

Water Quality