HomeMy Public PortalAboutORD15852BILL NO. 2018-072
SPONSORED BY Councilman Hussey
ORDINANCE NO. (5855 Z.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AUTHORIZING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE A $333,844.08 LAND LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH FISCHER GRAIN FARMS FOR CITY OWNED PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, Fischer Grain Farms has been selected as the organization best qualified
to rent agricultural land held by the airport and wastewater divisions of the
City of Jefferson.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
JEFFERSON, MISSOURI, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Fischer Grain Farms is hereby approved as the best qualified firm to
rent the City Land and its proposal is hereby accepted.
Section 2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute an
agreement with Fischer Grain Farms for rental of land.
Section 3. The agreement shall be substantially the same in form and content as
that agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the date
of its passage and approval.
Passed: I 77/? 1 3 , O/ 8 Approved:h Pim • 1-4 .?.0/
Presiding Officer
ATTEST:
"di L/z •
ty Cler
Mayor Carrie Tergin
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
EXHIBrrA
CITY OF JEFFERSON
AGRICULTURAL LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT, made and entered into the date last executed by a party as indicated below,
by and between the City of Jefferson, Missouri, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor,"
and Fischer Grain Farms, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Lessee."
WITNESSETH:
THAT WHEREAS, Lessor has this day leased unto Lessee the following described property, situated in
the County of Cole, State of Missouri, to -wit:
See Attachment A
NOW THEREFORE, for the considerations herein expressed, it is agreed by and between the Lessor and
the Lessee:
1. Lease Period.
The initial period of this Lease shall be effective from the January 1, 2019 through December 31,
2019. With the consent of both parties, this contract may be extended for four (4) additional one (1)
year periods.
2. Notice of Termination of Agreement.
Lessee shall inform Lessor of its desire to extend this lease by November 1st of each year for each
one (1) year option.
3. Rental.
The Lessee, in consideration of the leasing of the above described premises, hereby covenants and
agrees with the Lessor to pay the Lessor as rent for said premises the price described in Attachment
A. Such rental is due and payable on or before December 31st of each year.
4. Expenses.
Lessee shall provide and pay for all items and expenses involved in planting and harvesting the
crops.
5. Harvesting and Removal of Crops.
All crops shall be harvested and removed prior to December 31st of any year which is a termination
anniversary of the lease, unless other specific arrangements are made in writing between the
parties.
6. Right to Reclaim Acreage.
It is understood that the Lessor has the right to reclaim any part of the acreage should it be needed.
7. Operation of Equipment.
No farm machinery or vehicles of any kind are to be left unattended or overnight.
8. Grass Control.
It is agreed that Lessee shall maintain an effective Johnson Grass Control Program.
9. Covenant to Comply with Federal Regulations.
The Lessee, for their self, their personal representatives, successors in interest, and assigns, as a
part of the consideration hereof, does hereby covenant and agree as a covenant running with the
land that: (1) no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin shall be excluded from
participation in, denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the use of said
facilities, (2) that in the construction of any improvements on, over, or under such land and the
furnishing of services thereon, no person on the grounds of race, color, or national origin shall be
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subjected to discrimination,
(3) that the Lessee shall use the premises in compliance with all other requirements imposed by or
pursuant to federal, state and local laws and regulations.
10. Insurance.
Lessee agrees that it will at all times maintain general liability insurance, with a reputable insurance
company at a limit of $500,000 Each Occurrence, $3,000,000 Annual Aggregate; provided that
nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of the City's sovereign immunity. This insurance shall
assure the obligation of the Lessee to save the Lessor harmless from any and all claims for damages
arising on the demised premises or resulting as a direct or indirect consequence of the occupation
and use of said demised premises. Current copies of said insurance policy or certificate of
insurance shall be furnished to the Lessor and shall be promptly replaced upon expiration. Lessor
shall be named as an additional insured on the policy. Lessee shall save Lessor harmless from any
loss, cost or damage that may arise in connection with this lease or the use of demised premises by
Lessee, or his/her agents, or employees, or any other person using the premises.
11. Assignment and Mortgage.
Neither the demised premises nor any portion of them shall be sublet, nor shall this lease, or any
interest in it be assigned, hypothecated or mortgaged by Lessee, and any attempted assignment,
subletting, hypothecation or mortgaging of this lease shall be of no force or effect, and shall confer
no rights upon any assignee, sublessee, mortgagee or pledgee.
In the event that Lessee shall become incompetent, bankrupt, or insolvent, or should a guardian,
trustee, or receiver be appointed to administer Lessee's business or affairs, neither this lease nor any
interest here shall become an asset of such guardian, trustee or receiver, and in the event of the
appointment of any such guardian, trustee, or receiver, this lease shall immediately terminate and
end.
12. Default.
In the event that Lessee shall be in default of any payment of any rent or in the performance of any
of the terms or conditions agreed to be kept and performed by Lessee, then in that event, Lessor
may terminate and end this lease, immediately, and Lessor may enter upon the premises and
remove all persons and property, and Lessee shall not be entitled to any money paid or any part of
that money; in the event Lessor shall bring a legal action to enforce any of the terms of this lease, or
to obtain possession of the premises by reason of any default of Lessee, or otherwise, Lessee agrees
to pay Lessor all costs of such legal action, plus the sum of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00).
13. Waiver.
Waiver by Lessor of any default in performance by Lessee of any of the terms, covenants, or
conditions contained here, shall not be deemed a continuing waiver of that default or any
subsequent default.
—2—
14. Compliance with Laws.
Lessee agrees to comply with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations that may pertain or apply
to the demised premises and their use.
15. Lessor May Enter.
Lessee agrees that Lessor, its agents or employees, may enter upon the premises at any time during
the term or any extension of it for the purpose of inspection, maintenance, digging test holes,
making surveys, taking measurements, and doing similar work necessary for the preparation of
plans for improvements on the premises, with the understanding that the work will be performed in
such a manner as to cause a minimum of interference with the use of the property by Lessee.
16. Successors in Interest.
All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained here shall continue, and bind all successors in
interest of Lessee.
17. Lessor's Reserved Rights.
A. Lessor reserves the right further to develop or improve the area as it sees fit,
regardless of the desires or views of the Lessee, and without interference or
hindrance.
B. Lessor reserves the right to take any action it considers necessary to protect the
property, together with the right to prevent Lessee from erecting, or permitting to
be erected, any building or other structure on the property which in the opinion of
Lessor would limit the usefulness of the property.
C. It is understood and agreed that the rights granted by this agreement will not be
exercised in such a way as to interfere with or adversely affect the use, operation,
maintenance or development of the property.
D. Lessor, through its duly authorized agent, shall have at any reasonable time during
business hours the full and unrestricted right to enter the leased premises for the
purpose of inspection.
18. Paragraph Headings.
The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience in reference and are not intended to
define or Limit the scope of any provision of this lease.
19. Notices, Consents and Approvals.
Whenever any notice or payment is required by this Lease to be made, given or transmitted to the
parties hereto, such notice or payment shall be deemed to have been given ifenclosed in an
envelope with sufficient postage attached to insure delivery, and deposited in the United States
mail, addressed to:
LESSOR City of Jefferson
Department of Public Works
320 East McCarty Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
—3—
LESSEE Fischer Grain Farms, Inc.
1905 Mokane Road
Jefferson City, MO 65101
or such other place as either party shall in writing designate in the manner herein provided.
20. Successors and Assigns.
All of the terms, covenants and agreements herein contained shall be binding upon and shall inure
to the benefit of successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto.
21. Amendments to Lease.
All amendments to this lease must be made in writing by mutual agreement to the parties, and no
oral amendments shall be in force or effect whatever.
22. Jurisdiction.
This Lease shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Missouri.
23. Complete Agreement.
This covenants and agreements contained in this Lease shall be binding upon and shall inure to the
benefit of the parties of this Lease, their respective successors, administrators, executors and
assigns.
CITY OF JEFFERSON, MISSOURI FISCHER GRAIN FARMS, INC.
Carrie Tergin, Mayor
Date: /a- 4- g
ATTEST:
4110
wily Don.,r: son, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ry. o- man, City Counselor
ATTEST:
Title:
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF WORK
1. The farmer shall provide farm cropping services for the City of Jefferson on certain land at the
Jefferson City Municipal airport and the Wastewater Division in North Jefferson City, Missouri as
shown on attached maps. Exhibits A, B and C Aerial Maps. Farmer shall observe and obey any
and all ordinances, rules, and regulations concerning the farming operation, including all Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Advisory Circular, 2007 publication and Wastewater Missouri
State Operating Permit MO -0094846. Including no livestock shall be permitted.
2. The farmer shall work in cooperation with City personnel in scheduling biosolids land application
for its fertilizer nutrients at a nitrogen rat before farm practices begin on targeted fields on a
yearly basis. Communication and flexibility will be key.
3. The farmer shall apply supplemental fertilizer as needed at their cost. See Attachment 1 -Soil
Test Reports.
4. The farmer will be solely responsible for the purchase of any supplemental commercial
fertilizer, seed, chemicals as needed to establish and grow intended crops.
5. The farmer shall be solely responsible for all equipment, labor, and material in the application of
fertilizer nutrients, tillage, spraying of chemicals, planting, harvest, hauling storage and sale of
grain or hay.
6. The farmer shall be solely responsible for crop insurance, securing of any eligible FSA program
benefits and will notify City prior to any changes with FSA as it relates to City farm properties.
7. All farming services shall be performed to the sole satisfaction and timeliness of the City of
Jefferson for the management of biosolids of its fertilizer nutrient value in crop production to
optimize yields with timely planting and harvesting to run an efficient nutrient recycling program.
8. The farmer shall follow the cropping plan and allowance for land application of biosolids to
Airport Fields - approximately 202 acres.
The entire acreage must be used as delineated on the attached map and table based on FAA
Advisory Circular (2007) and Missouri State Operating Permit M0-0094846. See Exhibit A; and
Attachments 2 and 3.
9. The farmer shall follow the cropping plan and allowance for land application of biosolids to
Wastewater Fields - Approximately 259 acres.
The entire acreage shall be used as tillable, crops shall be sown as indicated on the attached
map and table. See Exhibit Band Attachment 4.
Wastewater property where biosolids are applied shall not be open to the public for a one year
period from the time the biosolids are applied. Property cannot be used for corn maze, etc.)
Refer to Attachment 3- Missouri State Operating Permit M0-0094846, includes WQ426 and
Standard Conditions Part3.
The City has established a crop rotation program, Attachment D - Crop Schedule. Each crop
has a different uptake rate for such nutrients as nitrogen, phosphorous etc., and different crops
are harvested at different times of the year which accommodates the biosolids land application
program.
Wastewater Fields - Approximately 40 acres.
The forty acres within this area is open to farmer to determine what to plant depending on the
farmers preferred use would be. There will not be any biosolids applied to this acreage unless
specifically approved by the Wastewater Division.
10. Proposals shall be on a price per acre basis. The farmer shall provide and pay for all items and
expenses involved in the planting and harvesting of the crops.
11. The farmer shall not sublet or assign any part of the premises.
12. Farmer shall not at any time sow, plant, cultivate, spray, harvest, or do any other work that
would interfere with operations of the adjacent airport or wastewater properties. Refer to
Attachment Band Attachment 4 for crops rotations on airport property where height restrictions
are required for some fields. Refer to Attachment 3 Missouri State Operating Permit MO -
0094846, Special Conditions Part 3, for Biosolids Regulations.
There shall not be any activity that endangers the safety of employees or patrons.
13. Farmer shall allow the Wastewater Division to apply biosolids to the City owned property as
needed per communication and planning ahead of time.
14. The farmer is encouraged to participate in the land application program on farm land that is
either owned or rented within five miles of the wastewater plant.
15. The farmer shall make the fulllease payment by November 30th for each crop year.
16. The farmer shall work with the city to determine the test hay crop variety and sow the proper
seed and rate in a timely manner to establish forage vegetation.
17. Lease period shall be one year, January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019 with up to four (4)
additional one year renewal periods. Renewal periods must be initiated by the farmer on or before
September 1st prior to the end of each lease period.
18. City will evaluate the farmer's performance annually during the year and will make a decision as
to whether to renew the Lease Agreement for the next season.
19. The farmer shall be required to carry sufficient insurance coverage and limits as determined by
the City. Insurance are listed in the sample contract.
20. Award of the lease or leases may be to one or multiple farmers as determined to be in the best
interest of the City, by the City.
21. Farmer shall maintain an effective Johnson Grass Control Program on airport property. The
farmer will received a credit to the rental fee on airport property equivalent to fifty percent (50%)
of sprays or chemicals as may be necessary to control or kill theJohnson Grass. This is provided
as information and does not need to be reflected in the bid.
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
PROPOSAL RESPONSE FORM
1. Management Objectives (20 points)
2. Experience (20 points)
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
3. Current Farming Operations (20 points)
,Sete od-FocelieePt -
4. Lease Price (20 points)
Airport Property, Exhibit A and Attachment E
Annual Lease Payment
Year Unit Cost to the City
a. Year One Leaser per acre 1b-7 x 202'acres = 9.1 (D 1
b. Year Two Leaser per acre 1 0 i x 202 acres = t r6__11
c. Year Three Leaser per acre 107 x 202 acres = �-t �!
d. Year Four Leaser per acre x 202 acres = 1
6 1
(4
e. Year Five Leaser per acre 10 7 x 202 acres = 21 i (0/14
Five year total / 031070
10
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
Wastewater Plant Property, Exhibit B and Attachment C
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Year
Year One Leaser per acre
Year Two Leaser per acre
Year Three Leaser per acre
Year Four Leaser per acre
Year Five Leaser per acre
Unit Cost
x 259 acres
x 259 acres
x 259 acres
x 259 acres
x 259 acres
Annual Lease Payment
to the City
Five year total
Wastewater Plant Property, Exhibit C and Attachment C
Year
a. Year One Leaser per acre
b. Year Two Leaser per acre
c. Year Three Leaser per acre
d. Year Four Leaser per acre
e. Year Five Leaser per acre
7g.4
Annual Lease Payment
Unit Cost to the City
a-sa x 40 acres = /Of OW
a S x 40 acres = I Or oW D
a5 oC x 40 acres = (D/ Ogo
x 40 acres = 101 O? 0
01B a x 40 acres = 101 O$d
Five year total 'O , (-! 00
5. References (10 points)
Provide at least one reference to a past or current landlord.
Contact Name:
Address:
Telephone No.
Lease Location:
Date of Lease: From To No. of Acres
Description of farming operation:
Contact Name:
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
Address:
Telephone No.
Lease Location:
Date of Lease: From To No. of Acres
Description of farming operation:
Contact Name:
Go'
Lk)9J-i
Address:
Telephone No.
Lease Location:
Date of Lease: From To No. of Acres
Description of farming operation:
12
Contact Name:
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
Address:
Telephone No.
Lease Location:
Date of Lease: From To
Description of farming operation:
Contact Name:
r
No. of Acres
Address:
Telephone No.
Lease Location:
Date of Lease: From To No. of Acres
Description of farming operation:
13
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PA
6. Labor Force in Your Farming Operation (10 points)
List of staff responsible for farm ng operations:
Staff Member
Background and Expertise of Personnel
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
14
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS E?AGE
Q
Staff Member
Backgro'ttf J and Expertise of Personnel
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
Name:
Title:
15
SUBMIT ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY OF THIS PAGE
This prices contained in this bid are firm for ! tb days.
Do you represent a disadvantaged business enterprise? YES NO
Do you represent a woman -owned business enterprise? YES — NO
Bid tabulation to be sent to fax or e-mail -frCeiheiri j' Y,i(7'i.drLigii'L ,.ft bi,,emvy1
NAME OF COMPANYFiE5Chfr- t -P j
AGENT AND TITLE
ADDRESS
tea. (,ioJ
TELEPHONE 5 9;--Lps-91 I LiCSD
BIDDER SIGNATURE /„
i
Form of Business: Sole Proprietorship _ Partnership _Corporation _ Limited Liability Corporation
1 f),
Exhibit A – Airport Map 202 Acres
Exhibit B –Wastewater Plant Map 259 Acres
Exhibit C – Wastewater Plant Map 40 Acres
Attachment A -- Soil Test Report
Attachment B – FFA Advisory Circular
Attachment C – MO State Operating Permit – Wastewater MO -0094846
Attachment D – Wastewater Plant Crop Planting Schedule
Attachment E – MO State Operating Permit – Airport MO-R80F000
Sample Contract
16
1. Management Objectives
Goals- To provide good agronomical practices on the cities property. Also, to use the
latest technology, as GPS, yield monitors, fertilizer and chemical regulators. We want to
produce the best crop possible and try to make a profit in the end. After 31 Years
experience of working with biosolids, I feel we have obtained some good yields from
corn, especially on lighter soils. (sand) Experience shows that we have to manage it
properly. Deep ripping the soil is a necessity after application, to reduce compaction,
and to retain nitrogen. Ripping the soil also lets the rain water absorb and reduces
ponding. I do not feel no till works well with biosolid management. Applying to lighter
soils (sand) gives much better yield response. It is important to plan in advance of the
following years crop, so the gumbo soils can be worked in the fall.
2. Experience
I grew up farming with my grandpa. It is all I wanted to do since I was a young kid. I
rented my first row crop land when I was 17 years old (junior in high school). I was born
and raised in Jefferson City. Graduated from Jefferson City High School in 1988. I have
farmed every since. I had to take a job with Jim Keeven Sod after the Flood of '93 for 2
years. I also was in the excavating business during this time.
I have worked with MU Extension and Pioneer Hybrid agronomist. 1 am on the Missouri
Corn Board. I am the vice president of the Missouri Corn Merchandising Council for the
2019 year. I also serve on the United States Grain Council out of Washington DC. 1 also
attended Sygenta Agronomic Leadership program in Greenville, SC. I was also on the
National Corn Growers Association water quality action team. Capital View levee
supervisor, Reveaux levee supervisor, and Renz Farm levee supervisor.
We are a family farm living in the city limits of Jefferson City in Callaway county. I have
been married to my wife Kim since 1991. We have one daughter, Jena. Jena is a Senior
at Westminster College in Fulton and will graduate in the Spring of 2019. Jena plans to
return back to the farm and help to expand the pumpkin patch and corn maze
operation. With the help of Jena, we plan on building a local market and selling local
grown produce in the North Jefferson City area. We grow and sell all our grain,
produce, and hay locally.
have produced soybeans, corn, wheat, straw, oats, alfalfa hay, millet, sudan grass,
brome grass, orchard grass, sunflowers, pumpkins, gourds, squash, watermelons,
cantaloupes, sweet potatos, sweet corn, apples, peaches, and pears.
We have had some good yields in years past using biosolids. Corn yield last year on the
highway 63 farm average 259 bushels per acre. We also had 71 bushel beans on our
land in North Jefferson City by Oilwell Road.
1
*. CURRENT FARMING OPERATIONS
Own approximately 700 acres
Rent approximately 1200 acres
Winter tillage, plant oats February -March, plant Corn starting March 25th (if possible),
finish corn by May 15th, plant sweet corn starting May 1 every two weeks, start
planting soybeans May 15th, hope to finish by June 15th, unless the soybeans are
double crop after oat, or wheat, May 20 start planting watermelons every two weeks
until June 20th, plant sweet potatoes by June 20th, plant pumpkins, gourds, squash by
July 1st. We also harvest oats and straw mid June July 5th. Mow and harvest hay all
summer long. Start harvesting watermelons Mid August -November, hope to harvest
short season corn by Labor Day. Harvest the remainder of corn and soybeans by
November 20th.
Corn yields have improved dramatically over the last 20 years. When I began farming I
raised 120 bushel corn and now I raise 200+ (in good years).
1 have implemented split applications of nitrogen and have had good results with Tess
fertilizer.
1 have my commercial chemical applicator license.
I use GPS, and Raven flow control regulators for both chemicals and fertilizers.
I soil sample on a yearly bases and work with Pioneer Hybrid Agronomist on fertilizer
recommendations.
Last year in 2017 the county average yield was 55 bushel per acre soybeans (our
average on all acres was 57) The county average on corn was 180 bushel per acre (our
average on all acres was 189).
Trying to implement yield records from combine monitor (GPS) to computer to report
to county offices for yield records.
2
(3) 400 HP FW Drive Tractors
(3) 200 HP 2WD Tractors
(2) 18 ft Deep Rippers- Used for turning over sludge
(2) Disk 20 & 32 ft
(2) Field Cultivators 40 & 44 Ft
(3) Planters 16 Row, l2Row, & 6 Row
(1) Anhydrous Application 42 ft
(1) Dry Fertilizer Applicator
(2) Combines 30ft bean head & 8 Row Corn Head
(2) Dozers
(2) Moldboard Plows
Grain Cart 800 bushel
(2) Semi Trucks
(2) Hopper bottom Grain Trailers
(4) Tandem Grain Trucks
100,000 Bushel Grain Bin Storage
16ft Self Propelled Haybine
Small Square Baler
(2) Big Round Balers
(2) Hay Rakes
(8) Hay Wagons
(4) Small Hay Tractors with Loaders
3
4. Lease Price
See Attached
5. References
Landlords:
Pastor Gerald Scheperle 573-395-4591 '2 O QC e-- ! 4% S AOtS
Larry Beck 573-230-4479
Jeff Kempker 573-353-5757
Brian Meller 573-636-7339
Britt Smith- City of Jefferson
Bradley - Waste Water Plant- work with daily on sludge application
Farmers:
Mark Smart- Smart Brothers Farms 573-295-4583
William Kautsch- Kautsch Farms 573-782-4722
Jim Keeven- Keeven Sod 573-634-3444
David Boessen 573-680-7981
6. Labor Force
3 Full time employees, besides myself
3 Part-time seasonal help
Additional labor during harvest, haying, and pumpkin patch
Additional Services
4
Will be available to pull out stuck trucks
Spray weeds on idle land for sludge spreading
Disked, rip, or plow under sludge that has been applied to the maxium rate to keep
odor down after a rain.
I have approximately 1000 acres of land that is available for sludge application. (some
within 50 yards of the wastewater plant).
Note: Noticed not fn the bid. I recommended to the USDA wildlife agent that the
airport land be plowed under within 72 hours of harvest to keep the wildlife off the
airport runway. Ron Kraft made it mandatory in the last bid after my recommendation.
I have already planted 100 acres of hay on sandy ground to be used for sludge
application during wet condition or between hay cuttings.
Side Note: 1 started farming the city property in 1989. I was approached by Mary
Brose, John Drainer, and Bob Hopkins. They wanted me to help them find a place for
them to spread sludge. I was farming Raymond & Wilma Scheperle's farm at the time. 1
went to the Scheperie's and asked them to let the city spread on their ground, and they
agreed. I have 30 years experience farming the cities properties with sludge
application.
\:TAI,Vc GiaMIFQ.
MS 6'4
mcoie
TOLL (6161
C(c-t Rdlar,
5
City of Jefferson, Missouri
EXHIBIT A
Airport Property
WE
0
2.547
5.200 Fee,
4to
6
�'
MidMoGIS, MO
100' Buffer Zone 1
10 ' Bufer Zone
0' Buffer Zane 100 Buffer Zone
July 19, 2018
1:4,800
0 225 450
0
1
65
it
130
900 ft
260 m
Disclaimer Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal docurnent and should not be substituted for a title search.appraisal, survey, or tor zoning verification_
Attachment 1 — Soil Test Report
CONTROL ID 18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0106
DATE
02/22/2017
j
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
/A � %/
%/////////////i
""• 6513 BENZ RD
PERRY
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. 80X 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324-2931 1 waw.porryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -1
1
14.60
24.03 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.69 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.70
PHOSPHORUS (P)
551bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
68661bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
12321bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5681bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 71.44
MAGNESIUM: 21.37
POTASSIUM: 3.03
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P2O5
POTASH
I00
SULFUR
S
BORON
B
IRON
c.
MANGANESE
MA
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
34
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
20
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
20
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.corn
IP.
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0107
DATE
02/22/2017
j/
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
/////i i %/
er.raaesa ° ``
%/////////////i
'""""' "°_
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 416, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324.2931 1 www.peNyopIab com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF-1
2
14.60
26.74 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.77 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.80
PHOSPHORUS (P)
49lbs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
76211bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
1421 Ibs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6001bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 71.24
MAGNESIUM: 22.14
POTASSIUM: 2.87
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
P20
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
FA
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Z.
CORN BU/AC
180
208
62
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
30
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
35
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
20
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.penyaglab corn
'%
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0109
DATE
02/22/2017
%'
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
Illik.4
ii
���������
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. M063334
573/324-2931 I Hvnv.perryeglab_com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -5A
1
6.60
29.12 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.41 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
691bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
mil
CALCIUM (Ca)
94651bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
11341bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5711bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
tbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.26
MAGNESIUM: 16.23
POTASSIUM: 2.52
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
1(20
SULFUR
0
BORON
0
IRON
Fe
MANGANESE
Mi
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab_com
'%
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER C0110 DATE
02/22/2017
.1
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
5737324-2931 1 www.ponyaglab com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -5B
1
17.50
26.97 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 2.18 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.10
PHOSPHORUS (P)
671bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
12lbsta
CALCIUM (Ca)
85901bsta
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
113616s/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5941bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 79.62
MAGNESIUM: 17.55
POTASSIUM: 2.83
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NIROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
BORON
0
IRON
FA
MANGANESE
IM
COPPER
Cu
21NC
2n
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.pemyaglab. corn
-" /
CONTROL ID
16447
REPORT NUMBER
B0277
DATE 11/22/2016
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOON E CONSULTING
�
�����
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P O_ BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
5731324-2931 1 vomv,porryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
AF -6A
1
10.20
31.03 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.44 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
971es/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
100981bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
1203iesra
POTASSIUM (K)
6031bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dsim
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.35
MAGNESIUM: 16.16
POTASSIUM: 2.49
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
420
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
MA
COPPER
Cv
ZINC
ZA
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
'� j
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER I C0111
DATE
02/22/2017
/SUBMITTED
FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
,��,�
,4 '4x
="'A% T.L.<:
""'.
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY,
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY
BOWLING GREEN. MO
573/324-2931 I www.perryaglab.com
v
, - a—a-''_'"" 6513 BENZ RD
INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
54 EAST
63334
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF-7
1
15.40
24.30 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.58 %
Neut. A: 2.00
pH (Salt)
6.30
PHOSPHORUS (P)
64 bsia
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
I♦
CALCIUM (Ca)
71561bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
884 bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5681bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 73.61
MAGNESIUM: 15.16
POTASSIUM: 3.00
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
N20
SULFUR
5
BORON
5
IRON
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
2n
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
ID
18544 REPORT NUMBER
C0112 DATE
02/22/20171
�CONTROL
jz"
A
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
All lb. BOONE CONSULTING
/////i i %/.
///////////ii/
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. M083334
5731324-2931 i www.perryagtab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISHCER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -8
1
13.30
28.12 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 2.03 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.90
PHOSPHORUS (P)
187Ibs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
6ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
92391bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
7931bsia
POTASSIUM (K)
561 lbs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 82.14
MAGNESIUM: 11.74
POTASSIUM: 2.56
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
Ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
Fe
MANGANESE
Inn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www perryaglab.com
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0113
DATE
02/22/2017
•'r
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
%AAAA//, i ///
MA...p ), 31 4=:L
%AAAA/////////X
IlGLYS.Y.S.};
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 41a, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324.2931 1 w..55 perryoplab com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -9
1
19.40
25.31 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.77 %
Neut. A: 3.00
pH (Salt)
6.10
PHOSPHORUS (P)
771bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
6lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
71721bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
8751bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5741bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 70.84
MAGNESIUM: 14.40
POTASSIUM: 2.91
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
140
SULFUR
5
BORON
8
IRON
Fo
MANGANESE
Vol
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.pertyaglab.com
CONTROL ID 18544 REPORT NUMBER
C0114
DATE
02/22/2017
•j�
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND T0:
BOONE CONSULTING
ilial/. .i
c;14"° to .."'
iaiiiiiiiiiii
"""'"• 6513
PERRY
BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
573/324-2931 1 wove perryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISHCER
CITY AIRPORT
AF-9
2
19.40
30.05 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 2.32 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.60
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1391bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9lbsla
CALCIUM (Ca)
92531bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
12211bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
64718s/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 76.98
MAGNESIUM: 16.93
POTASSIUM: 2.76
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
020
SULFUR
5
BORON
0
IRON
it
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
In
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www. perryaglab. com
6./
CONTROL ID 18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0115
DATE .
02/22/2017
j�
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
../ 4 i�
:. .�:s.
„�„/ice1
=K.......,
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BO% 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. M063334
5737324-2931 I'"
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE DESIRED
VERY HIGH EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF-9
3
19.40
29.64 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.76 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
2301bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
6Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
103381bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
7411bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5541bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibsla
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 87.19
MAGNESIUM: 10.42
POTASSIUM: 2.40
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
P20
SULFUR
5
BORON
O
IRON
Ptr
MANGANESE
Lll
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Z.
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www _per yaglab.com
./
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0116
DATE
02/22/2017
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
///i/i i *.
i///////////i/
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON, IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/3242931 I wxw.pelryaglab.cam
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -10
1
16.20
23.34 me
TEXTURE: Clay Loam
MATTER: 2.06 %
Neut. Al 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
771bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
31bs/a
—
CALCIUM (Ca)
76471bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
8591bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
4991bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.91
MAGNESIUM: 15.34
POTASSIUM: 2.74
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
1
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
P20
SULFUR
$
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
/in
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
2.
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
20
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
20
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
20
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.partyaglab. tom
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0117 DATE
02/22/2017
j
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
v �., v ,
'iS .. •PiY
' A
P Hya; SVS»
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, NC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324-2931 I www perrysglsb.Com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -10
2
16.20
23.09 me
TEXTURE: Clay Loam
MATTER: 1.81 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
104 lbsta
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
1.11
CALCIUM (Ca)
74711bsta
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
898 bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5191bsra
SODIUM (Na)
lbsra
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 80.90
MAGNESIUM: 16.21
POTASSIUM: 2.88
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
1Q0
SULFUR
S
BORON
B
IRON
MANGANESE
1.k1
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.pemyaglabcom
/
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0118
DATE
02/22/2017
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
4.116 BOONE CONSULTING
�.
...y /4 '
moi.
s"'"'mC.
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
5731324-2931 1 www.porryaglab.corn
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -11
1
4.70
28.12 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.72 %
Neut. A: 5.00
pH (Salt)
5.40
PHOSPHORUS (P)
551bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
NM
CALCIUM (Ca)
70171bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
11701bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5501bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 62.38
MAGNESIUM: 17.33
POTASSIUM: 2.51
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS I
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P2OS
POTASH
R20
SULFUR
1
BORON
0
IRON
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
36
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
20
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
20
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
lbs ENM/A: 1513
Apply 4 tons of lime.
APPLIED:
www.porryaglab.com
CONTROL ID
16447
REPORT NUMBER
B0278
DATE 11/22/2016
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
Aft BOONE CONSULTING
M
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. NC PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 83334
573/324-2931Imm pefryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
AF -13
1
3.40
15.00 me
TEXTURE: Silt Loam
MATTER: 2.02 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
171 lbs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
61bsia
CALCIUM (Ca)
53491bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
3201bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
231 Ibs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
ds/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 89.13
MAGNESIUM: 8.90
POTASSIUM: 1.97
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
BORON
8
IRON
Fe
IAANGANESE
TM
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
HAY GRASS Ton
4
130
0
153
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
"%II
CONTROL ID
18544
REPORT NUMBER
C0119
DATE 02/22/2017
,
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
AI lik BOONE CONSULTING
/i////i ,2 ii
`.."K' MM.
i/////ilii////
"`,_""" `"
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 83334
573/324-2931 I www.perryaglab com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
FISCHER
CITY AIRPORT
AF -14
1
2.80
26.93 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.95 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.10
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1451bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
151bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
88541bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
9871bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5301bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 82.20
MAGNESIUM: 15.28
POTASSIUM: 2.52
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
I00
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F•
MANGANESE
Al
COPPER
Cu
2.NC
ZP
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
20
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
50
0
0
20
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
20
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
wA w.perryaglab com
CONTROL ID 16355
REPORT NUMBER
B0256 DATE
11/22/2016
•••'off
%'MITTED
SUB FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
x. VSA
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY,
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY
BOWLING GREEN, MO
573(324-2931 1 wwwper rya
��„/„i„`
6513 BENZ RD
INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
54 EAST
83334
g la b. co m
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
AF -15
1
6.00
15.46 me
TEXTURE: Silt Loam
MATTER: 1.92 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
961bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
51641bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
5411bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
2321bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
as/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 83.49
MAGNESIUM: 14.59
POTASSIUM: 1.92
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
$
BORON
8
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
2n
HAY GRASS Ton
4
140
0
154
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
CONTROL ID
16446
REPORT NUMBER
B0270
DATE
11/22/2016
/
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
j �1 411111. BOONE CONSULTING
IN SVA, "' "` "'"'"T~""`�`"
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324.29311 wrvw.parryu9lab .Com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED I VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF-1
1
17.60
28.74 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.31 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
7.00
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1871bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
90181bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
10921bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5031bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 78.45
MAGNESIUM: 15.83
POTASSIUM: 2.24
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
80808
8
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
20
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
20
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
20
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
i/
CONTROL ID 16446 REPORT NUMBER
B0271
DATE
11/22/2016
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
/ ..4 o ��
������,��
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573!324-2931 1 www.po ryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -1
2
17.60
15.52 me
TEXTURE: Silt Loam
MATTER: 1.95 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1811bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
12lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
55471bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
2941bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
3301bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
cIS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 89.38
MAGNESIUM: 7.90
POTASSIUM: 2.72
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
IGO
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F•
NANGAIIE SE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
198
0
42
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
68
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
99
0
20
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
140
0
34
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
/
CONTROL ID
16446
REPORT NUMBER
B0272
DATE
11/22/2016
.j�
Ailik SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
iiiii/i ii
i///ilii//ilii
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63314
573(324.2931 1 mvw.porryaglab corn
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF-1
3
17.60
37.77 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.16 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
2061bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
121bsIa
CALCIUM (Ca)
129351bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
11061bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6461bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 85.61
MAGNESIUM: 12.20
POTASSIUM: 2.19
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
H2O
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab. tom
j
CONTROL ID 16445
REPORT NUMBER B0266
DATE
11/22/2016
ANL SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
1
/i
6513 BENZ RD
PERRY AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
573/324.2931 I www.perryagtabcom
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM: CITY OF
FIELD: WF -2
SAMPLE: 1
ACRES: 16.10
CEC: 37.57 me
SOIL TEXTURE: Clay
ORGANIC MATTER: 1.50 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
3061bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
18Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
131631bs/a
-
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
8651bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
8271bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibsla
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 87.58
MAGNESIUM: 9.60
POTASSIUM: 2.82
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
920
SULFUR
S
BORON
B
IRON
Fe
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Z.
1
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
5
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
5
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
5
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
5
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
CONTROL ID 16445
REPORT NUMBER
B0267
DATE
11/22/2016
.j�
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
Ili. BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
5731324-2931 I Iwo .perryaglab.Com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF-2
2
16.10
40.06 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.68 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
3131bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
21 lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
137761bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
1139tbs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6801bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ib5/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 85.98
MAGNESIUM: 11.85
POTASSIUM: 2.18
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
Ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
S
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
21NG
2n
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
5
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
5
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
5
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
5
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
vnvw.perryaglab.com
%off
CONTROL ID
16445
REPORT NUMBER
80268
DATE 11/22/2016
•j�
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
Il BOONE CONSULTING
/����,4 ,�
s.�. ,.6 .:::_.
�����„��/
` ...,-.” 4.
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
573/324.2931 1 ww _porryeglab com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -2
3
16.10
28.30 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.60 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.10
PHOSPHORUS (P)
2201bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
18Ibsfa
CALCIUM (Ca)
95061bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
909Ibs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5791bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibsla
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 83.99
MAGNESIUM: 13.39
POTASSIUM. 2.62
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
Ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
H
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K205
SULFUR
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
5
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
5
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
5
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
5
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
'/
CONTROL IDI 16445
REPORT NUMBER
B0269
DATE
11/22/2016
j
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. M063334
573/324.2931 1 xww.pmryaglab.corn
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -2
4
16.10
24.24 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.63 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.40
PHOSPHORUS (P)
2261bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
91bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
8497ms/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
5661bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
4991bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 87.64
MAGNESIUM: 9.72
POTASSIUM: 2.64
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P20S
POTASH
820
SULFUR
$
BORON
8
IRON
FF
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
20
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
20
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
20
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.Com
%off
CONTROL ID
16444
REPORT NUMBER
B0263
DATE 11/22/2016
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
.`o°'"" "`' `"4`4
/
"."..,.414AFF
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/124-2931 1 www.perryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED i VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF JEFFRSON
WF -3
1
16.90
30.93 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.31 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.40
PHOSPHORUS (P)
198Ibs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
104151bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
9751bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6431bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
cIS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 84.19
MAGNESIUM: 13.14
POTASSIUM: 2.67
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
11
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
120
SULFUR
5
BORON
e
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
IA
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
%off
CONTROL ID
16444
REPORT NUMBER
B0264
DATE
11/22/2016
•� /
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND T0:
BOONE CONSULTING
/////i %/.
%/////////////
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 83334
573/324-29311 www.porryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF JEFFRSON
WF -3
2
16.90
23.63 me
TEXTURE: Clay Loam
MATTER: 1.49 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.60
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1481bs/a
ER
SULFUR (SO4-S)
3Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
74071bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
8131bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5711bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 78.35
MAGNESIUM: 14.33
POTASSIUM: 3.10
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
P20
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS
BU/AC
60
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryagIab.com
j
CONTROL ID
16444
REPORT NUMBER
B0265
DATE
11/22/2016
A
1 11L SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
!BOONE CONSULTING
zwnsar .4. .14
'"'"''`'"..,M
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 83334
573/324-2831 1 www.pelryagteb.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF JEFFRSON
WF -3
3
16.90
37.30 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 2.60 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.40
PHOSPHORUS (P)
3641bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
151bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
125081bs1a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
11681bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
9041bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
eS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 83.84
MAGNESIUM: 13.05
POTASSIUM: 3.11
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
C.
21110
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
'��
CONTROL ID
16443
REPORT NUMBER
B0260
DATE
11/22/2016
j�
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
t+•lsc ay tl PYA
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY.
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY
BOWLING GREEN, MO
573/324-2931 I m w posyaglab
e• -x:44^ v'=1
6513 BENZ RD
INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
54 EAST
83334
com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -4
1
16.20
33.57 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 2.01 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.40
PHOSPHORUS (P)
2851bsra
SULFUR (SO4-S)
121bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
112221bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
10541bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
8791bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (8)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 83.56
MAGNESIUM: 13.08
POTASSIUM: 3.36
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
KZO
SULFUR
5
BORON
8
IRON
i.
MANGANESE
AM
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
In
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
:.
CONTROL ID
16443
REPORT NUMBER
B0261
DATE
11/22/2016
j
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
ilii/iA ii/,
:. ` "•
iiiiiiii//iii/
"'r" >•-'-
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY. INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
S73f324-2931 I worw.P0AYa91.b PP.
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -4
2
16.20
26.09 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.19 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
6.90
PHOSPHORUS (P)
111 Ibsta
SULFUR (SO4-S)
61bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
85151bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
9621bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
619tbsta
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
ds/m
BORON (8)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.60
MAGNESIUM: 15.36
POTASSIUM: 3.04
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
PHOS
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab_Com
CONTROL ID
16443
REPORT NUMBER
B0262 DATE
11/22/2016
,.j1
/
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
6513 BENZ RD
PERRY
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
573/324-2931 I ww<v parrya5Wb.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW ' LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -4
3
16.20
28.67 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.34 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1601bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
91bs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
94361bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
10261bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6251bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 82.30
MAGNESIUM: 14.91
POTASSIUM: 2.80
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
S
BORON
8
IRON
Fe
MANGANESE
88
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
ZO
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www. perryagla b.com
.i
CONTROL ID
16442
REPORT NUMBER
80257
DATE
11/22/2016
.
j
471
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
1 Ask BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY.
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY
BOWUNG GREEN. MO
573/324-2931 1 www,perryagbb
6513 BENZ RD
INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
54 EAST
63334
cam
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -5
1
16.20
27.45 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.15 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.20
PHOSPHORUS (P)
137Ibs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
6lbs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
89391bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
1031 Ibs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
6321bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.40
MAGNESIUM: 15.64
POTASSIUM: 2.95
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
Ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
N20S
SULFUR
BORON
0
IRON
Fr
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
In
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab com
CONTROL ID
16442
REPORT NUMBER
60258
DATE
11/22/2016
•j1
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
Amok BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY,
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY
BOWU NG GREEN. MO
5731324-2931 1 www.porryaglab.com
6513 BENZ RD
INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
54 EAST
63334
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM: CITY OF
FIELD: WF -5
SAMPLE: 2
ACRES: 16.20
CEC: 23.14 me
SOIL TEXTURE: Clay Loam
ORGANIC MATTER: 1.10 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
621bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
75101bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
8841bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
5291bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 81.15
MAGNESIUM: 15.92
POTASSIUM: 2.93
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
MTROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
720
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
iP05
F.
MANGANESE
un
COPPER
C.
ZINC
2n
CORN BU/AC
180
208
20
0
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
'j
CONTROL ID
16442
REPORT NUMBER
B0259
DATE
11/22/2016
•j
'
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P O. BOX 418, HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 83334
573/324-2931 1 rm o polryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -5
3
0.00
14.82 me
TEXTURE: Silt Loam
MATTER: 1.78 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.50
PHOSPHORUS (P)
111 lbs/a
'
SULFUR (SO4-S)
9lbsra
CALCIUM (Ca)
48631bsra
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
5121bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
4151bsra
SODIUM (Na)
Ibsra
Salts
dStm
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 82.02
MAGNESIUM: 14.39
POTASSIUM. 3.59
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P200
POTASH
N20
SULFUR
5
BORON
8
IRON
F.
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
2R<C
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
198
0
20
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
20
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
99
0
20
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
140
0
0
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perTyaglab.com
CONTROL ID
16446
REPORT NUMBER
B0273
DATE
11/22/2016
."moi/
j '
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
AM lik BOONE CONSULTING
.=", �. ,..-..,
x`
•
"u""'' .'
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. BOX 418. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN, MO 63334
573/324-29311www.pertyaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF -6
1
17.20
35.15 me
TEXTURE: Clay
MATTER: 1.18 %
Neut. A: 1.00
pH (Salt)
6.80
PHOSPHORUS (P)
1371bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
6Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
107271bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
15321bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
7441bs/a
SODIUM (Na)
Ibs/a
Salts
eS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 76.28
MAGNESIUM: 18.16
POTASSIUM: 2.71
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
620
SULFUR
5
BORON
B
IRON
Fr
MANGANESE
Mn
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
208
0
0
15
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
0
15
WHEAT BU/AC
80
104
0
0
15
HAY GRASS Ton
4
145
0
0
15
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
CONTROL ID
16446
REPORT NUMBER
B0274
DATE
11/22/2016
j'''
""'"°` „"."
SUBMITTED FOR: SEND TO:
BOONE CONSULTING
""':""".`."`
PERRY
6513 BENZ RD
AGRICULTURAL LABORATORY, INC. PAYSON , IL 62360
P.O. 80X 415. HIGHWAY 54 EAST
BOWLING GREEN. MO 63334
573(524-2931 1 www.perryaglab.com
SOIL REPORT
RATING
VERY LOW
LOW
MODERATE
DESIRED
VERY HIGH
EXCESS
GROWER:
FARM:
FIELD:
SAMPLE:
ACRES:
CEC:
SOIL
ORGANIC
CITY OF
WF-6
2
17.20
13.85 me
TEXTURE: Silt Loam
MATTER: 2.42 %
Neut. A: 0.00
pH (Salt)
7.70
PHOSPHORUS (P)
3121bs/a
SULFUR (SO4-S)
15Ibs/a
CALCIUM (Ca)
50431bs/a
MAGNESIUM (Mg)
2041bs/a
POTASSIUM (K)
307Ibs/a
SODIUM (Na)
lbs/a
Salts
dS/m
BORON (B)
ppm
IRON (Fe)
ppm
BASE SATURATION PERCENT
MANGANESE (Mn)
ppm
CALCIUM: 91.02
MAGNESIUM: 6.13
POTASSIUM: 2.84
COPPER (Cu)
ppm
ZINC (Zn)
ppm
CHLORIDES (CI)
ppm
SOIL FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS
CROPPING OPTIONS
YIELD
GOAL
SUGGESTED TREATMENT POUNDS / ACRE
NITROGEN
N
PHOSPHATE
P205
POTASH
K20
SULFUR
S
BORON
5
IRON
Fs
MANGANESE
FM
COPPER
Cu
ZINC
Zn
CORN BU/AC
180
178
0
47
10
SOYBEANS BU/AC
60
0
0
76
10
WHEAT BU/AC
80
89
0
21
10
HAY GRASS Ton
4
130
0
49
10
DATE/AMOUNT APPLIED
LIME RECOMMENDATIONS:
COMMENTS:
APPLIED:
www.perryaglab.com
1/3/08
Attachment a- FAA Advisory Circular
AC 150/5300-13 CHG 12
Appendix 17
Appendix 17. MINIMUM DISTANCES BETWEEN CERTAIN AIRPORT
FEATURES AND ANY ON -AIRPORT AGRICULTURE CROPS
Table A17-1. Minimum Distances Between Certain Airport Features and Any On -Airport Agriculture Crops
Aircraft Approach
pp
Category and Design
Group 1
Distance in Feet From
RunwayCenterline to
Crop
Distance in Feet From
Runway End to Crop
Distance in
Feet from
Centerline of
Taxiway to
Crop
Distance in Feet
from Edge of
Apron to Crop
Visual &
>'f., mile
< i mile
Visual &
,
> r, mile
<%mile
Category A & B Aircraft
Group V: Wing span 171 ft. up to 213 0..
Category E: Speed 166 knots or more
Group i
200 2
400
300'
600
45
40
,Group II
250
400
4003
600
66
58
Group III
400
400
600
800
93
8 I
Group IV
400
400
1,000
1,000
130
1 13
Category C, D, & E Aircraft
Group 1
5303
575'
1,000
1,000
45
40
Group 11
530'
575 3
1.000
1,000
66
58
Group 11i
530'
575 3
1,000
1,000
93
81
Group IV
530 3
575 1
1,000
1,000
130
1 1 3
Group V
530'
575 3
1,000
1,000
160
138
Group VI
530'
5751
1,000
1,000
193
167
1. Design Groups are based on ruing span or tail height, and Category depends on approach speed of the aircraft as shown below:
Design Group
Category
Grnup 1: Wing span up to 49 ft.
Category A: Speed Icss than 91 knots
Group II Wing span 49 (1. up w 73 ft.
Category 13: Speed 91 knots up to 120 knots
Group 111: Wing span 79 It. up to 117 0.
Category C: Speed 121 knots up to 140 knots
Group IV: Wing span 113 6. up to 170 ft.
Category D: Speed 131 knots up to 165 knots
Group V: Wing span 171 ft. up to 213 0..
Category E: Speed 166 knots or more
Group VI: Wing span 214 0. up to 261 ft.
2. If the runway will only serve small airplanes (12,500 Ib. and under) in Design Group!, this dimension may be reduced to 125
feet: however, this dimension should be increased where necessary to accommodate visual navigational aids that may be installed.
For example, farming operations should not be allowed within 25 feet of a Precision Approach Path Indicator (PATI) light box.
3. These dimensions reflect the Threshold Siting Surface (TSS) as defined in AC 150/5300-13, Appendix 2. The TSS cannot be
penetrated by any object. Under these conditions, the TSS is more restrictive than the OFA, and the dimensions shown here are to
prevent penetration of the TSS by crops and farm machinery.
295
Advisory
U.S. Department C i rc u 1 a r
of Transportation
Federal Aviation
Administration
Subject: HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE
ATTRACTANTS ON OR NEAR
AIRPORTS
Date: 8/28/2007 AC No: 150/5200-33B
Initiated by: MS -300 Change:
1. PURPOSE. This Advisory Circular (AC) provides guidance on certain land uses
that have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife on or near public -use airports. It
also discusses airport development projects (including airport construction, expansion,
and renovation) affecting aircraft movement near hazardous wildlife attractants.
Appendix 1 provides definitions of terms used in this AC.
2. APPLICABILITY. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommends that
public -use airport operators implement the standards and practices contained in this
AC. The holders of Airport Operating Certificates issued under Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 139, Certification of Airports, Subpart D (Part 139),
may use the standards, practices, and recommendations contained in this AC to comply
with the wildlife hazard management requirements of Part 139. Airports that have
received Federal grant-in-aid assistance must use these standards. The FAA also
recommends the guidance in this AC for land -use planners, operators of non -
certificated airports, and developers of projects, facilities, and activities on or near
airports.
3. CANCELLATION. This AC cancels AC 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife
Attractants on or near Airports, dated July 27, 2004.
4. PRINCIPAL CHANGES. This AC contains the following major changes, which
are marked with vertical bars in the margin:
a. Technical changes to paragraph references.
b. Wording on storm water detention ponds.
c. Deleted paragraph 4-3.b, Additional Coordination.
5. BACKGROUND. Information about the risks posed to aircraft by certain wildlife
species has increased a great deal in recent years. Improved reporting, studies,
documentation, and statistics clearly show that aircraft collisions with birds and other
wildlife are a serious economic and public safety problem. While many species of
wildlife can pose a threat to aircraft safety, they are not equally hazardous. Table 1
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
ranks the wildlife groups commonly involved In damaging strikes In the United States
according to their relative hazard to aircraft. The ranking Is based on the 47,212
records in the FAA National Wildlife Strike Database for the years 1990 through 2003.
These hazard rankings, in conjunction with site-specific Wildlife Hazards Assessments
(WHA), will help airport operators determine the relative abundance and use pattems of
wildlife species and help focus hazardous wildlife management efforts on those species
most likely to cause problems at an airport.
Most public -use airports have large tracts of open, undeveloped land that provide added
margins of safety and noise mitigation. These areas can also present potential hazards
to aviation if they encourage wildlife to enter an airport's approach or departure.airspace
or air operations area (AOA). Constructed or natural areas—such as poorly drained
locations, detention/retention ponds, roosting habitats on buildings, landscaping, odor -
causing rotting organic matter (putrescible waste) disposal operations, wastewater
treatment plants, agricultural or aquaculture activities, surface mining, or wetlands—can
provide wildlife with ideal locations for feeding, loafing, reproduction, and escape. Even
small facilities, such as fast food restaurants, taxicab staging areas, rental car facilities,
aircraft viewing areas, and public parks, can produce substantial attractions for
hazardous wildlife.
During the past century, wildlife -aircraft strikes have resulted in the loss of hundreds of
lives worldwide, as well as billions of dollars in aircraft damage. Hazardous wildlife
attractants on and near airports can jeopardize future airport expansion, making proper
community land -use planning essential. This AC provides airport operators and those
parties with whom they cooperate with the guidance they need to assess and address
potentially hazardous wildlife attractants when locating new facilities and implementing
certain land -use practices on or near public -use airports.
6. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN FEDERAL RESOURCE
AGENCIES. The FM, the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture - Wildlife Services signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) in July 2003 to acknowledge their respective missions in protecting aviation from
wildlife hazards. Through the MOA, the agencies established procedures necessary to
coordinate their missions to address more effectively existing and future environmental
conditions contributing to collisions between wildlife and aircraft (wildlife strikes)
throughout the United States. These efforts are intended to minimize wildlife risks to
aviation and human safety while protecting the Nation's valuable environmental
resources.
CVA_
DAVID L. BENNETT
Director, Office of Airport Safety
and Standards
ii
8/28/2007
AC 150/5200-33B
Table 1. Ranking of 25 species groups as to relative hazard to aircraft (1=most hazardous)
based on three criteria (damage, major damage, and effect -on -flight), a composite ranking
based on all three rankings, and a relative hazard score. Data were derived from the FAA
National Wildlife Strike Database, January 1990 -April 2003.1
Ranking by Arte
Major Composite Relative
Species group Damage damage5 Effect on bight° ►ankingi hazard score/
Deer 1 1 1 1 100
Vultures 2 2 2 2 64
Geese 3 3 6 3 66
Cormorants/pet aans 4 6 3 4 54
Cranes 7 6 4 5 47
Eagles 6 9 7 8 41
Ducks 5 8 10 7 39
Osprey 8 4 6 8 39
Turkey/pheasants 9 7 11 9 33
Herons 11 14 9 10 27
Hawks (butoos) 10 12 12 11 25
Gulls 12 11 13 12 24
Rock pigeon 13 10 14 13 23
Owls 14 13 20 14 23
H. lark/s. bunting 18 15 15 15 17
Crows/ravens 15 16 16 18 16
Coyote 18 19 5 17 14
Mourning dove. 17 17 17 18 14
Shorebirds 19 21 18 19 10
Blackbirds/starling 20 22 19 20 10
American kestrel 21 18 21 21 9
Meadowlarks 22 20 22 22 7
Swallows 24 23 24 23 4
Sparrows 25 24 23 24 4
Nighthawks 23 25 25 25 1
1 Excerpted from the Special Report for the FAA, "Ranking the Hazard Level of Wildlife Specles to Clvii
Aviation in the USA: Update #1, July 2, 2003' Refer to this report for additional explanations of criteria
and method of ranking.
2 Relative rank of each species group was compared with every other group for the three variables,
placing the species group with the greatest hazard rank for > 2 of the 3 variables above the next highest
ranked group, then proceeding down the list.
3 Percentage values, from Tables 3 and 4 in Footnote 1 of the Special Report, for the three criteria were
summed and scaled down from 100, with 100 as the score for the species group with the maximum
summed values and the greatest potential hazard to aircraft.
4 Aircraft incurred at least some damage (destroyed, substantial, minor, or unknown) from strike.
6 Aircraft incurred damage or structural failure, which adversely affected the structure strength,
performance, or flight characteristics, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of
the affected component, or the damage sustained makes ft inadvisable to restore aircraft to airworthy
condition.
e Aborted takeoff, engine shutdown, precautionary landing, or other.
iii
8/28/2007 AC 1500200-338
. This page intentionally lei blank.
828/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
Table of Contents
SECTION 1. GENERAL SEPARATION CRITERIA FOR HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE ATTRACTANTS
ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS. 1
1-1. INTRODUCTION 1
1-2. AIRPORTS SERVING PISTON -POWERED AIRCRAFT 1
1-3. AIRPORTS SERVING TURBINE -POWERED AIRCRAFT 1
1-4. PROTECTION OF APPROACH, DEPARTURE, AND CIRCLING AIRSPACE 1
SECTION 2. LAND -USE PRACTICES ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS THAT POTENTIALLY ATTRACT
HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE 3
2-1. GENERAL 3
2-2. WASTE DISPOSAL OPERATIONS 3
2-3. WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 5
2-4. WETLANDS 8
2-5. DREDGE SPOIL CONTAINMENT AREAS 9
2-6. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES 9
2-7. GOLF COURSES, LANDSCAPING AND OTHER LAND -USE CONSIDERATIONS 10
2-8. SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS OF SURROUNDING LAND USES 11
SECTION 3. PROCEDURES FOR WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT BY OPERATORS OF
PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS 13
3.1. INTRODUCTION 13
3.2. COORDINATION WITH USDA WILDLIFE SERVICES OR OTHER QUALIFIED
WILDLIFE DAMAGE MANAGEMENT BIOLOGISTS 13
3-3. WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT AT AIRPORTS: A MANUAL FOR AIRPORT
PERSONNEL 13
3-4. WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENTS, TITLE 14, CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS, PART 139 13
3-5. WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (WHMP) 14
3-6. LOCAL COORDINATION 14
3-7. COORDINATION/NOTIFICATION OF AIRMEN OF WILDLIFE HAZARDS 14
SECTION 4. FAA NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE
.CHANGES IN THE VICINITY OF PUBUC-USE AIRPORTS 15
4-1. FAA REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES IN THE VICINITY
OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS 15
4-2. WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 15
4-3. OTHER LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES 16
APPENDIX 1. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS ADVISORY CIRCULAR 19
v
8/2812007
This, page Infenfloi aIly left blank.
.i
•_
•
t
•
•
•
AC 15015200-33B
•
vi
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
SECTION 1.
GENERAL SEPARATION CRITERIA FOR HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE ATTRACTANTS
ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS.
1-1. INTRODUCTION. When considering proposed land uses, airport operators,
local planners, and developers must take into account whether the proposed land uses,
including new development projects, will increase wildlife hazards. Land -use practices
that attract or sustain hazardous wildlife populations on or near airports can significantly
increase the potential for wildlife strikes.
The FAA recommends the minimum separation criteria outlined below for land -use
practices that attract hazardous wildlife to the vicinity of airports. Please note that FAA
criteria include land uses that cause movement of hazardous wildlife onto, into, or
across the airport's approach or departure airspace or air operations area (AOA). (See
the discussion of the synergistic effects of surrounding land uses In Section 2-8 of this
AC.)
The basis for the separation criteria contained in this section can be found in existing
FAA regulations. The separation distances are based on (1) flight pattems of piston -
powered aircraft and turbine -powered aircraft, (2) the altitude at which most strikes
happen (78 percent occur under 1,000 feet and 90 percent occur under 3,000 feet
above ground level), and (3) National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
recommendations.
1-2. AIRPORTS SERVING PISTON -POWERED AIRCRAFT. Airports that do not sell
Jet -A fuel normally serve piston -powered aircraft. Notwithstanding more stringent
requirements for specific land uses, the FAA recommends a separation distance of
5,000 feet at these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants mentioned in
Section 2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate aircraft
movement. This distance Is to be maintained between an airport's AOA and the
hazardous wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts this separation distance measured from
the nearest aircraft operations areas.
1-3. AIRPORTS SERVING TURBINE -POWERED AIRCRAFT. Airports selling Jet -A
fuel normally serve turbine -powered aircraft. Notwithstanding more stringent
requirements for specific land uses, the FAA recommends a separation distance of
10,000 feet at these airports for any of the hazardous wildlife attractants mentioned in
Section 2 or for new airport development projects meant to accommodate aircraft
movement. This distance is to be maintained between an airport's AOA and the
hazardous wildlife attractant. Figure 1 depicts this separation distance from the nearest
aircraft movement areas.
1-4. PROTECTION OF APPROACH, DEPARTURE, AND CIRCLING AIRSPACE.
For all airports, the FAA recommends a distance of 5 statute miles between the farthest
edge of the airport's AOA and the hazardous wildlife attractant if the attractant could
cause hazardous wildlife movement into or across the approach or departure airspace.
1
8/28/2007
AC 150/5200-33B
Figure 1. Separation distances within which hazardous wildlife attractants should be avoided, eliminated,
or mitigated.
l -
• . • • ♦ ._, . . . . . •.. • •%• •
• • fir~ - f.-4~ • . • 4 • . %`• • ••\.
• r r• . ••.
•
• • 1• •1 • • . I• •
• . . . PFRITER A • 1. • 1
• . C . \.. . .I . .1 •
• • • ~1 •.•` • • • • • • • • • ._•-.***• ...W."' • • • • 1 . •
• . O • • • • .•• • • • . •
• •\• • .•• •.• •••`• • •.•.• • • • • • • •
1•
•
• • . •L_% _._�--• J
. •
_
• • • • • • . . • . • . • • • • • • • •
• • • • .• • • • • • • • • . . . • . . . . . •
• • • • • • • • •
• ♦ • • • •
PERIMETER A: For airports serving piston -powered aircraft, hazardous wildlife attractants must be 5,000
feet from the nearest air operations area.
PERIMETER B: For airports serving turbine -powered aircraft, hazardous wifdiife attractants must be
10,000 feet from the nearest air operations area.
PERIMETER C: 5 -mite range to protect approach, departure and circling airspace.
2
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
SECTION 2.
LAND -USE PRACTICES ON OR NEAR AIRPORTS THAT POTENTIALLY ATTRACT
HAZARDOUS WILDLIFE.
2-1. GENERAL. The wildlife species and the size of the populations attracted to the
airport environment vary considerably, depending on several factors, including land -use
practices on or near the airport. This section discusses land -use practices having the
potential to attract hazardous wildlife and threaten aviation safety. In addition to the
specific considerations outlined below, airport operators should refer to Wildlife Hazard
Management at Airports, prepared by FM and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
staff. (This manual is available in English, Spanish, and French. It can be viewed and
downloaded free of charge from the FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web site:
http://wildlife-mitiaation.tc.FAA.aov.). And, Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage;
compiled by the University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension Division. (This manual
is available online in a periodically updated version at:
Janrwwkuni.edu/wildlife/sofutionslhandlvok/.)
2-2. WASTE DISPOSAL OPERATIONS. Municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLF)
are known to attract large numbers of hazardous wildlife, particularly birds. Because of
this, these operations, when located within the separations identified in the siting criteria
in Sections 1-2 through 1-4, are considered incompatible with safe airport operations.
a. Siting for new municipal solid waste landfills subject to AIR 21. Section 503 of
the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century
(Public Law 106-181) (AIR 21) prohibits the construction or establishment of a new
MSWLF within 6 statute miles of certain public -use airports. Before these
prohibitions apply, both the airport and the landfill must meet the very specific
conditions described below. These restrictions do not apply to airports or landfills
located within the state of Alaska.
The airport must (1) have received a Federal grant(s) under 49 U.S.C. § 47101, et.
seq.; (2) be under control of a public agency; (3) serve some scheduled air carrier
operations conducted in aircraft with less than 60 seats; and (4) have total annual
enpianements consisting of at least 51 percent of scheduled air carrier
enplanements conducted in aircraft with Tess than 60 passenger seats.
The proposed MSWLF must (1) be within 6 miles of the airport, as measured from
airport property line to MSWLF property line, and (2) have started construction or
establishment on or after April 5, 2001. Public Law 108-181 only limits the
construction or establishment of some new MSWLF. It does not limit the expansion,
either vertical or horizontal, of existing landfills.
NOTE: Consult the most recent version of AC 150/5200-34, Construction or
Establishment of Landfills Near Public Airports, for a more detailed discussion of
these restrictions.
3
8/28/2007
AC 150/5200-33B
b. Siting for new MSWLF not subject to AiR 21. If an airport and MSWLF do not
meet the restrictions of Public Law 108-181, the FAA recommends against locating
MSWLF within the separation distances identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4. The
separation distances should be measured from the closest point of the airport's AOA
to the closest planned MSWLF cell.
c. Considerations for existing waste disposal. facilities within the limits of
separation criteria. The FAA recommends against airport development projects
that would increase the number of aircraft operations or accommodate larger or
faster aircraft near MSWLF operations located within the separations Identified in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4. In addition, in accordance with 40 CFR 258.10, owners or
operators of existing MSWLF units that are located within the separations listed in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4 must demonstrate that the unit is designed and operated
so it does not pose a bird hazard to aircraft. (See Section 4-2(b) of this AC for a
discussion of this demonstration requirement.)
d. Enclosed trash transfer stations. Enclosed waste -handling facilities that receive
garbage behind closed doors; process it via compaction, incineration, or similar
manner, and remove ail residue by enclosed vehicles generally are compatible with
safe airport operations, provided they are not located on airport property or within
the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ). These facilities should not handle or store
putrescible waste outside or in a partially enclosed structure accessible to hazardous
wildlife. Trash transfer facilities that are open on one or more sides; that store
uncovered quantities of municipal solid waste outside, even if only for a short time;
that use semi -trailers that leak or have trash clinging to the outside; or that do not
control odors by ventilation and filtration systems (odor masking is not acceptable)
do not meet the FM's definition of fully enclosed trash transfer stations. The FM
considers these facilities incompatible with safe airport operations If they are located
closer than the separation distances specified In Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
e. Composting operations on or near airport property. Composting operations that
accept only yard waste (e.g., leaves, lawn clippings, or branches) generally do not
attract hazardous wildlife. Sewage sludge, woodchips, and similar material are not
municipal solid wastes and may be used as compost bulking agents. The compost,
however, must never include food or other municipal solid waste. Composting
operations should not be located on airport property. Off -airport property
composting operations should be located no closer than the greater of the following
distances: 1,200 feet from any AOA or the distance called for by airport design
requirements (see AC 15015300-13, Airport Design). This spacing should prevent
material, personnel, or equipment from penetrating any Object Free Area (OFA),
Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ), Threshold Siting Surface (TSS), or Clearway. Airport
operators should monitor composting operations located in proximity to the airport to
ensure that steam or thermal rise does not adversely affect air traffic. On -airport
disposal of compost by-products should not be.conducted for the reasons stated in
2-3f.
4
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-338
f. Underwater waste discharges. The FAA recommends against the underwater
discharge of any food waste (e.g., fish processing offal) within the separations
Identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 because it could attract scavenging hazardous
wildlife.
g. Recycling centers. Recycling centers that accept previously sorted non-food items,
such as glass, newspaper, cardboard, or aluminum, are, in most cases, not
attractive to hazardous wildlife and are acceptable.
h. Construction and demolition (C&D) debris facilities. C&D landfills do not
generally attract hazardous wildlife and are acceptable if maintained in an orderly
manner, admit no putrescible waste, and are not co -located with other waste
disposal operations. However, C&D landfills have similar visual and operational
characteristics to putrescible waste disposal sites. When co -located with putrescible
waste disposal operations, C&D landfills are more likely to attract hazardous wildlife
because of the similarities between these disposal facilities. Therefore, a C&D
landfill co -located with another waste disposal operation should be located outside of
the separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
I. Fly ash disposal. The incinerated residue from resource recovery power/heat-
generating facilities that are fired by municipal solid waste, coal, or wood is generally
not a wildlife attractant because it no longer contains putrescible matter. Landfills
accepting only fly ash are generally not considered to be wildlife attractants and are
acceptable as long as they are maintained in an orderly manner, admit no
putrescible waste of any kind, and are not co -located with other disposal operations
that attract hazardous wildlife.
Since varying degrees of waste consumption are associated with general
incineration (not resource recovery power/heat-generating facilities), the FAA
considers the ash from general incinerators a regular waste disposal by-product and,
therefore, a hazardous wildlife attractant if disposed of within the separation criteria
outlined In Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
2-3. WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES. Drinking water intake and treatment
facilities, storm water and wastewater treatment facilities, associated retention and
settling ponds, ponds built for recreational use, and ponds that result from mining
activities often attract Targe numbers of potentially hazardous wildlife. To prevent
wildlife hazards, land -use developers and airport operators may need to develop
management plans, in compliance with local and state regulations, to support the
operation of storm water management facilities on or near all public -use airports to
ensure a safe airport environment.
a. Existing storm water management facilities. On -airport storm water
management facilities allow the quick removal of surface water, including discharges
related to aircraft deicing, from impervious surfaces, such as pavement and
terminal/hangar building roofs. Existing on -airport detention ponds collect storm
water, protect water quality, and control runoff. Because they slowly release water
5
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
after storms, they create standing bodies of water that can attract hazardous wildlife.
Where the airport has developed a Wildlife Hazard Management Pian (Wi IMP) in
accordance with Part 139, the FAA requires immediate correction of any wildlife
hazards arising from existing storm water facilities located on or near airports, using
appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Airport operators should develop
measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation with a wildlife
damage management biologist
Where possible, airport operators should modify storm water detention ponds to
allow a maximum 48-hour detention period for the design storm. The FM
recommends that airport operators avoid or remove retention ponds and detention
ponds featuring dead storage to eliminate standing water. Detention basins should
remain totally dry between rainfalls. Where constant flow of water is anticipated
through the basin, or where any portion of the basin bottom may remain wet, the
detention facility should include a concrete or paved pad and/or ditchlswale in the
bottom to prevent vegetation that may provide nesting habitat.
When it is not possible to drain a large detention pond completely, airport operators
may use physical barriers, such as bird balls, wires grids, pillows, or netting, to deter
birds and other hazardous wildlife. When physical barriers are used, airport
operators must evaluate their use and ensure they will not adversely affect water
rescue. Before installing any physical barriers over detention ponds on Part 139
airports, airport operators must get approval from the appropriate FAA Regional
Airports Division Office.
The FM recommends that airport operators encourage off -airport storm water
treatment facility operators to incorporate appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation
techniques into storm water treatment facility operating practices when their facility is
located within the separation criteria specified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
b. New storm water management facilities. The FAA strongly recommends that off -
airport
airport storm water management systems located within the separations identified in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4 be designed and operated so as not to create above-
ground standing water. Stormwater detention ponds should be designed,
engineered, constructed, and maintained for a maximum 48—hour detention period
after the design storm and remain completely dry between storms. To facilitate the
control of hazardous wildlife, the FAA recommends the use of steep -sided, rip -rap
Tined, narrow, linearly shaped water detention basins. When It is not possible to
place these ponds away from an airport's AOA, airport operators should use
physical barriers, such as bird balls, wires grids, pillows, or netting, to prevent
access of hazardous wildlife to open water and minimize aircraft -wildlife interactions.
When physical barriers are used, airport operators must evaluate their use and
ensure they will not adversely affect water rescue. Before installing any physical
barriers over detention ponds on Part 139 airports, airport operators must get
approval from the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office. All vegetation
in or around detention basins that provide food or cover for hazardous wildlife should
be eliminated. If soil conditions and other requirements allow, the FAA encourages
6
8/282007
AC 150/5200.338
the use of underground storm water Infiltration systems, such as French drains or
buried rock fields, because they are less attractive to wildlife.
c. Existing wastewater treatment facilities. The FAA strongly recommends that
airport operators immediately correct any wildlife hazards arising from existing
wastewater treatment facilities located on or near the airport. Where required, a
WHMP developed in accordance with Part 139 will outline appropriate wildlife
hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators should encourage
wastewater treatment facility operators to incorporate measures, developed in
consultation with a wildlife damage management biologist, to minimize hazardous
wildlife attractants. Airport operators should also encourage those wastewater
treatment facility operators to incorporate these mitigation techniques into their
standard operating practices. In addition, airport operators should consider the
existence of wastewater treatment facilities when evaluating proposed sites for new
airport development projects and avoid such sites when practicable.
d. New wastewater treatment facilities. The FAA strongly recommends against the
construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or associated settling ponds
within the separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4. Appendix 1 defines
wastewater treatment facility as "any devices and/or systems used to store, treat,
recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes." The definition
includes any pretreatment involving the reduction of the amount of pollutants or the
elimination of pollutants prior to introducing such pollutants into a publicly owned
treatment works (wastewater treatment facility). During the site -location analysis for
wastewater treatment facilities, developers should consider the potential to attract
hazardous wildlife if an airport is in the vicinity of the proposed site, and airport
operators should voice their opposition to such facilities if they are in proximity to the
airport.
e. Artificial marshes. In warmer climates, wastewater treatment facilities sometimes
employ artificial marshes and use submergent and emergent aquatic vegetation as
natural filters. These artificial marshes may be used by some species of flocking
birds, such as blackbirds and waterfowl, for breeding or roosting activities. The FAA
strongly recommends against establishing artificial marshes within the separations
identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
f. Wastewater discharge and sludge disposal. The FAA recommends against the
discharge of wastewater or sludge on airport property because it may improve soil
moisture and quality on unpaved areas and lead to improved turf growth that can be
an attractive food source for many species of animals. Also, the turf requires more
frequent mowing, which In tum may mutilate or flush insects or small animals and
produce straw, both of which can attract hazardous wildlife. In addition, the
improved turf may attract grazing wildlife, such as deer and geese. Problems may
also occur when discharges saturate unpaved airport areas. The resultant soft,
muddy conditions can severely restrict or prevent emergency vehicles from reaching
accident sites in a timely manner.
7
8/28/2007
AC 150/5200-338
2.4. WETLANDS. Wetlands provide a variety of functions and can be regulated by
local, state, and Federal laws. Normally, wetlands are attractive to many types of
wildlife, including many which rank high on the list of hazardous wildlife species (Table
1).
NOTE: If questions exist as to whether an area qualifies as a wetland, contact the local
division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, or a wetland consultant qualified to delineate wetlands.
a. Existing wetlands on or near airport property. if wetlands are located on or near
airport property, airport operators should be alert to any wildlife use or habitat
changes In these areas that could affect safe aircraft operations. At public -use
airports, the FAA recommends immediately correcting, in cooperation with local,
state, and Federal regulatory agencies, any wildlife hazards arising from existing
wetlands located on or near airports. Where required, a WHMP will outline
appropriate wildlife hazard mitigation techniques. Accordingly, airport operators
should develop measures to minimize hazardous wildlife attraction in consultation
with a wildlife damage management biologist.
b. New airport development Whenever possible, the FAA recommends locating new
airports using the separations from wetlands identified In Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
Where alternative sites are not practicable, or when airport operators are expanding
an existing airport into or near wetlands, a wildlife damage management biologist, in
consultation with the U.S. Fish and IMldlife Service, the U.S. Amory Corps of
Engineers, and the state wildlife management agency should evaluate the wildlife
hazards and prepare a WHMP that indicates methods of minimizing the hazards.
c. Mitigation for wetland impacts from airport projects. Wetland mitigation may be
necessary when unavoidable wetland disturbances result from new airport
development protects or projects required to correct wildlife hazards from wetlands.
Wetland mitigation must be designed so it does not create a wildlife hazard. The
FAA recommends that wetland mitigation projects that may attract hazardous wildlife
be sited outside of the separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
(1) Onsite mitigation of wetland functions. The FM may consider exceptions
to locating mitigation activities outside the separations identified in Sections 1-2
through 1-4 if the affected wetlands provide unique ecological functions, such as
critical habitat for threatened or endangered species or ground water recharge,
which cannot be replicated when moved to a different location. Using existing
airport property is sometimes the only feasible way to achieve the mitigation ratios
mandated in regulatory orders and/or settlement agreements with the resource
agencies. Conservation easements are an additional means of providing mitigation
for project impacts. Typically the airport operator continues to own the property, and
an easement is created stipulating that the property will be maintained as habitat for
state or Federally listed species.
8
8/28/2007 AC 15015200.338
Mitigation must .not Inhibit the airport operator's ability to effectively control
hazardous wildlife on or near the mitigation site or effectively maintain other aspects
of safe airport operations. Enhancing such mitigation areas to attract hazardous
wildlife must be avoided. The FAA will review any onsite mitigation proposals to
determine compatibility with safe airport operations. A wildlife damage management
biologist should evaluate any wetland mitigation projects that are needed to protect
unique wetland functions and that must be located in the separation criteria in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4 before the mitigation is implemented. A WHMP should be
developed to reduce the wildlife hazards.
(2) Offsite mitigation of wetland functions. The FAA recommends that wetland
mitigation projects that may attract hazardous wildlife be sited outside of the
separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 unless they provide unique
functions that must remain onsite (see 2-4c(1)). Agencies that regulate impacts to or
around wetlands recognize that it may be necessary to split wetland functions in
mitigation schemes. Therefore, regulatory agencies may, under certain
circumstances, allow portions of mitigation to take place in different locations.
(3) Mitigation banking. Wetland mitigation banking is the creation or restoration
of wetlands in order to provide mitigation credits that can be used to offset permitted
wetland losses. Mitigation banking benefits wetland resources by providing advance
replacement for permitted wetland losses; consolidating small projects into larger,
better -designed and managed units; and encouraging integration of wetland
mitigation projects with watershed planning. This last benefit is most helpful for
airport projects, as wetland impacts mitigated outside of the separations Identified in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4 can still be located within the same watershed. Wetland
mitigation banks meeting the separation criteria offer an ecologically sound
approach to mitigation in these situations. Airport operators should work with local
watershed management agencies or organizations to develop mitigation banking for
wetland impacts on airport property.
2-5. DREDGE SPOIL CONTAINMENT AREAS. The FAA recommends against
locafing dredge spoil containment areas (also known as Confined Disposal Facilities)
within the separations Identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 if the containment area or
the spoils contain material that would attract hazardous wildlife.
2-6. AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. Because most, if not all, agrlcuftural crops can
attract hazardous wildlife during some phase of production, the FAA recommends
against the used of airport property for agricultural production, including hay crops,
within the separations Identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4. . If the airport has no
financial alternative to agricultural crops to produce income necessary to maintain the
viability of the airport, then the airport shall follow the crop distance guidelines listed In
the table titled "Minimum Distances between Certain Airport Features and Any On -
Airport Agricultural Crops" found in AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, Appendix 17. The
cost of wildlife control and potential accidents should be weighed against the Income
produced by the on -airport crops when deciding whether to allow crops on the airport.
9
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-338
a. Livestock production. Confined livestock operations (i.e., feedlots, dairy
operations, hog or chicken production facilities, or egg laying operations) often
attract flocking birds, such as starlings, that pose a hazard to aviation. Therefore,
The FAA recommends against such facilities within the separations identified in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4. Any livestock operation within these separations should
have a program developed to reduce the attractiveness of the site to species that
are hazardous to aviation safety. Free -ranging livestock must not be grazed on
airport property because the animals may wander onto the AOA. Furthermore,
livestock feed, water, and manure may attract birds.
b. Aquaculture. Aquaculture activities (Le. catfish or trout production) conducted
outside of fully enclosed buildings are inherently attractive to a wide variety of birds.
Existing aquaculture facilities/activities within the separations listed in Sections 1-2
through 1-4 must have a program developed to reduce the attractiveness of the sites
to species that are hazardous to aviation safety. Airport operators should also
oppose the establishment of new aquaculture facilities/activities within the
separations listed in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
c. Alternative uses of agricultural land. Some airports are surrounded by vast areas
of farmed land within the distances specified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4. Seasonal
uses of agricultural land for activities such as hunting can create a hazardous wildlife
situation. In some areas, farmers will rent their land for hunting purposes. Rice
farmers, for example, flood their land during waterfowl hunting season and obtain
additional revenue by renting out duck blinds. The duck hunters then use decoys
and call in hundreds, if not thousands, of birds, creating a tremendous threat to
aircraft safety. A wildlife damage management biologist should review, in
coordination with local farmers and producers, these types of seasonal land uses
and incorporate them into the WHMP.
2-7. GOLF COURSES, LANDSCAPING AND OTHER LAND -USE
CONSIDERATIONS.
a. Golf courses. The large grassy areas and open water found on most golf courses
are attractive to hazardous wildlife, particularly Canada geese and some species of
gulls. These species can pose a threat to aviation safety. The FAA recommends
against construction of new golf courses within the separations identified in Sections
1-2 through 1-4. Existing golf courses located within these separations must
develop a program to reduce the attractiveness of the sites to species that are
hazardous to aviation safety. Airport operators should ensure these golf courses are
monitored on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If hazardous
wildlife is detected, convective actions should be immediately implemented.
b. Landscaping and landscape maintenance. Depending on its geographic location,
landscaping can attract hazardous wildlife. The FAA recommends that airport
operators approach landscaping with caution and confine it to airport areas not
associated with aircraft movements. A wildlife damage management biologist
should review all landscaping plans. Airport operators should also monitor all
landscaped areas on a continuing basis for the presence of hazardous wildlife. If
10
8128/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
hazardous wildlife is detected, corrective actions should be immediately
implemented.
Turf grass areas can be highly attractive to a variety of hazardous wildlife species.
Research conducted by the USDA Wildlife Services' National Wildlife Research
Center has shown that no one grass management regime will deter alt species of
hazardous wildlife In all situations. In cooperation with wildlife damage management
biologist, airport operators should develop airport turf grass management plans on a
prescription basis, depending on the airport's geographic locations and the type of
hazardous wildlife likely to frequent the airport
Airport operators should ensure that plant varieties attractive to hazardous wildlife
are not used on the airport. Disturbed areas or areas in need of re -vegetating
should not be planted with seed mixtures containing millet or any other large -seed
producing grass. For airport property already planted with seed mixtures containing
millet, rye grass, or other Targe -seed producing grasses, the FAA recommends
disking, plowing, or another suitable agricultural practice to prevent plant maturation
and seed head production. Plantings should follow the specific recommendations
for grass management and seed and plant selection made by the State University
Cooperative Extension Service, the local office of Wildlife Services, or a qualified
wildlife damage management biologist. Airport operators should also consider
developing and implementing a preferred/prohibited plant species list, reviewed by a
wildlife damage management biologist, which has been designed for the geographic
location to reduce the attractiveness to hazardous wildlife for landscaping airport
property.
c. Airports surrounded by wildlife habitat. The FAA recommends that operators of
airports surrounded by woodlands, water, or wetlands refer to Section 2.4 of this AC.
Operators of such airports should provide for a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA)
conducted by a wildlife damage management biologist. This WHA is the first step in
preparing a WHMP, where required.
d. Other hazardous wildlife attractants. Other specific land uses or activities (e.g.,
sport or commercial fishing, shellfish harvesting, etc.), perhaps unique to certain
regions of the country, have the potential to attract hazardous wildlife. Regardless of
the source of the attraction, when hazardous wildlife is noted on a public -use airport,
airport operators must take prompt remedial action(s) to protect aviation safety.
2-8. SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS OF SURROUNDING LAND USES. There may be
circumstances where two (or more) different land uses that would not, by themselves,
be considered hazardous wildlife attractants or that are located outside of the
separations identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 that are in such an alignment with the
airport as to create a wildlife corridor directly through the airport and/or surrounding
airspace. An example of this situation may involve a lake located outside of the
separation criteria on the east side of an airport and a large hayfield on the west side of
an airport, land uses that together could create a flyway for Canada geese directly
across the airspace of the airport. There are numerous examples of such situations;
11
8!28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
therefore, airport operators and the wildlife damage • management biologist must
consider the entire surrounding Landscape and community when developing the'WHMP.
12
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-338
SECTION 3.
PROCEDURES FOR WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT BY OPERATORS OF
PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS.
3.1. INTRODUCTION. In recognition of the Increased risk of serious aircraft damage
or the loss of human life that can result from a wildlife strike, the FAA may require the
development of a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (WHMP) when specific triggering
events occur on or near the airport. Part 139.337 discusses the specific events that
trigger a Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) and the specific issues that a WHMP must
address for FAA approval and inclusion in an Airport Certification Manual.
3.2. COORDINATION WITH USDA WILDLIFE SERVICES OR OTHER QUAUF1ED
WILDLIFE DAMAGE MANAGEMENT BIOLOGISTS. The FM will use the 1Mldlife
Hazard Assessment (WHA) conducted in accordance with Part 139 to determine if the
airport needs a WHMP. Therefore, persons having the education, training, and expertise
necessary to assess wildlife hazards must conduct the WHA. The airport operator may
look to Wildlife Services or to qualified private consultants to conduct the WHA. When the
services of a wildlife damage management biologist are required, the FAA recommends
that land -use developers or airport operators contact a consultant specializing in wildlife
damage management or the appropriate state director of Wildlife Services.
NOTE: Telephone numbers for the respective USDA Wildlife Services state offices can
be obtained by contacting USDA Wildlife Services Operational Support Staff, 4700
River Road, Unit 87, Riverdale, MD, 20737-1234, Telephone (301) 734-7921, Fax (301)
734-5157 thitraWww.aohls.uscia.gov/wsA.
3-3. WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT AT AIRPORTS: A MANUAL FOR
AIRPORT PERSONNEL. This manual, prepared by FAA and USDA Wildlife Services
staff, contains a compilation of infommation to assist airport personnel in the
development, implementation, and evaluation of WHMPs at airports. The manual
Includes specific information on the nature of wildlife strikes, legal authority, regulations,
wildlife management techniques, WHAs, WHMPs, and sources of help and information.
The manual is available in three languages: English, Spanish, and French. It can be
viewed and downloaded free of charge from the FAA's wildlife hazard mitigation web
site: htta://wildlife-mitination.tc.FAA.gov/. This manual only provides a starting point for
addressing wildlife hazard issues at airports. Hazardous wildlife management is a
complex discipline and conditions vary widely across the United States. Therefore,
qualified wildlife damage management biologists must direct the development of a
WHMP and the Implementation of management actions by airport personnel.
There are many other resources complementary to this manual for use in developing
and implementing WHMPs. Several are listed In the manual's bibliography.
3-4. WILDLIFE HAZARD ASSESSMENTS, TITLE 14, CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS, PART 139. Part 139.337(b) requires airport operators to conduct a
Wildlife Hazard Assessment (WHA) when certain events occur on or near the airport.
13
8/2812007 AC 15015200-33B
Part 139.337 (c) provides specific guidance as to what facts must be addressed in a
WHA.
3-5. WILDLIFE HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (WHMP). The FAA will consider
the results of the WHA, along with the aeronautical activity at the airport and the views
of the airport operator and airport users, in determining whether a formal WHMP is
needed, in accordance with Part 139.337. If the FM determines that a WHMP is
needed, the airport operator must formulate and Implement a WHMP, using the WHA as
the basis for the plan.
The goal of an airport's Wildlife Hazard Management Plan is to minimize the risk to
aviation safety, airport structures or equipment, or human health posed by populations
of hazardous wildlife on and around the airport.
The WHMP must identify hazardous wildlife attractants on or near the airport and the
appropriate wildlife damage management techniques to minimize the wildlife hazard. It
must also prioritize the management measures.
3-6. LOCAL COORDINATION. The establishment of a Wildlife Hazards Working
Group (WHWG) will facilitate the communication, cooperation, and coordination of the
airport and its surrounding community necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the
WHMP. The cooperation of the airport community is also necessary when new projects
are considered. Whether on or off the airport, the input from all involved parties must be
considered when a potentially hazardous wildlife attractant is being proposed. Airport
operators should also incorporate public education activities with the local coordination
efforts because some activities in the vicinity of your airport, while harmless under
normal leisure conditions, can attract wildlife and present a danger to aircraft. For
example, if public trails are planned near wetlands or inparks adjoining airport property,
the public should know that feeding binds and other wildlife in the area may pose a risk
to aircraft.
Airport operators should work with local and regional planning and zoning boards so as
to be aware of proposed land -use changes, or modification of existing land uses, that
could create hazardous wildlife attractants within the separations identified in Sections
1-2 through 1-4. Pay particular attention to proposed land uses involving creation or
expansion of waste water treatment facilities, development of wetland mitigation sites,
or development or expansion of dredge spoil containment areas. At the very least,
airport operators must ensure they are on the notification list of the local planning board
or equivalent review entity for all communities located within 5 miles of the airport, so
they will receive notification of any proposed project and have the opportunity to review
it for attractiveness to hazardous wildlife.
3-7 COORDINATIONINOTIFICATION OF AIRMEN OF WILDLIFE HAZARDS. if an
existing land -use practice creates a wildlife hazard and the land -use practice or wildlife
hazard cannot be immediately eliminated, airport operators must issue a Notice to
Airmen (NOTAM) and encourage the land—owner or manager to take steps to control
the wildlife hazard and minimize further attraction.
14
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-338
SECTION 4.
FAA NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE
CHANGES IN THE VICINITY OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS
4-1. FAA REVIEW OF PROPOSED LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES IN THE
VICINITY OF PUBLIC -USE AIRPORTS.
a. The FAA discourages the development of waste disposal and other facilities,
discussed in Section 2, located within the 5,000/10,000 -foot criteria specified in
Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
b. For projects that are located outside the 5,000/10,000 -foot criteria but within 5
statute miles of the airport's AOA, the FAA may review development plans,
proposed land -use changes, operational changes, or wetland mitigation plans to
determine if such changes present potential wildlife hazards to aircraft operations.
The FAA considers sensitive airport areas as those that lie under or next to
approach or departure airspace. This brief examination should indicate if further
investigation is warranted.
c. Where a wildlife damage management biologist has conducted a further study to
evaluate a site's compatibility with airport operations, the FAA may use the study
results to make a determination.
4-2. WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES.
a. Notification of new/expanded project proposal. Section 503 of the Wendell H.
Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (Public Law 108-181)
limits the construction or establishment of new MSWLF within 6 statute miles of
certain public -use airports, when both the airport and the landfill meet very specific
conditions. See Section 2-2 of this AC and AC 150/5200-34 for a more detailed
discussion of these restrictions.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires any MSWLF operator
proposing a new or expanded waste disposal operation within 5 statute miles of a
runway end to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office and the
airport operator of the proposal (40 CFR 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills, Section 258.10, Airport Safety). The EPA also requires owners or
operators of new MSWLF units, or lateral expansions of existing MSWLF units, that
are located within 10,000 feet of any airport runway end used by turbojet aircraft, or
within 5,000 feet of any airport runway end used only by piston -type aircraft, to
demonstrate successfully that such units are not hazards to aircraft. (See .4-2.b
below.)
When new or expanded MSWLF are being proposed near airports, MSWLF
operators must notify the airport operator and the FAA of the proposal as early as
possible pursuant to 40 CFR 258.
15
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
b. Waste handling facilities within separations identified in Sections 1-2 through
1-4. To claim successfully that a waste -handling facility sited within the separations
identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4 does not attract hazardous wildlife and does
not threaten aviation, the developer must establish convincingly that the facility will
not handle putrescible material other than that as outlined in 2-2.d. The FAA
strongly recommends against any facility other than that as outlined in 2-2.d
(enclosed transfer stations). The FAA will use this information to determine if the
facility will be a hazard to aviation.
c. Putrescible-Waste Facilities. In their effort to satisfy the EPA requirement, some
putrescible-waste facility proponents may offer to undertake experimental measures
to demonstrate that their proposed facility will not be a hazard to aircraft. To date, no
such facility has been able to demonstrate an ability to reduce and sustain
hazardous wildlife to levels that existed before the putrescible-waste landfill began
operating. For this reason, demonstrations of experimental wildlife control measures
may not be conducted within the separation identified in Sections 1-2 through 1-4.
4-3. OTHER LAND -USE PRACTICE CHANGES. As a matter of policy, the FM
encourages operators of public -use airports who become aware of proposed land use
practice changes that may attract hazardous wildlife within 5 statute miles of their
airports to promptly notify the FM. The FM also encourages proponents of such land
use changes to notify the FAA as early in the planning process as possible. Advanced
notice affords the FAA an opportunity (1) to evaluate the effect of a particular land -use
change on aviation safety and (2) to support efforts by the airport sponsor to restrict the
use of land next to or near the airport to uses that are compatible with the airport.
The airport operator, project proponent, or land -use operator may use FAA Form 7460-
1, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, or other suitable documents similar to
FAA Form 7460-1 to notify the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office.
Project proponents can contact the appropriate FAA Regional Airports Division Office
for assistance with the notification process.
It is helpful if the notification includes a 15 -minute quadrangle map of the area
identifying the location of the proposed activity. The land -use operator or project
proponent should also forward specific details of the proposed land -use change or
operational change or expansion. In the case of solid waste landfills, the information
should include the type of waste to be handled, how the waste will be processed, and
final disposal methods.
a. Airports that have received Federal grant-in-aid assistance. Airports that have
received Federal grant-in-aid assistance are required by their grant assurances to
take appropriate actions to restrict the use of land next to or near the airport to uses
that are compatible with normal airport operations. The FAA recommends that
airport operators to the extent practicable oppose off -airport land -use changes or
practices within the separations identified in• Sections 1-2 through 1-4 that may
attract hazardous wildlife. Failure to do so may lead to noncompliance with
applicable grant assurances. The FM will not approve the placement of airport
16
8/2812007 AC 150/5200-33B
development projects pertaining to aircraft movement In the vicinity of hazardous
wildlife attractants without appropriate mitigating measures. Increasing the intensity
of wildlife control efforts is not a substitute for eliminating or reducing a proposed
wildlife hazard. Airport operators should identify hazardous wildlife attractants and
any associated wildlife hazards during any planning process for new airport
development projects.
17
8/2812007 • AC 15015200-33
page intentionally left blank.
s
18 •
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
APPENDIX 1. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN THIS ADVISORY CIRCULAR.
1. GENERAL This appendix provides definitions of terms used throughout this AC.
1. Air operations area. Any area of an airport used or intended to be used for
landing, takeoff, or surface maneuvering of aircraft. An air operations area
includes such paved areas or unpaved areas that are used or intended to be
used for the unobstructed movement of aircraft in addition to its associated
runway, taxiways, or apron.
2. Airport operator. The operator (private or public) or sponsor of a public -use
airport.
3. Approach or departure airspace. The airspace, within 5 statute miles of an
airport, through which aircraft move during landing or takeoff.
4. Bird bails. High-density plastic floating balls that can be used to cover ponds
and prevent birds from using the sites.
5. Certificate holder. The holder of an Airport Operating Certificate issued under
Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 139.
6. Construct a new MSWLF. To begin to excavate, grade land, or raise
structures to prepare a municipal solid waste landfill as permitted by the
appropriate regulatory or permitting agency.
7. Detention ponds. Storm water management ponds that hold storm water for
short periods of time, a few hours to a few days.
8. Establish a new MSWLF. When the first load of putrescible waste is received
on-site for placement in a prepared municipal solid waste landfill.
9. Fly ash. The fine, sand -like residue resulting from the complete incineration of
an organic fuel source. Fly ash typically results from the combustion of coal or
waste used to operate a power generating plant.
10. General aviation aircraft. Any civil aviation aircraft not operating under 14
CFR Part 119, Certification: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators.
11. Hazardous wildlife. Species of wildlife (birds, mammals, reptiles), including
feral animals and domesticated animals not under control, that are associated
with aircraft strike problems, are capable of causing structural damage to
airport facilities, or act as attractants to other wildlife that pose a strike hazard
12. Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF). A publicly or privately owned
discrete area of land or an excavation that receives household waste and that
is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile,
as those terms are defined under 40 CFR § 257.2. An MSWLF may receive
19
8/28/2007 AC 150/5200-33B
other types wastes, such as commercial solid waste, non -hazardous sludge,
small -quantity generator waste, and industrial solid waste, as defined under 40
CFR § 258.2. An MSWLF can consist of either a stand alone unit or several
cells that receive household waste.
13. New MSWLF. A municipal solid waste landfill that was established or
constructed after April 5, 2001.
14. Piston -powered aircraft. Fixed -wing aircraft powered by piston engines.
15. Piston -use airport. Any airport that does not sell Jet -A fuel for fixed -wing
turbine -powered aircraft, and primarily serves fixed -wing, piston -powered
aircraft. Incidental use of the airport by turbine -powered, fixed -wing aircraft
would not affect this designation. However, such aircraft should not be based
at the airport.
16. Public agency. A State or political subdivision of a State, a tax -supported
organization, or an Indian tribe or pueblo (49 U.S.C. § 47102(19)).
17. Public airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes that
is under the control of a public agency; and of which the area used or intended
to be used for landing, taking off, or surface maneuvering of aircraft is publicly
owned (49 U.S.C. § 47102(20)).
18. Public -use airport. An airport used or intended to be used for public purposes,
and of which the area used or intended to be used for landing, taking off, or
surface maneuvering of aircraft may be under the control of a public agency or
privately owned and used for public purposes (49 U.S.C. § 47102(21)).
19. Putrescible waste. Solid waste that contains organic matter capable of being
decomposed by micro-organisms and of such a character and proportion as to
be capable of attracting or providing food for birds (40 CFR §257.3-8).
20. Putrescible-waste disposal operation. Landfills, garbage dumps, underwater
waste discharges, or similar facilities where activities include processing,
burying, storing, or otherwise disposing of putrescible material, trash, and
refuse.
21. Retention ponds. Storm water management ponds that hold water for several
months.
22. Runway protection zone (RPZ). An area off the runway end to enhance the
protection of people and property on the ground (see AC 150/5300-13). The
dimensions of this zone vary with the airport design, aircraft, type of operation,
and visibility minimum.
23. Scheduled air carrier operation. Any common carriage passenger -carrying
operation for compensation or hire conducted by an air carrier or commercial
20
8/28/2007 AC 15015200-338
operator for which the air carrier, commercial operator, or their representative
• offers in advance the departure location, departure time, and arrival location. It
does not include any operation that is conducted as a supplemental operation
under 14 CFR Part 119 or as a public charter operation under 14 CFR Part 380
(14 CFR § 119.3).
24. Sewage sludge. Any solid, semi-solid, or liquid residue generated during the
treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Sewage sludge includes,
but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or solids removed in primary,
secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment process; and a material derived
from sewage sludge. Sewage does not include ash generated during the firing
of sewage sludge in a sewage sludge incinerator or grit and screenings
generated during preliminary treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment
works. (40 CFR 257.2)
25. Sludge. Any solid, semi-solid, or liquid waste generated form a municipal,
commercial or industrial wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment
plant, or air pollution control facility or any other such waste having similar
characteristics and effect. (40 CFR 257.2)
26. Solid waste. Any garbage, refuse, sludge, from a waste treatment plant, water
supply treatment plant or air pollution control facility and other discarded
material, including, solid liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material
resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and
from community activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in
domestic sewage, or solid or dissolved material in irrigation return flows or
industrial discharges which are point sources subject to permits under section
402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (86 Stat. 880), or
source, special nuclear, or by product material as defined by the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, (68 Stat. 923). (40 CFR 257.2)
27. Turbine -powered aircraft. Aircraft powered by turbine engines including
turbojets and turboprops but excluding turbo -shaft rotary -wing aircraft.
28. Turbine -use airport. Any airport that sells Jet -A fuel for fixed wing turbine -
powered aircraft.
29. Wastewater treatment facility. Any devices and/or systems used to store,
treat, recycle, or reclaim municipal sewage or liquid industrial wastes, including
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW), as defined by Section 212 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500) as amended by the Clean
Water Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-576) and the Water Quality Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-4).
This definition includes any pretreatment involving the reduction of the amount
of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of
pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise
introducing such pollutants into a POTW. (See 40 CFR Section 403.3 (q), (r), &
(s)).
21
8/28/2007 AC 15015200-33B
30. Wildlife. Any wild animal, including without limitation any wild mammal, bird,
reptile, fish, amphibian, mollusk, crustacean, arthropod, coelenterate, or other
invertebrate, including any part, product, egg, or offspring thereof
(50 CFR 10.12, Taking, Possession, Transportation, Sale, Purchase, Barter,
Exportation, and Importation of Wildlife and Plants). As used in this AC, wildlife
includes feral animals and domestic animals out of the control of their owners
(14 CFR Part 139, Certification of Airports).
31. Wildlife attractants. Any human -made structure, land -use practice, or human -
made or natural geographic feature that can attract or sustain hazardous
wildlife within the landing or departure airspace or the airport's AOA. These
attractants can include architectural features, landscaping, waste disposal sites,
wastewater treatment facilities, agricultural or aquaculture activities, surface
mining, or wetlands.
32. Wildlife hazard. A potential for a damaging aircraft collision with wildlife on or
near an airport.
33. Wildlife strike. A wildlife strike is deemed to have occurred when:
a. A pilot reports striking 1 or more birds or other wildlife;
b. Aircraft maintenance personnel identify aircraft damage as having been
caused by a wildlife strike;
c. Personnel on the ground report seeing an aircraft strike 1 or more birds or
other wildlife;
d. Bird or other wildlife remains, whether in whole or in part, are found within
200 feet of a runway centerline, unless another reason for the animal's
death is identified;
e. The animal's presence on the airport had a significant negative effect on a
flight (i.e., aborted takeoff, aborted landing, high-speed emergency stop,
aircraft left pavement area to avoid collision with animal) (Transport
Canada, Airports Group, Wildlife Control Procedures Manual, Technical
Publication 11500E, 1994).
2. RESERVED.
22
WQ426 Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land Application j University of Misso... Page 1 of 5
Attachment 3- MO State Operating
Permit — MO 0094846
University of Missouri Extension
WQ426, Revised August 1994
Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land
Application
Ken Arnold
Chief of Land Application, Missouri Department of Natural Resources
John Dunn
Environmental Engineer, Environmental Protection Agency Region VII
Jerry D. Carpenter
Department of Agricultural Engineering
Biosolids is domestic wastewater sludge that meets standards for use as a fertilizer or soil conditioner.
These standards include monitoring requirements, metal limitations, pathogen reduction, vector
requirements and best management practices.
Applying biosolids to land uses the available nitrogen, phosphorus and potash as fertilizer for growing
crops. It is an environmentally sound practice sanctioned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Reusing biosolids on crops, pastures and
timberland reduces water pollution. It eliminates the environmental risks and costs associated with sludge
disposal options, benefiting all Missourians.
Background
EPA regulations, under Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 503 (40 CFR 503), establish the
minimum national standards for the use and disposal of domestic sludge. These standards include
limitations for the land application of biosolids.
DNR incorporated the EPA standards into the state requirements under the Missouri Clean Water Law and
regulations. The state rules include additional requirements that are not covered in the EPA standards.
Complying with state regulations automatically meets the EPA sludge standards.
Pollutant standards for land application
Testing for metal, pathogens and other pollutants is required to determine the representative quality of the
biosolids. Treat biosolids to reduce pathogens and vectors before application. The concentration of metal
and other pollutants in the biosolids determines the acceptability for land application and the appropriate
loading rates to protect crops, soils and the environment.
Best management practices
Biosolids that meet the standards for metal, pathogens, vectors and other pollutants are safe to apply when
following the best management practices.
http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=WQ426 10/6/2016
WQ426 Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land Application I University of Misso... Page 2 of 5
Best management practices, or "good farming practices," include agronomic Toad rates, buffer zones,
depth to groundwater, wetlands protection, harvest and grazing deferments, threatened and endangered
species protection, field slope limitations, restrictions for frozen or saturated soils, requirements for
public -use sites, soil conservation practices and other site restrictions.
The following list of practices is based on the regulations and standard permit conditions:
1. No discharge
Biosolids must not discharge from the application site, except during catastrophic or chronic precipitation
exceeding the 1 -in -10 year rainfall level.
2. Public contact sites and public -use or distribution of biosolids
• Class A biosolids applied to public -use sites, distributed for general public use or used on vegetable
crops, root crops or home gardens must comply with 40 CFR 503 Subpart B.
• A biosolids management plan or engineering report for Class A biosolids used on public sites must
be approved by the DNR before use or distribution.
• Do not apply Class B biosolids to public contact areas, residential lawns or turf farms unless the
biosolids are incorporated. Restrict public access for 12 months. You must gain approval from the
permitting authority.
3. Crop restrictions
Do not apply Class B biosolids to root crops, home gardens or vegetable crops whose edible parts will
come in contact with applied biosolids, unless the crops are not used for direct human consumption.
4. Harvest and grazing restrictions
Do not apply biosolids to land within 30 days of harvest or grazing by cattle. Applicators are also subject
to requirements of the Missouri Department of Agriculture State Milk Board concerning grazing
restrictions of lactating dairy cattle.
5. Threatened or endangered species
Applying biosolids must not adversely affect a threatened or endangered species or its designated critical
habitat. This is in accordance with section 4 of the Endangered Species Act.
6. Nitrogen limitations
Do not apply more than the agronomic rate of nitrogen needed.
• The applicator must document the Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) loadings, available nitrogen in
the soil and crop removals, unless the following conditions are met:
• Nitrogen content of the biosolids does not exceed 50,000 milligrams per kilogram of total
nitrogen on a dry weight basis; and
U Biosolids application rate is less than two dry tons per acre per year.
• Report nitrogen compounds as nitrogen in the PAN calculations. Calculate PAN as follows:
http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=WQ426 10/6/2016
WQ426 Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land Application 1 University of Misso... Page 3 of 5
(Nitrate + nitrite nitrogen) + (organic nitrogen x 0.2) + (ammonia nitrogen x volatilization factor)
The volatilization factors are 0.7 for surface application and 1 for subsurface injection.
• You may use alternate PAN calculations if documented by site-specific data and prior approval is
obtained from the DNR.
• If you use the University soil test laboratory, the soil test report will provide the net nitrogen to
apply for a specific crop and yield goal. If you use a private soil test laboratory, the available
nitrogen in the soil must be determined and subtracted from the nitrogen application requirements.
7. Buffer zones
Do not apply biosolids within:
• 300 feet of a water supply well, sinkhole, lake, pond, water supply reservoir or water supply intake
in a stream;
• 300 feet of a losing stream, no -discharge stream, stream stretches designated for whole body contact
recreation, wild and scenic rivers, Ozark National Scenic Riverways or outstanding state resource
waters as listed in the Water Quality Standards, 10 CSR 20-7.031;
• 150 feet of dwellings;
• 100 feet of wetlands or permanent flowing streams;
• 50 feet of a property line or other waters of the state, including intermittent flowing streams.
8. Slope limitations for application sites
• On slopes of 0 to 6 percent, there is no rate limitation
• On 7 to 12 percent slopes, you may apply biosolids when soil conservation practices are used to
meet minimum erosion (T) levels in accordance with U.S. Soil Conservation service
recommendations.
• For slopes of 12 percent or more, apply biosolids only when the site is maintained in grass
vegetation with at least 80 percent ground cover. Do not apply more than two dry tons per acre per
year.
9. Storm water runoff
• Do not place biosolids in a location where it is reasonably certain that pollutants will be transported
into waters of the state during stormwater runoff.
• Subsurface inject the biosolids, incorporate after application, use soil conservation practices, adhere
to slope restrictions, create buffer areas and follow other approved methods, as necessary.
• Soil conservation practices for application must be approved by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service
or MU Extension.
10. Frozen, snow-covered or saturated soil conditions
Do not apply biosolids when the ground is frozen, snow covered or when the soil is saturated, unless site
restrictions or other controls are provided to prevent pollutants from being discharged during snowmelt or
storm water runoff. If land application is necessary during inclement weather, use sites which meet the
following:
• A maximum field slope of 6 percent and a minimum 300 feet grass buffer between the application
site and waters of the state.
http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=WQ426 10/6/2016
WQ426 Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land Application j University of Misso... Page 4 of 5
• A maximum field slope of 2 percent and 100 feet grass buffer between the application site and
waters of the state.
• Other best management practices approved by the DNR.
11. Biosolids storage
• Provide adequate sludge and biosolids storage as needed to match the application windows for crop
planting, harvesting and inclement weather conditions. Operate storage basins so there is no
discharge to waters of the state.
• Recommended biosolids storage for grassland sites ranges from 60 to 120 days as follows: 60 days
south of Highway 60; 75 days between Highway 60 and Highway 50; 90 days between Highway 50
and Highway 36; and 120 days north of Highway 36.
• Storage should be increased for tilled cropland application sites depending on the crop rotations and
ratio of tilled land to grassland. Recommended storage is 180 to 365 days if all sites are tilled crop
land.
• Any storage area located off-site of the sludge or biosolids generating facility must have a separate
individual permit for the storage site, except for temporary stockpiles.
• Use temporary stockpiles for solid or semi-solid materials (no free liquids) only. Limit the stockpile
to two weeks per year at any one application field. Locate stockpiles at least 300 feet from drainage
ways or they must have runoff collection berms at least 6 inches high around the pile.
12. Application rates
Evenly spread the biosolids over the entire application site. Do not dump the material in batches or spread
a pile using a blade, disc or similar equipment.
13. Application equipment
Properly operate and maintain application equipment. Visually check the equipment each day during
operation. Apply biosolids during daylight hours only, unless approval is obtained from the permitting
authority.
14. Soil pH limitations
Do not apply biosolids to sites with a soil pH less than 6.0 or greater than 7.5 (based on the salt solution
test, which is preferred) or less than 6.5 or greater than 8.0 (based on the water solution test).
Application of biosolids to higher pH soils may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Submit a site-
specific permit application and supporting document, addressing crop and groundwater protection, to
DNR. Tracking of aluminum loading rates will be required. See Table 4 in MU publication WQ425,
Biosolids Standards for Metals and Other Trace Substances.
15. Soil phosphorus limitations
Do not apply biosolids to soils that contain more than 800 pounds of available phosphorus, based on the
Bray P-1 test, unless approval is obtained from the permitting authority DNR.
16. Soil depth
http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=WQ426 10/6/2016
WQ426 Best Management Practices for Biosolids Land Application 1 University of Misso... Page 5 of 5
Do not apply biosolids to sites that have Tess than 5 feet of soil above bedrock or a groundwater aquifer,
unless authorized in a site-specific permit for the application site.
17. Record keeping
Sludge applicators must keep detailed records for at least five years on each location and amounts of
biosolids applied.
Landowners are not required to keep records. However, it is highly recommended that biosolids
application records be incorporated into your total nutrient management plan.
Related MU Extension publications
• WQ425, Biosolids Standards for Metals and Other Trace Substances
http://extension.missouri.edu/p/WQ425
Order publications online at http://extension.missouri.edu/explore/shop/ or call toll-free 800-292-0969.
UNIVERSITY O F MISSOURI ■ Issued in furtherance of the Cooperative Extension Work Acts of May 8 and
Ei
Exter1sion � 9 oith �8 Columbia,slo m Agriculture.
http ://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=WQ426 10/6/2016
STATE OF MISSOURI
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MISSOURI CLEAN WATER COMMISSION
MISSOURI STATE OPERATING PERMIT
In compliance with the Missouri Clean Water Lai+. (Chapter 644 R.S. Mo. as amended. hereinafter. the Lauf. and the Federal \\ aler
Pollution Control .Act (Public Law 92-500, 92" Congress) as amended.
Permit "o. MO -0094846
Owner:
Address:
Continuing Authority:
Address:
Facility Name:
Facility Address:
legal Description:
'TM Coordinates:
Receiving Stream:
First Classified Stream and ID:
(;SGS Basin & Sub -watershed No.:
City of Jefferson
320 East McCarty, Jefferson City, MO 65101
Same as above
Same as above
Jefferson City Regional Water Reclamation Facility (RWRF)
401 Mokane Road, Jefferson City, MO 6510I
See Page 2
See Page 2
See Page 2
See Page 2
See Page 2
is authorized to discharge from the facility described herein. in accordance with the effluent limitations and monitoring requirements
as set forth herein:
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
See Page 2
This permit authorizes only wastewater and stormwater discharges under the Missouri Clean Water L.aa and the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System: it does not apply to other regulated areas. This permit mai be appealed in accordance with Section
621.250 RSMo. Section 640.013 RSMo and Section 644.05I.6 of the Law.
September 1, 2017
I-fl'eeuoe Date
March 31, 2020
X
F.dMard I) Galbraith. Director. Dn icinn ni't:n%inmmcntal Qualm
PI! al pale Chris Wiehcre. 1)trector. V, pier Pr tun Program
Page 2ofi1
Permit No. M00094846
Outfall #001— POTW — SIC #4952
The use or operation of this facility shall be by or under the supervision of a Certified "A" Operator.
Three (3) fine mechanical bar screens / grit removal / four (4) sequencing batch reactor basins / UV disinfection / high water effluent
pump station / two (2) solids thickening basins / two (2) solids storage basins / solids belt filter presses / land application of biosolids.
Design population equivalent is 1) 0,000.
Design flow is 11 MGD.
Actual flow is 6.8 MGD.
Design biosolids production is 5,200 dry tons/year.
Legal Description:
UTM Coordinates:
Receiving Stream:
First Classified Stream and ID:
USGS Basin & Sub -watershed No.:
Landgrant 2638, Callaway County
X= 572696, Y= 4270886
Missouri River (P)
Missouri River (P) (701)
(10300102-1305)
Permitted Feature SMI — Instream Monitoring
Instream monitoring location — Upstream — See Special Condition #I8
Page 3 of I 1
Permit No. M00094846
OUTFALL
#001
TABLE A-1
FINAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The permittee is
limitations shall
limited and monitored
authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial
become effective on September 1, 2017 and remain
number(s) as specified in the application for this permit. The final effluent
in effect until expiration of the permit. Such discharges shall be controlled.
by the permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT PARAMETERS)
UNITS
FINAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
DAILY
MAXIMUM
WEEKLY
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
MEASUREMENT
FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
TYPE
Flow (Note 1, Page 4)
Biochemical Oxygen Demands
Total Suspended Solids
E. coli (Note 2, Page 4)
Ammonia as N
Oil & Grease
MGD
mg/L
mg/L
#/100mL
mg/L
mg/L
*
*
15
45
45
1,030
*
30
30
206
*
10
once/day
once/week
once/week
once/week
once/month
once/month
24 hr. total
composite**
composite**
grab
grab
grab
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
NO DISCHARGE OF FLOATING SOLIDS OR
MONTHLY: THE FIRST
REPORT
TRACE
S DUE OCTOBER 28. 2017. THERE
SHALL BE
VISIBLE FOAM IN OTHER THAN
AMOUNTS.
Total Phosphorus
Total Nitrogen
mg/I.
mg/L
*
*
*
*
once/quarter****
once/quarter****
grab
grab
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
QUARTERLY; THE FIRST
REPORT
IS DUE JANUARY 28, 2018.
EFFLUENT PARAMETER(S)
UNITS
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
MEASUREMENT
FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
TYPE
pH — Units ***
SU
6.0
9.0
once/month
grab
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
MONTHLY; THE FIRST
REPORT IS
DUE OCTOBER 28, 2017.
EFFLUENT PARAMETER(S)
UNITS
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
MINIMUM
MEASUREMENT
FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
TYPE
Biochemical Oxygen Demands— Percent Removal (Note 3, Page 4)
Total Suspended Solids — Percent Removal (Note 3, Page 4)
%
%
85
85
once/month
once/month
calculated
calculated
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
MONTHLY; THE FIRST
REPORT IS
DUE OCTOBER 28, 2017.
*
**
***
****
Monitoring requirement only.
A 24-hour composite sample is composed of 48 aliquots (subsamples) collected at 30 minute intervals by an automatic
sampling device.
pH is measured in pH units and is not to be averaged.
See table on Page 4 for quarterly sampling requirements.
Page 4 of 11
Permit No. M00094846
OUTFALL
#00IWHOLE
TABLE A-2
EFFLUENT TOXICITY
FINAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Months
The permittee is
limitations shall
limited and monitored
authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial
become effective on September 1, 2017 and remain
number(s) as specified in the application for this permit. The final effluent
in effect until expiration of the permit. Such discharges shall be controlled.
by the permittee as specified below.
EFFLUENT PARAMETER(S)
UNITS
FINAL EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
DAILY
MAXIMUM
WEEKLY
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
MEASUREMENT
FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
TYPE
Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity (Note 4)
TUa
*
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter
January 28th
once/year
composite**
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
ANNUALLY: THE
FIRST REPORT
IS DUE DECEMBER 28. 2017.
Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (Note 5)
TUB
*
once/permit cycle
composite**
WET TEST REPORTS
SHALL BE SUBMITTED
ONCE PER PERMIT CYCLE; THE FIRST
REPORT
1S DUE DECEMBER 28, 2018.
* Monitoring requirement only.
** A 24-hour composite sample is composed of 48 aliquots (subsamples) collected at 30 minute intervals by an automatic
sampling device.
Quarterly Minimum Sampling Requirements
Quarter
Months
Total Phosphorus and Total Nitrogen
Report is Due
First
January. February, March
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter
April 28`"
Second
April, May. June
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter
July 28th
Third
July, August, September
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter
October 28th
Fourth
October, November, December
Sample at least once during any month of the quarter
January 28th
Note 1 — Either influent or effluent flow may be reported.
Note 2 — Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements for E. coli are applicable only during the recreational season from April 1
through October 31. The Monthly Average Limit for E. coli is expressed as a geometric mean. The Weekly Average for E. coli will
be expressed as a geometric mean if more than one (1) sample is collected during a calendar week (Sunday through Saturday).
Note 3 — Influent sampling is not required when the facility does not discharge effluent during the reporting period. Samples are to be
collected following preliminary treatment. Percent removal is calculated by the following formula: [(Influent —Effluent) / lnfluent] x
100%= Percent Removal. The Monthly Average Minimum Percent removal is to be reported as the average of all daily calculated
removal efficiencies. lnfluent samples are to be collected as a 24-hour composite sample, composed of 48 aliquots (subsamples)
collected at 30 minute intervals by an automatic sampling device.
Note 4 — The Acute WET test shall be conducted once per year during the 1 and 3rd year of the permit cycle. See Special Condition
#19 for additional requirements.
Note 5 —The Chronic WET test shall be conducted during the 2nd year of the permit cycle. See Special Condition #20 for additional
requirements.
Page 5of11
Permit No. M00094846
PERMITTED
FEATURE SM1
TABLE B
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The monitoring requirements shall become effective
monitored by the permittee as specified below:
on September 1, 2017 and
remain in effect until expiration of the permit. The stream shall be
PARAMETER(S)
UNITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
DAILY
MAXIMUM
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
MEASUREMENT
FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
TYPE
Total Phosphorus
Total Nitrogen
mg/L
mg/L
*
*
*
*
once/quarter****
once/quarter****
grab
grab
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED
QUARTERLY: THE
FIRST REPORT
IS DUE JANUARY 28, 2018.
* Monitoring requirement only.
**** See table on Page 4 for quarterly sampling requirements.
C. STANDARD CONDITIONS
In addition to specified conditions stated herein, this permit is subject to the attached Parts I, 11. & 111 standard conditions
dated August 1, 2014, May 1, 2013. and March 1, 2015, and hereby incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
Page 6 of 11
Permit No. M00094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) Submission System.
(a) Discharge Monitoring Reporting Requirements. The permittee must electronically submit compliance monitoring data via
the eDMR system. In regards to Standard Conditions Part 1, Section B, #7, the eDMR system is currently the only
Department approved reporting method for this permit.
(b) Programmatic Reporting Requirements. The following reports (if required by this permit) must be electronically submitted
as an attachment to the eDMR system until such a time when the current or a new system is available to allow direct input of
the data:
(1) Collection System Maintenance Annual Reports;
(2) Sludge/Biosolids Annual Reports;
i. In addition to the annual SludgeBiosolids report submitted to the Department, the permittee must submit
Sludge/Biosolids Annual Reports electronically using EPA's NPDES Electronic Reporting Tool ("NeT')
(https:,'/cdx,epa.r ov-).
(3) Pretreatment Program Reports; and
(4) Any additional report required by the permit excluding bypass reporting.
After such a system has been made available by the Department, required data shall be directly input into the system by the
next report due date.
(c) Other actions. The following shall be submitted electronically after such a system has been made available by the
Department:
( I ) General Permit Applications/Notices of Intent to discharge (NO1s);
(2) Notices of Termination (NOTs);
(3) No Exposure Certifications (NOES); and
(4) Bypass reporting, See Special Condition #10 for 24 -hr. bypass reporting requirements.
(d) Electronic Submissions. To access the eDMR system, use the following link in your web
browser: https:.'/edmr.dnr.mo.gov'edmr.%E2'Shared/Paees/Main/Login.aspx.
(e) Waivers from Electronic Reporting. The permittee must electronically submit compliance monitoring data and reports unless
a waiver is granted by the Department in compliance with 40 CFR Part 127. The permittee may obtain an electronic reporting
waiver by first submitting an eDMR Waiver Request Form: http:/•dnr.mo.gov. forms•'780-2692-f.pdf. The Department will
either approve or deny this electronic reporting waiver request within 120 calendar days. Only permittees with an approved
waiver request may submit monitoring data and reports on paper to the Department for the period that the approved electronic
reporting waiver is effective.
2. The full implementation of this operating permit, which includes implementation of any applicable schedules of compliance, shall
constitute compliance with all applicable federal and state statutes and regulations in accordance with §644.051.16, RSMo, and
the CWA section 402(k); however, this permit may be reopened and modified, or alternatively revoked and reissued:
(a) To comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation issued or approved under Sections 301(b)(2)(C) and (D),
304(b)(2), and 307(a) (2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent standard or limitation so issued or approved:
(1) contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
(2) controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
(b) To incorporate an approved pretreatment program pursuant to 40 CFR 403.8(a).
3. All outfalls must be clearly marked in the field. This does not include instream monitoring locations.
4. Report as no -discharge when a discharge does not occur during the report period. For instream samples, report as "no flow" if no
stream flow occurs during the report period.
5. Changes in existing pollutants or the addition of new pollutants to the treatment facility:
The permittee must provide adequate notice to the Director of the following:
(a) Any new introduction of pollutants into the POTW from an indirect discharger which would be subject to section 301 or 306
of CWA if it were directly discharging those pollutants; and
(b) Any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into that POTW by a source introducing
pollutants into the POTW at the time of issuance of the permit.
(c) For purposes of this paragraph, adequate notice shall include information on;
(1) the quality and quantity of effluent introduced into the POTW, and
(2) any anticipated impact of the change on the quantity or quality of effluent to be discharged from the POTW.
Page 7 of 11
Permit No. M00094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (continued)
6. Reporting of Non -Detects:
(a) An analysis conducted by the permittee or their contracted laboratory shall be conducted in such a way that the precision and
accuracy of the analyzed result can be enumerated.
(b) The permittee shall not report a sample result as "Non -Detect" without also reporting the detection limit of the
test. Reporting as "Non Detect" without also including the detection limit will be considered failure to report, which is a
violation of this permit.
(c) The permittee shall provide the "Non -Detect" sample result using the less than sign and the minimum detection limit
(e.g. <10).
(d) Where the permit contains a Minimum Level (ML) and the permittee is granted authority in the permit to report zero in lieu
of the < ML for a specified parameter (conventional, priority pollutants, metals, etc.), then zero (0) is to be reported for that
parameter.
(e) See Standard Conditions Part 1, Section A, #4 regarding proper detection limits used for sample analysis.
(f) When calculating monthly averages, one-half of the method detection limit (MDL) should be used instead ofa zero. Where
all data are below the MDL, the "<MDL" shall be reported as indicated in item (c).
7. It is a violation of the Missouri Clean Water Law to fail to pay fees associated with this permit (644.055 RSMo).
8. The permittee shall comply with any applicable requirements listed in 10 CSR 20-9. The permittee has been granted approval for
an alternative operational monitoring schedule in accordance with 10 CSR 20-9.010 (3). Daily operational monitoring does not
need to occur on the weekends or on City holidays. During periods where the sequencing batch reactors are not aerating due to
high flows, the mixed liquor does not need to be sampled. If further modification of the monitoring frequencies listed in 10 CSR
20-9 is needed, the permittee shall submit a written request to the Department for review and, if deemed necessary, approval.
9. The permittee shall develop and implement a program for maintenance and repair of the collection system. The recommended
guidance is the US EPA's Guide For Evaluating Capacity, Management, Operation, And Maintenance (CMOM) Programs At
Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems (Document number EPA 305-B-05-002) or the Departments' CMOM Model located
at http:bdnr.mo.govienv/wpoPermits%docsicmom-template.doc. For additional information regarding the Departments' CMOM
Model, see the CMOM Plan Model Guidance document at http:i:dnr.mo.eov.pubs'pub2574.htm.
The permittee shall also submit a report via the Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) Submission System annually.
by January 28`h, for the previous calendar year. The report shall contain the following information:
(a) A summary of the efforts to locate and eliminate sources of excessive infiltration and inflow into the collection system
serving the facility for the previous year.
(b) A summary of the general maintenance and repairs to the collection system serving the facility for the previous year.
(c) A summary of any planned maintenance and repairs to the collection system serving the facility for the upcoming calendar
year. This list shall include locations (GPS, 911 address, manhole number, etc.) and actions to be taken.
10. Bypasses are not authorized at this facility unless they meet the criteria in 40 CFR 122.41(m). If a bypass occurs, the permittee
shall report in accordance to 40 CFR 122.41(m)(3), and with Standard Condition Part I, Section B, subsection 2.b. Bypasses are
to be reported to the Northeast Regional Office during normal business hours or by using the online Sanitary Sewer
Overflow/Facility Bypass Application located at: htm:•'dnr.mo.gowmodnrcag or the Environmental Emergency Response hotline
at 573-634-2436 outside of normal business hours. Once an electronic reporting system compliant with 40 CFR Part 127, the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Electronic Reporting Rule, is available all bypasses must be reported
electronically via the new system. Blending, which is the practice of combining a partially -treated wastewater process stream
with a fully -treated wastewater process stream prior to discharge, is not considered a form of bypass. If the permittee wishes to
utilize blending, the permittee shall file an application to modify this permit to facilitate the inclusion of appropriate monitoring
conditions.
11. The facility must be sufficiently secured to restrict entry by children, livestock and unauthorized persons as well as to protect the
facility from vandalism.
12. At least one gate must be provided to access the wastewater treatment facility and provide for maintenance and mowing. The
gate shall remain closed except when temporarily opened by the permittee to access the facility in order to perform operational
monitoring, sampling, maintenance, mowing, or for inspections by the Department. The gate shall be closed and locked when
the facility is not staffed.
13. At least one (I) warning sign shall be placed on each side of the facility enclosure in such positions as to be clearly visible from
all directions of approach. There shall also be one (1) sign placed for every five hundred feet (500') (150 m) of the perimeter
fence. A sign shall also be placed on each gate. Minimum wording shall be SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITY—KEEP OUT.
Signs shall be made of durable materials with characters at least two inches (2") high and shall be securely fastened to the fence,
equipment or other suitable locations.
Page 8 of 1 I
Permit No. M00094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (continued)
14. An Operation and Maintenance (0 & M) manual shall be maintained by the permittee and made available to the operator. The 0
& M manual shall include key operating procedures and a brief summary of the operation of the facility.
15. An all-weather access road shall be provided to the treatment facility.
16. The discharge from the wastewater treatment facility shall be conveyed to the receiving stream via a closed pipe or a paved or rip -
rapped open channel. Sheet or meandering drainage is not acceptable. The outfall sewer shall be protected against the effects of
floodwater, ice or other hazards as to reasonably insure its structural stability and freedom from stoppage. The outfall shall be
maintained so that a sample of the effluent can be obtained at a point after the final treatment process and before the discharge
mixes with the receiving waters.
17. Land application of biosolids shall be conducted in accordance with Standard Conditions III and a Department approved biosolids
management plan. Land application of biosolids during frozen, snow covered, or saturated soil conditions in accordance with the
additional requirements specified in WQ426 has been approved in a letter to the City dated July 5, 2017.
18. Receiving Water Monitoring Conditions.
(a) In -stream receiving water samples should be taken at the location described in this condition. In the event that a safe,
accessible location is not present at the location(s) listed, a suitable location can be negotiated with the Department. Samples
should be taken at least four feet from the bank or from the middle of the stream (whichever is less) and 6 -inches below the
surface if possible. The upstream receiving water sample should be collected at a point upstream from any influence of the
effluent, where the water is visibly flowing down stream.
(b) When conducting in -stream monitoring, the permittee shall record observations that include: the time of day, weather
conditions, unusual stream characteristics (e.g., septic conditions, algae growth, etc.), the stream segment (e.g., riffle, pool or
run) from where the sample was collected. These observations shall be submitted with the sample results.
(c) Samples shall not be collected from areas with especially turbulent flow, still water or from the stream bank, unless these
conditions are representative of the stream reach or no other areas are available for sample collection. Sampling should not
be made when significant precipitation has occurred recently. The sampling event should be terminated and rescheduled if
any of the following conditions occur:
• If turbidity in the stream increases notably; or
• If rainfall over the past two weeks exceeds 2.5 inches or exceeds 1 inch in the last 24 hours
(d) Always use the correct sampling technique and handling procedure specified for the parameter of interest. Please refer to the
latest edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater for further discussion of proper sampling
techniques. All analyses must be conducted in accordance with the most recent EPA approved method. Please contact the
Department if you need additional instructions or assistance.
19. Acute Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) tests shall be conducted as follows:
(a) Freshwater Species and Test Methods: Species and short-term test methods for estimating the acute toxicity of NPDES
effluents are found in the most recent edition of Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters
to Freshwater and Marine Organisms (EPA/821/R-021012; Table IA, 40 CFR Part 136). The permittee shall concurrently
conduct 48-hour, static, non -renewal toxicity tests with the following species:
o The fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas (Acute Toxicity EPA Test Method 2000.0).
o The daphnid, Ceriodaphnia dubia (Acute Toxicity EPA Test Method 2002.0).
(b) Chemical and physical analysis of the upstream control sample and effluent sample shall occur immediately upon being
received by the laboratory, prior to any manipulation of the effluent sample beyond preservation methods consistent with
federal guidelines for WET testing that are required to stabilize the sample during shipping. Where upstream receiving water
is not available or known to be toxic, other approved control water may be used.
(c) Test conditions must meet all test acceptability criteria required by the EPA Method used in the analysis.
(d) The Acute Allowable Effluent Concentration (AEC) for this facility is 9% with the dilution series being: 72%, 36%, 18%,
9%, and 4.5%.
(e) All chemical and physical analysis of the effluent sample performed in conjunction with the WET test shall be performed at
the 100% effluent concentration.
(f) The facility must submit a full laboratory report for all toxicity testing. The report must include a quantification of acute toxic
units (TU, = 100/LC50) reported according to the test methods manual chapter on report preparation and test review. The
Lethal Concentration 50 Percent (LC50) is the effluent concentration that would cause death in 50 percent of the test
organisms at a specific time.
Page 9of11
Permit No. 100094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (continued)
20. Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) tests shall be conducted as follows:
(a) Freshwater Species and Test Methods: Species and short-term test methods for estimating the chronic toxicity of NPDES
effluents are found in the most recent edition of Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and
Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms (EPA/821/R-02/013; Table 1,4, 40 CFR Part 136). The permittee shall
concurrently conduct 7 -day, static, renewal toxicity tests with the following species:
o The fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas (Survival and Growth Test Method 1000.0).
o The daphnid, Ceriodaphnia dubia (Survival and Reproduction Test Method 1002.0).
(b) Chemical and physical analysis of the upstream control sample and effluent sample shall occur immediately upon being
received by the laboratory, prior to any manipulation of the effluent sample beyond preservation methods consistent with
federal guidelines for WET testing that are required to stabilize the sample during shipping. Where upstream receiving water
is not available or known to be toxic, other approved control water may be used.
(c) Test conditions must meet all test acceptability criteria required by the EPA Method used in the analysis.
(d) The Chronic Allowable Effluent Concentration (AEC) for this facility is 0.4% with the dilution series being: 50%, 10%, 2%.
0.4%, and 0.08%.
(e) All chemical and physical analysis of the effluent sample performed in conjunction with the WET test shall be performed at
the 100% effluent concentration.
(f) The facility must submit a full laboratory report for all toxicity testing. The report must include a quantification of chronic
toxic units (TUC = 100/IC25) reported according to the Methods for Measuring the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and
Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms chapter on report preparation and test review. The 25 percent
Inhibition Effect Concentration (IC25) is the toxic or effluent concentration that would cause 25 percent reduction in mean
young per female or in growth for the test populations.
21. Pretreatment.
The permittee shall implement and enforce its approved pretreatment program in accordance with the requirements of 10 CSR 20-
6.100. The approved pretreatment program is hereby incorporated by reference.
(a) The permittee shall submit to the Department via the Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) Submission System
on or before March 31' of each year a report briefly describing its pretreatment activities during the previous calendar year.
At a minimum, the report shall include the following:
(1) An updated list of the Permittee's Industrial Users, including their names and addresses, or a list of deletions and
additions keyed to a previously submitted list. The Permittee shall provide a brief explanation of each deletion. This list
shall identify which Industrial Users are subject to categorical pretreatment Standards and specify which Standards are
applicable to each Industrial User. The list shall indicate which Industrial Users are subject to local standards that are
more stringent than the categorical Pretreatment Standards. The Permittee shall also list the Industrial Users that are
subject only to local Requirements;
(2) A summary of the status of Industrial User compliance over the reporting period;
(3) A summary of compliance and enforcement activities (including inspections) conducted by the Permittee during the
reporting period; and
(4) Any other relevant information requested by the Department.
(b) Pursuant to 40 CFR 122.44(j)(2)(ii), permittees are to submit to the Department a written technical evaluation of the need to
revise local limits under 40 CFR 403.5(c)(1). This evaluation has been submitted by the permittee and approved by the
Department July 8, 2016.
Page IO of I I
Permit No. M00094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (continued)
22. Sewer Extension Authority Supervised Program.
On June 12, 2017, the Department approved the Sewer Extension Authority Supervised Program for the City of Jefferson to
regulate and approve construction of sanitary sewers and pump stations, which are tributary to this wastewater treatment facility.
The City of Jefferson shall act as the continuing authority for the operation, maintenance, and modernization of the constructed
collection system. This approval may be modified or revoked by the Department if the wastewater collection, transportation, or
treatment facilities reach their design capacity, if the treatment facility falls into chronic noncompliance with the permit, or if the
permittee fails to follow the terms and conditions of the submitted and approved program.
This permit may be reopened and modified or alternatively revoked and reissued to incorporate new or modified conditions to the
Sewer Extension Authority Supervised Program, if information indicates changes are necessary to assure compliance with
Missouri's Clean Water Law and associated regulations. When any of the above mentioned conditions occur, the permittee will
be notified prior to any modifications of this permit condition. Plans and specifications for all projects which include a proposed
sanitary sewer overflow must be submitted to the Department to provide record information for location and size of the sanitary
sewer overflow.
•
An annual report on the Sewer Extension Authority Supervised Program must be submitted by January 28 of each year to the
Missouri Department of Natural Resources' Water Protection Program's Engineering Section. Please see Appendix — Sewer
Extension Authority Supervised Program Reauthorization Letter for applicable conditions.
The Department's Water Protection Program's Engineering Section will reevaluate the City's Sewer Extension Authority
Supervised Program for reauthorization when they file an application for permit renewal to determine if it is current, complete,
and meets the requirements of 10 CSR 20-8 Design Guides. Once the Sewer Extension Authority Supervised Program is
reauthorized or denied, this condition will be updated accordingly.
23. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
A SWPPP must be developed and implemented within 180 days of the effective date of the permit. Through implementation of
the SWPPP, the permittee shalt minimize the release of pollutants in stormwater from the facility to the waters of the state. The
SWPPP shall be developed in consultation with the concepts and methods described in the following document: Developing
Your Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. A Guide for Industrial Operators, (Document number EPA 833-B-09-002) published
by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in February 2009.
(a) The SWPPP must identify any stormwater outfall from the facility and Best Management Practices (BMPs) used to prevent
or reduce the discharge of contaminants in stormwater. The stormwater outfalls shall either be marked in the field or clearly
marked on a map and maintained with the SWPPP.
(b) The SWPPP must include a schedule and procedures for a once per month routine site inspection.
(1) The monthly routine inspection shall be documented in a brief written report, which shall include:
i. The person(s) conducting the inspection.
ii. The inspection date and time.
iii. Weather information for the day of the inspection.
iv. Precipitation information for the entire period since the last inspection.
v. Description of the discharges observed, including visual quality of the discharges (sheen, turbid, etc.).
vi. Condition of BMPs
vii. If BMPs were replaced or repaired.
viii. Observations and evaluations of BMP effectiveness.
(2) Any deficiency observed during the routine inspection must be corrected within seven (7) days and the actions taken to
correct the deficiencies shall be included with the written report.
(3) The routine inspection reports must be kept onsite with the SWPPP and maintained for a period of five (5) years.
(4) The routine inspection reports shall be made available to Department personnel upon request.
Page 11 of 11
Permit No. M00094846
D. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (continued)
(c) The SWPPP must include a schedule and procedures for a once per year comprehensive site inspection.
(I) The annual comprehensive inspection shall be documented in a written report, which shall include:
i. The person(s) conducting the inspection.
ii. The inspection date and time.
iii. Findings from the areas of your facility that were examined;
iv. All observations relating to the implementation of your control measures including:
1. Previously unidentified discharges from the site,
2. Previously unidentified pollutants in existing discharges,
3. Evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system;
4. Evidence of pollutants discharging to receiving waters at all facility outfall(s), and the condition of and around
the outfall, and
5. Additional control measures needed to address any conditions requiring corrective action identified during the
inspection.
v. Any required revisions to the SWPPP resulting from the inspection;
vi. Any incidence of noncompliance observed or a certification stating that the facility is in compliance.
(2) Any deficiency observed during the comprehensive inspection must be corrected within seven (7) days and the actions
taken to correct the deficiencies shall be included with the written report.
(3) The comprehensive inspection reports must be kept onsite with the SWPPP and maintained for a period of five (5) years.
(4) The comprehensive inspection reports shall be made available to Department personnel upon request.
(d) The SWPPP must be kept on-site and should not be sent to the Department unless specifically requested.
(e) The SWPPP must be reviewed and updated at a minimum once per permit cycle, as site conditions or control measures
change.
24. The permittee shall select, install, use, operate, and maintain the Best Management Practices prescribed in the SWPPP.
(a) Permittee shall adhere to the following minimum Best Management Practices (BMPs):
(1) Minimize the exposure of industrial material storage areas, loading and unloading areas, dumpsters and other disposal
areas, maintenance activities, and fueling operations to rain, snow, snowmelt, and runoff, by locating industrial materials
and activities inside or protecting them with storm resistant coverings, if warranted and practicable.
(2) Provide good housekeeping practices on the site to prevent potential pollution sources from coming into contact with
stormwater and provide collection facilities and arrange for proper disposal of waste products, including sludge.
(3) Implement a maintenance program to ensure that the structural control measures and industrial equipment is kept in good
operating condition and to prevent or minimize leaks and other releases of pollutants.
(4) Prevent or minimize the spillage or leaks of fluids, oil, grease, fuel, etc. from equipment and vehicle maintenance.
equipment and vehicle cleaning, or activities.
(5) Provide sediment and erosion control sufficient to prevent or control sediment loss off of the property. This could
include the use of straw bales, silt fences, or sediment basins, if needed.
(6) Provide stormwater runoff controls to divert, infiltrate, reuse, contain, or otherwise minimize pollutants in the
stormwater discharge.
(7) Enclose or cover storage piles of salt or piles containing salt, used for deicing or other commercial or industrial purposes.
(8) Provide training to all employees who; work in areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to stormwater,
are responsible for stormwater inspections, are members of the Pollution Prevention Team. Training must cover the
specific control measures and monitoring, inspection, planning, reporting and documentation requirements of this permit.
Training is recommended annually for any applicable staff and whenever a new employee is hired who meets the
description above.
(9) Eliminate and prevent unauthorized non-stormwater discharges at the facility.
(10) Minimize generation of dust and off-site tracking of raw, final, or waste materials by implementing appropriate control
measures.
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
ISSUED BY
THE MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MISSOURI CLEAN WATER COMMISSION
March 1, 2015
PART III — SLUDGE AND BIOSOLIDS FROM DOMESTIC AND INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER
TREATMENT FACILITIES
SECTION A — GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. This permit pertains to sludge requirements under the Missouri Clean Water Law and regulation for domestic
wastewater and industrial process wastewater. This permit also incorporates applicable federal sludge disposal
requirements under 40 CFR 503 for domestic wastewater. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has principal
authority for permitting and enforcement of the federal sludge regulations under 40 CFR 503 for domestic wastewater.
EPA has reviewed and accepted these standard sludge conditions. EPA may choose to issue a separate sludge
addendum to this permit or a separate federal sludge permit at their discretion to further address the federal
requirements.
2. These PART III Standard Conditions apply only to sludge and biosolids generated at domestic wastewater treatment
facilities, including public owned treatment works (POTW), privately owned facilities and sludge or biosolids
generated at industrial facilities.
3. Sludge and Biosolids Use and Disposal Practices:
a_ The permittee is authorized to operate the sludge and biosolids treatment, storage, use, and disposal facilities
listed in the facility description of this permit.
b. The permittee shall not exceed the design sludge volume listed in the facility description and shall not use
sludge disposal methods that are not listed in the facility description, without prior approval of the permitting
authority.
c. The permittee is authorized to operate the storage, treatment or generating sites listed in the Facility
Description section of this permit.
4. Sludge Received from other Facilities:
a. Permittees may accept domestic wastewater sludge from other facilities including septic tank pumpings from
residential sources as long as the design sludge volume is not exceeded and the treatment facility
performance is not impaired.
b. The permittee shall obtain a signed statement from the sludge generator or hauler that certifies the type and
source of the sludge
5. These permit requirements do not supersede nor remove liability for compliance with county and other local
ordinances.
6. These permit requirements do not supersede nor remove liability for compliance with other environmental regulations
such as odor emissions under the Missouri Air Pollution Control Law and regulations.
7. This permit may (after due process) be modified, or alternatively revoked and reissued, to comply with any applicable
sludge disposal standard or limitation issued or approved under Section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act or under
Chapter 644 RSMo.
8. In addition to STANDARD CONDITIONS, the Department may include sludge limitations in the special conditions
portion or other sections of a site specific permit.
9. Alternate Limits in the Site Specific Permit.
Where deemed appropriate, the Department may require an individual site specific permit in order to authorize
alternate limitations:
a. A site specific permit must be obtained for each operating location, including application sites.
b. To request a site specific permit, an individual permit application, permit fee, and supporting documents shall
be submitted for each operating location. This shall include a detailed sludge/biosolids management plan or
engineering report.
10. Exceptions to these Standard Conditions may be authorized on a case-by-case basis by the Department, as follows:
a. The Department will prepare a permit modification and follow permit notice provisions as applicable under
10 CSR 20-6.020, 40 CFR 124.10, and 40 CFR 501.15(a)(2)(ix)(E). This includes notification of the owner
of the property located adjacent to each land application site, where appropriate.
b. Exceptions cannot be granted where prohibited by the federal sludge regulations under 40 CFR 503.
1
SECTION B — DEFINITIONS
1. Best Management Practices include agronomic loading rates, soil conservation practices and other site restrictions.
2. Biosolids means organic fertilizer or soil amendment produced by the treatment of domestic wastewater sludge.
3. Biosolids land application facility is a facility where biosolids are spread onto the land at agronomic rates for
production of food or fiber. The facility includes any structures necessary to store the biosolids until soil, weather, and
crop conditions are favorable for land application.
4. Class A biosolids means a material that has met the Class A pathogen reduction requirements or equivalent treatment
by a Process to Further Reduce Pathogens (PFRP) in accordance with 40 CFR 503.
5. Class B biosolids means a material that has met the Class B pathogen reduction requirements or equivalent treatment
by a Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens (PFRP) in accordance with 40 CFR 503.
6. Domestic wastewater means wastewater originating from the sanitary conveniences of residences, commercial
buildings, factories and institutions; or co -mingled sanitary and industrial wastewater processed by a (POTW) or a
privately owned facility.
7. Industrial wastewater means any wastewater, also known as process water, not defined as domestic wastewater. Per 40
CFR Part 122, process water means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct contact
with or results from the production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, byproduct, or
waste product.
8. Mechanical treatment plants are wastewater treatment facilities that use mechanical devices to treat wastewater,
including septic tanks, sand filters, extended aeration, activated sludge, contact stabilization, trickling filters, rotating
biological discs, and other similar facilities. It does not include wastewater treatment lagoons and constructed wetlands
for wastewater treatment.
9. Operating location as defined in 10 CSR 20-2.010 is all contiguous lands owned, operated or controlled by one (1)
person or by two (2) or more persons jointly or as tenants in common.
10. Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) is the nitrogen that will be available to plants during the growing seasons after
biosolids application.
11. Public contact site is land with a high potential for contact by the public. This includes, but is not limited to, public
parks, ball fields, cemeteries, plant nurseries, turf farms, and golf courses.
12. Sludge is the solid, semisolid, or liquid residue removed during the treatment of wastewater. Sludge includes septage
removed from septic tanks or equivalent facilities. Sludge does not include carbon coal byproducts (CCBs)
13. Sludge lagoon is part of a mechanical wastewater treatment facility. A sludge lagoon is an earthen basin that receives
sludge that has been removed from a wastewater treatment facility. It does not include a wastewater treatment lagoon
or sludge treatment units that are not a part of a mechanical wastewater treatment facility.
14. Septage is the material pumped from residential septic tanks and similar treatment works (with a design population of
less than 150 people). The standard for biosolids from septage is different from other sludges.
SECTION C — MECHANICAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
I. Sludge shall be routinely removed from wastewater treatment facilities and handled according to the permit facility
description and sludge conditions of this permit.
2. The permittee shall operate the facility so that there is no sludge discharged to waters of the state.
3. Mechanical treatment plants shall have separate sludge storage compartments in accordance with 10 CSR 20, Chapter
8. Failure to remove sludge from these storage compartments on the required design schedule is a violation of this
permit.
SECTION D—SLUDGE DISPOSED AT OTHER TREATMENT FACILITY OR CONTRACT' HAULER
1. This section applies to permittees that haul sludge to another treatment facility for disposal or use contract haulers to
remove and dispose of sludge.
2. Permittees that use contract haulers are responsible for compliance with all the terms of this permit including final
disposal, unless the hauler has a separate permit for sludge or biosolids disposal issued by the Department; or the hauler
transports the sludge to another permitted treatment facility.
3. Haulers who land apply septage must obtain a state permit.
4. Testing of sludge, other than total solids content, is not required if sludge is hauled to a municipal wastewater treatment
facility or other permitted wastewater treatment facility, unless it is required by the accepting facility.
2
SECTION E— INCINERATION OF SLUDGE
1. Sludge incineration facilities shall comply with the requirements of 40 CFR 503 Subpart E; air pollution control
regulations under 10 CSR 10; and solid waste management regulations under 10 CSR 80.
2. Permittee may be authorized under the facility description of this permit to store incineration ash in lagoons or ash
ponds. This permit does not authorize the disposal of incineration ash. Incineration ash shall be disposed in accordance
with 10 CSR 80; or if the ash is determined to be hazardous with 10 CSR 25.
3. In addition to normal sludge monitoring, incineration facilities shall report the following as part of the annual report.
quantity of sludge incinerated, quantity of ash generated, quantity of ash stored, and ash used or disposal method.
quantity, and location. Permittee shall also provide the name of the disposal facility and the applicable permit number.
SECTION F — SURFACE DISPOSAL SITES AND SLUDGE LAGOONS
1. Surface disposal sites of domestic facilities shall comply with the requirements in 40 CFR 503 Subpart C; air pollution
control regulations under 10 CSR 10; and solid waste management regulations under 10 CSR 80.
2. Sludge storage lagoons are temporary facilities and are not required to obtain a permit as a solid waste management
facility under 10 CSR 80. In order to maintain sludge storage lagoons as storage facilities, accumulated sludge must be
removed routinely, but not less than once every two years unless an alternate schedule is approved in the permit. The
amount of sludge removed will be dependent on sludge generation and accumulation in the facility. Enough sludge
must be removed to maintain adequate storage capacity in the facility.
a. In order to avoid damage to the lagoon seal during cleaning, the permittee may leave a layer of sludge on the
bottom of the lagoon, upon prior approval of the Department; or
b. Permittee shall close the lagoon in accordance with Section H.
SECTION G— LAND APPLICATION
1. The permittee shall not land apply sludge or biosolids unless land application is authorized in the facility description or
the special conditions of the issued NPDES permit.
2. Land application sites within a 20 miles radius of the wastewater treatment facility are authorized under this permit
when biosolids are applied for beneficial use in accordance with these standard conditions unless otherwise specified in
a site specific permit. If the permittee's land application site is greater than a 20 mile radius of the wastewater treatment
facility, approval must be granted from the Department.
3. Land application shall not adversely affect a threatened or endangered species or its designated critical habitat.
4. Biosolids shall not be applied unless authorized in this permit or exempted under 10 CSR 20, Chapter 6.
a. This permit does not authorize the land application of domestic sludge except for when sludge meets the
definition of biosolids.
b. This permit authorizes "Class A or B" biosolids derived from domestic wastewater and/or process water
sludge to be land applied onto grass land, crop land, timber or other similar agricultural or silviculture lands
at rates suitable for beneficial use as organic fertilizer and soil conditioner.
5. Public Contact Sites:
Permittees who wish to apply Class A biosolids to public contact sites must obtain approval from the Department
after two years of proper operation with acceptable testing documentation that shows the biosolids meet Class A
criteria. A shorter length of testing will be allowed with prior approval from the Department. Authorization for
land applications must be provided in the special conditions section of this permit or in a separate site specific
permit.
a. After Class B biosolids have been land applied, public access must be restricted for 12 months.
b. Class B biosolids are only land applied to root crops, home gardens or vegetable crops whose edible parts
will not be for human consumption.
6. Agricultural and Silvicultural Sites:
Septage — Based on Water Quality guide 422 (WQ422) published by the University of Missouri
a. Haulers that land apply septage must obtain a state permit
b. Do not apply more than 30,000 gallons of septage per acre per year.
c. Septage tanks are designed to retain sludge for one to three years which will allow for a larger reduction in
pathogens and vectors, as compared to other mechanical type treatment facilities.
d. To meet Class B sludge requirements, maintain septage at 12 pH for at least thirty (30) minutes before land
application. 50 pounds of hydrated lime shall be added to each 1,000 gallons of septage in order to meet
pathogen and vector stabilization for septage biosolids applied to crops, pastures or timberland.
e. Lime is to be added to the pump truck and not directly to the septic tanks, as lime would harm the beneficial
bacteria of the septic tank.
3
Biosolids - Based on \Vater Quality guide 423, 424, and 425 (WQ423, WQ424, WQ425) published by the University of
Missouri;
a. Biosolids shall be monitored to determine the quality for regulated pollutants
b. The number of samples taken is directly related to the amount of sludge produced by the facility (See
Section I of these Standard Conditions). Report as dry weight unless otherwise specified in the site specific
permit. Samples should be taken only during land application periods. When necessary, it is permissible to
mix biosolids with lower concentrations of biosolids as well as other suitable Department approved material
to reach the maximum concentration of pollutants allowed.
c. Table 1 gives the maximum concentration allowable to protect water quality standards
TABLE 1
I Land application is not allowed if the sludge concentration exceeds the maximum limits for any
of these pollutants
d. The low metal concentration biosolids has reduced requirements because of its higher quality and can safely
be applied for 100 years or longer at typical agronomic loading rates. (See Table 2)
TABLE 2
Biosolids ceiling concentration I
Pollutant
CEC 0 to 5
Milligrams per kilogram dry weight
Arsenic
Annual
75
Cadmium
Total
85
Copper
36.0
4,300
Lead
1.8
840
Mercury
1.7
57
Molybdenum
9.0
75
Nickel
Copper
420
Selenium
25.0
100
Zinc
125.0
7,500
I Land application is not allowed if the sludge concentration exceeds the maximum limits for any
of these pollutants
d. The low metal concentration biosolids has reduced requirements because of its higher quality and can safely
be applied for 100 years or longer at typical agronomic loading rates. (See Table 2)
TABLE 2
You may apply low metal biosolids without tracking cumulative metal limits, provided the
cumulative application of biosolids does not exceed 500 dry tons per acre.
e. Each pollutant in Table 3 has an annual and a total cumulative loading limit, based on the allowable pounds
per acre for various soil categories.
TABLE 3
Pollutant
Biosolids Low Metal Concentration I
Pollutant
CEC 0 to 5
Milligrams per kilogram dry weight
Arsenic
Annual
41
Cadmium
Total
39
Copper
36.0
1,500
Lead
1.8
300
Mercury
1.7
17
Nickel
9.0
420
Selenium
Copper
36
Zinc
25.0
2,800
You may apply low metal biosolids without tracking cumulative metal limits, provided the
cumulative application of biosolids does not exceed 500 dry tons per acre.
e. Each pollutant in Table 3 has an annual and a total cumulative loading limit, based on the allowable pounds
per acre for various soil categories.
TABLE 3
Pollutant
CEC 15+
CEC 5 to 15
CEC 0 to 5
Annual
Total 1
Annual
Total 1
Annual
Total
Arsenic
1.8
36.0
1.8
36.0
1.8
36.0
Cadmium
1.7
35.0
0.9
9.0
0.4
4.5
Copper
66.0
1,335.0
25.0
250.0
12.0
125.0
Lead
13.0
267.0
13.0
267.0
13.0
133.0
Mercury
0.7
15.0
0.7
15.0
0.7
15.0
Nickel
19.0
347.0
19.0
250.0
12.0
125.0
Selenium
4.5
89.0
4.5
44.0
1.6
16.0
Zinc
124.0
2,492.0
50.0
500.0
25.0
250.0
Total cumulative loading limits for soils with equal or greater than 6.0 pH (salt based test) or 6.5
pH (water based test)
4
TABLE 4 - Guidelines for land application of other trace substances
Cumulative Loading
Pollutant
Pounds per acre
Aluminum
4,0002
Beryllium
100
Cobalt
50
Fluoride
800
Manganese
500
Silver
200
Tin
1,000
Dioxin
(10 ppt in soil)r
Other
I Design of land treatment systems for Industrial Waste, 1979. Michael Ray Overcash, North
Carolina State University and Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater, EPA 1981.)
2 This applies for a soil with a pH between 6.0 and 7.0 (salt based test) or a pH between 6.5 to 7.5
(water based test). Case-by-case review is required for higher pH soils.
3 Total Dioxin Toxicity Equivalents (TEQ) in soils, based on a risk assessment under 40 CFR 744.
May 1998.
Case by case review. Concentrations in sludge should not exceed the 95th percentile of the
National Sewage Sludge Survey, EPA, January 2009.
Best Management Practices — Based on Water Quality guide 426 (WQ426) published by the University of Missouri
a. Use best management practices when applying biosolids.
b. Biosolids cannot discharge from the land application site
c. Biosolid application is subject to the Missouri Department of Agriculture State Milk Board concerning
grazing restrictions of lactating dairy cattle.
d. Biosolid application must be in accordance with section 4 of the Endangered Species Act.
e. Do not apply more than the agronomic rate of nitrogen needed.
f. The applicator must document the Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) loadings, available nitrogen in the soil.
and crop removal when either of the following occurs: 1) When biosolids are greater than 50.000 mg/kg TN:
or 2) When biosolids are land applied at an application rate greater than two dry tons per acre per year.
i. PAN can be determined as follows and is in accordance with WQ426
(Nitrate + nitrite nitrogen) + (organic nitrogen x 0.2) + (ammonia nitrogen x volatilization factor').
'Volatilization factor is 0.7 for surface application and 1 for subsurface application.
Buffer zones are as follows:
i. 300 feet of a water supply well, sinkhole, lake, pond, water supply reservoir or water supply intake
in a stream;
ii. 300 feet of a losing stream, no discharge stream, stream stretches designated for whole body
contact recreation, wild and scenic rivers, Ozark National Scenic Riverways or outstanding state
resource waters as listed in the Water Quality Standards, 10 CSR 20-7.031;
iii. 150 feet if dwellings;
iv. 100 feet of wetlands or permanent flowing streams;
v. 50 feet of a property line or other waters of the state, including intermittent flowing streams.
h. Slope limitation for application sites are as follows;
i. A slope 0 to 6 percent has no rate limitation
ii. Applied to a slope 7 to 12 percent, the applicator may apply biosolids when soil conservation
practices are used to meet the minimum erosion levels
iii. Slopes > 12 percent, apply biosolids only when grass is vegetated and maintained with at least 80
percent ground cover at a rate of two dry tons per acre per year or less.
i. No biosolids may be land applied in an area that it is reasonably certain that pollutants will be transported
into waters of the state.
j. Do not apply biosolids to sites with soil that is snow covered, frozen or saturated with liquid without prior
approval by the Department.
k. Biosolids / sludge applicators must keep detailed records up to five years.
g.
5
SECTION H—CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
1. This section applies to all wastewater facilities (mechanical, industrial, and lagoons) and sludge or biosolids storage
and treatment facilities and incineration ash ponds. It does not apply to land application sites.
2. Permittees ofa domestic wastewater facility who plan to cease operation must obtain Department approval ofa closure
plan which addresses properremova] and disposal of all residues, including sludge, biosolids. Mechanical plants,
sludge lagoons, ash ponds and other storage structures must obtain approval ofa closure plan from the Department.
Permittee must maintain this permit until the facility is closed in accordance with the approved closure plan per 10 CSR
20— 6.010 and 10 CSR 20-6.015.
3. Residuals that are left in place during closure ofa lagoon or earthen structure or ash pond shall not exceed the
agricultural loading rates as follows:
a. Residuals shall meet the monitoring and land application limits for agricultural rates as referenced in Section
H of these standard conditions.
b. If a wastewater treatment lagoon has been in operation for 15 years or more without sludge removal, the
sludge in the lagoon qualifies as a Class B biosolids with respect to pathogens due to anaerobic digestion, and
testing for fecal coliform is not required. For other lagoons, testing for fecal coliform is required to show
compliance with Class B biosolids limitations. In order to reach Class B biosolids requirements, fecal
coliform must be less than 2,000,000 colony forming units or 2,000,000 most probable number. All fecal
samples must be presented as geometric mean per gram.
c. The allowable nitrogen loading that may be left in the lagoon shall be based on the plant available nitrogen
(PAN) loading. For a grass cover crop, the allowable PAN is 300 pounds/acre.
i. PAN can be determined as follows:
(Nitrate + nitrite nitrogen) + (organic nitrogen x 0.2) + (ammonia nitrogen x volatilization factor).
Volatilization factor is 0.7 for surface application and I for subsurface application
4. When closing a domestic wastewater treatment lagoon with a design treatment capacity equal or less than 150 persons,
the residuals are considered "septage" under the similar treatment works definition. See Section B of these standard
conditions. Under the septage category, residuals may be left in place as follows:
a. Testing for metals or fecal coliform is not required
b. If the wastewater treatment lagoon has been in use for less than 15 years, mix lime with the sludge at a rate of
50 pounds of hydrated lime per I000 gallons (134 cubic feet) of sludge.
c. The amount of sludge that may be left in the lagoon shall be based on the plant available nitrogen (PAN)
loading. 100 dry tons/acre of sludge may be left in the basin without testing for nitrogen. If 100 dry tons/acre
or more will be left in the lagoon, test for nitrogen and determine the PAN using the calculation above.
Allowable PAN loading is 300 pounds/acre.
5. Residuals left within the domestic lagoon shall be mixed with soil on at least a 1 to 1 ratio, the lagoon berm shall be
demolished and the site shall be graded and contain >_70% vegetative density over 100% of the site so as to avoid
ponding of storm water and provide adequate surface water drainage without creating erosion.
6. Lagoons and/or earthen structure and/or ash pond closure activities shall obtain a storm water permit for land
disturbance activities that equal or exceed one acre in accordance with 10 CSR 20-6.200
7. When closing a mechanical wastewater and/or industrial process wastewater plant; all sludge must be cleaned out and
disposed of in accordance with the Department approved closure plan before the permit for the facility can be
terminated.
a. Land must be stabilized which includes any grading, alternate use or fate upon approval by the Department,
remediation, or other work that exposes sediment to stormwater per 10 CSR 20-6.200. The site shall be
graded and contain >70% vegetative density over 100% of the site, so as to avoid ponding of storm water and
provide adequate surface water drainage without creating erosion.
b. Per 10 CSR 20-6.015(4)(B)6, Hazardous Waste shall not be land applied or disposed during industrial and
mechanical plant closures unless in accordance with Missouri Hazardous Waste Management Law and
Regulations under 10 CSR 25.
c. After demolition of the mechanical plant / industrial plant, the site must only contain clean fill defined in
RSMo 260.200 (5) as uncontaminated soil, rock, sand, gravel, concrete, asphaltic concrete, cinderblocks,
brick, minimal amounts of wood and metal, and inert solids as approved by rule or policy of the Department
for fill or other beneficial use. Other solid wastes must be removed.
8. If sludge from the domestic lagoon or mechanical treatment plant exceeds agricultural rates under Section G and/or H,
a landfill permit or solid waste disposal permit must be obtained if the permittee chooses to seek authorization for on-
site sludge disposal under the Missouri Solid Waste Management Law and regulations per 10 CSR 80, and the
permittee must comply with the surface disposal requirements under 40 CFR 503, Subpart C.
6
SECTION 1— MONITORING FREQUENCY
I. At a minimum, sludge or biosolids shall be tested for volume and percent total solids on a frequency that will
accurately represent sludge quantities produced and disposed. Please see the table below.
TABLE 5
Design Sludge
Production (dry
tons per year)
Monitoring Frequency (See Notes 1, 2, and 3)
Metals'
Pathogens and
Vectors
Nitrogen TKN 1
2
Nitrogen PAN
Priority Pollutants
and TCLP
0 to 100
1 per year
I per year
1 per month
1 per year
101 to 200
biannual
biannual
1 per month
1 per year
201 to 1,000
quarterly
quarterly
1 per month
1 per year
1,001 to 10,000
1 per month
1 per month
1 per week
—4
10,001 +
1 per week
1 per week
1 per day
--4
r
4
Test total Kjeldahl nitrogen, if biosolids application is 2 dry tons per acre per year or less.
Calculate plant available nitrogen (PAN) when either of the following occurs: I) when biosolids are greater than 50,000 mg/kg TN: or 2)
when biosolids are land applied at an application rate greater than two dry tons per acre per year.
Priority pollutants (40 CFR 122.21, Appendix D, Tables 11 and 111) and toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (40 CFR 26124) is
required only for permit holders that mint have a pre-treatment program.
One sample for each 1,000 dry tons of sludge.
Note 1: Total solids: A grab sample of sludge shall be tested one per day during land application periods for percent total solids.
This data shall be used to calculate the dry tons of sludge applied per acre.
Note 2: Total Phosphorus: Total phosphorus and total potassium shall be tested at the same monitoring frequency as metals.
Note 3: Table 5 is not applicable for incineration and permit holders that landfill their sludge.
2. If you own a wastewater treatment lagoon or sludge lagoon that is cleaned out once a year or less, you may choose to
sample only when the sludge is removed or the lagoon is closed. Test one composite sample for each 100 dry tons of
sludge or biosolids removed from the lagoon during the year within the lagoon at closing. Composite sample must
represent various areas at one -foot depth.
3. Additional testing may be required in the special conditions or other sections of the permit. Permittees receiving
industrial wastewater may be required to conduct additional testing upon request from the Department.
4. At this time, the Department recommends monitoring requirements shall be performed in accordance with, "POTW
Sludge Sampling and Analysis Guidance Document," United States Environmental Protection Agency, August 1989,
and the subsequent revisions.
SECTION J — RECORD KEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. The permittee shall maintain records on file at the facility for at least five years for the items listed in these standard
conditions and any additional items in the Special Conditions section of this permit. This shall include dates when the
sludge facility is checked for proper operation, records of maintenance and repairs and other relevant information.
2. Reporting period
a. By January 28th of each year, an annual report shall be submitted for the previous calendar year period for all
mechanical wastewater treatment facilities, sludge lagoons, and sludge or biosolids disposal facilities.
b. Permittees with wastewater treatment lagoons shall submit the above annual report only when sludge or
biosolids are removed from the lagoon during the report period or when the lagoon is closed.
3. Report Forms. The annual report shall be submitted on report forms provided by the Department or equivalent forms
approved by the Department.
4. Reports shall be submitted as follows:
Major facilities (those serving 10,000 persons or 1 million gallons per day) shall report to both the Department and
EPA. Other facilities need to report only to the Department. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses listed as
follows:
DNR regional office listed in your permit
(see cover letter of permit)
ATTN: Sludge Coordinator
EPA Region VII
Water Compliance Branch (WACM)
Sludge Coordinator
11201 Renner Blvd.
Lenexa, KS 66219
7
5. Annual report contents. The annual report shall include the following:
a. Sludge and biosolids testing performed. Include a copy or summary of all test results, even if not required by
the permit.
b. Sludge or biosolids quantity shall be reported as dry tons for quantity generated by the wastewater treatment
facility, the quantity stored on site at the end of the year, and the quantity used or disposed.
c. Gallons and % solids data used to calculate the dry ton amounts.
d. Description of any unusual operating conditions.
e. Final disposal method, dates, and location, and person responsible for hauling and disposal.
i. This must include the name, address for the hauler and sludge facility. If hauled to a municipal
wastewater treatment facility, sanitary landfill, or other approved treatment facility, give the name
of that facility.
ii. Include a description of the type of hauling equipment used and the capacity in tons, gallons, or
cubic feet.
f. Contract Hauler Activities:
If contract hauler, provide a copy of a signed contract from the contractor. Permittee shall require the
contractor to supply information required under this permit for which the contractor is responsible. The
permittee shall submit a signed statement from the contractor that he has complied with the standards
contained in this permit, unless the contract hauler has a separate sludge or biosolids use permit.
g. Land Application Sites:
i. Report the location of each application site, the annual and cumulative dry tons/acre for each site,
and the landowners name and address. The location for each spreading site shall be given as a legal
description for nearest' 'h,'/, Section, Township, Range, and county, or UTM coordinates. The
facility shall report PAN when either of the following occurs: 1) When biosolids are greater than
50,000 mg/kg TN; or 2) when biosolids are land applied at an application rate greater than two dry
tons per acre per year.
ii. If the "Low Metals" criteria are exceeded, report the annual and cumulative pollutant loading rates
in pounds per acre for each applicable pollutant, and report the percent of cumulative pollutant
loading which has been reached at each site.
iii. Report the method used for compliance with pathogen and vector attraction requirements.
iv. Report soil test results for pH, CEC, and phosphorus. If none was tested during the year, report the
last date when tested and results.
8
Attachment Li- Crops Wastewater
Property
Crops to be planted on Wastewater Property
Field
Acres
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
WF -1
52.7
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
WF -2
58.4
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
WF -3
43.1
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
WF -4
42.9
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
WF -5
34.7
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
WF -6
27.3
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Corn
Soybeans
Wheat/Oats
Crops to be planted on Airport property
Field
Acres
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
AF -1
29.2
Corn, Soybeans, Wheat, Oats or Hay
A.F5A
Soybeans, lNieat,Oats orHay
AF -5B
17.5
Soybeans, Wheat, Oats or Hay
AF -6A
10.2
Corn
Late Beans
Corn
Late Beans
Corn
'AF=6B-
ay
a
i,a
Hay
Hay
AF -8
13.3
Late Beans
Corn
Late Beans
Corn
Late Beans
AF -9
58.2
Hay
Hay
Hay
Hay
Hay
AF -10
32.4
Hay
Hay
Hay
Hay
Hay
AF 11r
Corn, Soybeans,_ Wheat, Oats;or Hay
AF':1
$oybeats, 1
heat;.Oats o;rHa�
AF 14
Soybeans;:
eat, Oats or Hay
AF 1S
ay
Hay
H
y
Hay:.
Biosolids will NOT be applied
The City will work with the farmer to determine best hay crop: 1) Alfalfa, 2) Alfalfa & Grass, 3) Clover
& Grass, or 4) Grass Mixture.
Attachment ",— MO State Operating
Permit — MO-ROF000
STATE OF MISSOURI
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
MISSOURI CLEAN WATER COMMISSION
moo°apdir*T4aeaa
+a
MISSOURI STATE OPERATING PERMIT
GENERAL PERMIT
In compliance with the Missouri Clean Water Law. (Chapter 644 R.S. Mo. as amended, hereinafter, the Law). and the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (Public Law 92-500. 92"d Congress) as amended,
Permit No.
Owner:
Address:
Continuing Authority:
Address:
Facility Name:
Facility Address:
Legal Description:
UTM Coordinates:
Receiving Stream:
First Classified Stream and ID:
USGS Basin & Sub -watershed No.:
MO-R80F000
<Owner's Name>
<Owner's Address>
<Namc, or Same as above >
<Address, or Sarne as above >
<Facility Name>
<Physical address >
1/4, /, 1/4, Sec. xx, TxxN, RxxW, < county > County
X=, Y= (round to the nearest whole number)
<Receiving stream > <(C, P, LI, L2, L3)>
<lst classified stream > <(C, P, etc.)> <(ID number)> 303(d) List
<(USGS HUC12 #)>
is authorized to discharge from the facility described herein, in accordance with the effluent limitations and monitoring
requirements as set forth herein:
FACILITY DESCRIPTION
All Outfalls — Airports-- SIC code #45XX
Stormwater discharges from air transportation facilities involved in vehicle maintenance and/or deicing.
This permit authorizes only discharges under the Missouri Clean \Vater Law and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System: it does not apply to other regulated areas. This permit may be appealed in accordance with Section 644.051.6 of the
Law.
November 28, 2017
A,7/rt
Effective Date Edward 13. Galbraith, Director, Division of Environmental Quality
November 27, 2022
„ 0,)
Expiration Date Chris Wieberv. Director, Nater P otection Program
MO-R80F000
Page 2 of 10
APPLICABILITY
1. This permit authorizes the discharge of stormwater runoff from airports to waters of the State of Missouri, including,
but not limited to, establishments with the following Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes:
SIC Code Activity
4512 Air Transportation, Scheduled
4513 Air Courier Services
4522 Air Transportation, Nonscheduled
4581 Airports, Flying Fields and Airport Terminal Services
2. This permit authorizes stormwater discharges from only those portions of the air transportation facility that are
involved in vehicle maintenance (including vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling and
lubrication), equipment cleaning operations or deicing operations. Deicing is defined as procedures and practices to
remove or prevent any accumulation of snow or ice on an aircraft or on airfield pavement unless specific mention is
made otherwise.
3. For the purpose of this permit, stormwater is defined as water from rain or melting snow/ice in sufficient quantities
that it runs off over land and impervious surfaces and discharges to waters of the state instead of seeping into the
ground.
4. For the purpose of this permit, aircraft deicing fluid means a fluid (other than hot water) applied to aircraft to remove
or prevent any accumulation of snow or ice on the aircraft. This includes deicing and anti -icing fluids.
5. This permit does not authorize the discharge of any waters other than stormwater, except such non-stormwater
discharges as are outlined below. Discharge of other wastewaters, spills or other materials is a violation of Missouri
Clean Water Law. The following are allowable non-stormwater discharges authorized under this permit:
(a) Discharges from fire -fighting activities;
(b) Fire hydrant flushing (testing);
(c) Pavement wash waters where no detergents are used and no spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous materials
have occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed);
(d) Routine external building wash down that does not use detergents;
(e) Foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials; and
(f) Incidental windblown mist from cooling towers that collects on rooftops or adjacent portions of your
facility, but not intentional discharges from the cooling tower (e.g., "piped" cooling tower blowdown or
drains).
6. The first time an airport applies for coverage under this permit, the proposed permit must be placed on public notice
for 30 days per 10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(C)2. For a renewal of the permit for an existing airport, the proposed permit
must be placed on public notice for 30 days only if the facility has been in significant noncompliance during the time
of the previous permit per 10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(C).2.
7. Holders of current site-specific permits who desire to apply for inclusion under this general permit should contact the
Department for application requirements.
8. If at any time the Department determines that the quality of waters of the state may be better protected by requiring
the facility to apply for a site-specific permit, the Department may do so.
9. If at any time the facility should desire to apply for a site-specific permit, the owner may do so.
10. Airports that do not use chemical deicing on the runways or aircraft and do not conduct vehicle maintenance
(including vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling and lubrication, or equipment cleaning
operations) on premises are exempt from this permit. If the Department determines that the operating practices are
not adequate, a permit may be necessary to protect the environment.
MO-R80F000
Page 3 of 10
11. If a facility has no materials exposed to stormwater, the facility may apply for No Exposure Certification in lieu of
coverage under this permit. No Exposure means that all industrial materials and activities are protected by, and
contained within, a storm resistant shelter to prevent exposure to rain, snow, snowmelt, and/or runoff. Industrial
materials or activities include, but are not limited to, material handling or storage, equipment maintenance activities,
industrial machinery, raw materials, intermediate products, by-products, final products, or waste products. The
requirements are listed in full at 10 CSR 20-6.200(1)(B)16.A.(1) — B.(I11).
12. St. Louis Lambert International Airport, Kansas City International Airport and any other airports that use more than
100,000 gallons of glycol -based deicing/anti-icing chemicals and/or 100 tons of urea or calcium chloride per year,
combined, are precluded from coverage under this general permit and are required to apply for a site-specific permit.
13. This permit does not apply to stormwater discharges:
(a) Within 300 feet of a Class W' or mitigated wetland,
(b) Within 1,000 feet upstream of sinkholes, or other direct conduit to groundwater;
(c) Within 1,000 feet of an Outstanding National Resource Water' or Outstanding State Resource Water';
(d) Within two (2) stream miles upstream of biocriteria reference locations';
(e) Within two (2) miles upstream of streams, lakes, or reservoirs with the designated use of drinking water
supply'; or
(f) Within two (2) miles upstream of streams, lakes, or reservoirs identified as critical habitat for endangered
species'.
14. For discharges within the watershed of Outstanding National Resource Waters (ONRW), which includes the Ozark
National Scenic Riverways and the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, this permit:
(a) Authorizes no -discharge facilities [as defined in 10 CSR 20-6.015(1)(B)7.] to operate. Any discharge from
a no -discharge facility will be considered a violation of this permit unless a catastrophic or chronic storm
event [as defined in 10 CSR 20-6.0I5(1)(B)] occurs. In the event of a catastrophic or chronic storm event,
the no -discharge facility is authorized to release only the amount of stormwater required to prevent damage
to the facility or established Best Management Practices (BMPs).
(b) Authorizes stormwater discharge facilities to operate and continue to discharge stormwater so long as the
effluent limitations set forth in this permit are not exceeded. Should a value be exceeded, the discharge is
considered to cause degradation in water quality of the ONRW and the facility must take corrective action
to meet the effluent limits. Outstanding Resource Waters are protected against any degradation in quality as
defined in 10 CSR 20-7.015(6) and 7.031(3)(C). Failure to take corrective action to address an exceedance
and failure to make tangible progress towards achieving compliance is a permit violation. More detailed
requirements concerning stormwater discharges are found in the Stormwater Requirement section of this
permit. If exceedances continue to occur, the Department may require the facility to operate as a no -
discharge facility under this permit or to apply for a site-specific permit.
15. Facilities that discharge directly to a combined sewer system are exempt from permit requirements.
16. This general permit does not apply to land disturbance activities. A separate general permit must be obtained to
cover land disturbance activities.
17. Facilities that are located within the watershed of an impaired water as designated on the 305(b) Report must be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis for inclusion under this permit. Missouri's impaired waters can be found at
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/waterquality/index.html. Facilities that are found to be discharging the listed pollutant(s)
of concern for any impaired water may be required to obtain a site-specific permit.
18. A construction permit is not required for oil and water separators built to meet permit requirements. An operating
permit may be needed for an oil and water separator if the separator discharges to waters of the state. The facility
should check with their local Department regional office for guidance.
1 Identified or described in 10 CSR 20-7 Water Quality. These regulations are available at many libraries and online at
www.sos.mo.eov, or may be purchased from the Department ofNatural Resources by calling the Water Protection Program.
MO-R80F000
Page 4 of 10
REQUIREMENTS
Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) Submission System. Per 40 CFR Part 127 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Electronic Reporting Rule, reporting of effluent limits and monitoring shall
be submitted by the permittee via an electronic system to ensure timely, complete, accurate, and nationally -consistent
set of data about the NPDES program. All general permit covered facilities under this master general permit shall
comply with the Department's requirements for electronic reporting.
(a) Discharge Monitoring Reporting Requirements.
(1) Application to participate in the Department's eDMR system is required as part of the application
for general permit coverage in order to constitute a complete permit application and may be
accessed at dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/edmr.htm.
(2) The permittee must electronically submit compliance monitoring data via the eDMR system. In
regards to Standard Conditions Part I, Section B, #7, the eDMR system is currently the only
Department approved reporting method for this permit.
(b) Other actions. The following shall be submitted electronically after such a system has been made available
by the Department:
(1) General Permit Applications/Notices of Intent to discharge (NOLs);
(2) Notices of Termination (NOTs);
(3) No Exposure Certifications (NOEs); and
(4) Low Erosivity Waivers and Other Waivers from Stormwater Controls (LEWs).
(c) Electronic Submissions. To access the eDMR system, use the following link in your web browser:
https://edmr.dnr.mo.gov/edmr/E2/Shared/Pages/Main/Login.aspx.
(d) Waivers from Electronic Reporting.
(1) The permittee must electronically submit compliance monitoring data and reports unless a waiver
is granted by the Department in compliance with 40 CFR Part 127.
(2) The permittee may obtain a temporary or permanent electronic reporting waiver by first submitting
an eDMR Waiver Request Form (Form 780-2692): http://dnr.mo.gov/forms/780-2692-f.pdf, by
contacting the appropriate permitting office or emailing edmra,dnr.mo.gov. The Department will
either approve or deny this electronic reporting waiver request within 120 calendar days of receipt.
Only permittees with an approved waiver request may submit monitoring data and reports on paper
to the Department for the period that the approved electronic reporting waiver is effective.
2. Discharge of stormwater contaminated with deicing/anti-icing chemicals is only authorized as part of deicing/anti-
icing activities. Dumping of unused, out of specification, rinsate or product directly or indirectly into waters of the
state is prohibited.
3. Existing and new primary airports (commercial service airports with more than 10,000 passenger boardings a year)
with 1,000 or more annual jet departures ("non -propeller aircraft") that generate wastewater associated with airfield
pavement deicing are to use non -urea -containing deicers, or alternatively, meet the numeric limit for ammonia as
nitrogen daily maximum of 14.7 mg/L as expressed in 40 CFR 449.10.
4. Annual Report: The permittee shall submit an annual report by January 28th of each year detailing each deicer, anti -
icer, or solvent used at the facility. The annual report will include:
(a) Chemical types, such as "Urea" or "Sodium Chloride"
(b) Concentrations used, such as "1O%", and
(c) Total volume or mass of the deicer used in the previous calendar year.
5. In addition to the requirements of this permit, the Department may require further sampling and reporting as a result
of illegal discharges, compliance issues, complaint investigations, or evidence of off-site impacts from activities at
the facility. If such an action is needed, the Department will specify in writing the sampling requirements, including
such information as location and extent. It is a violation of this permit to fail to comply with said written notification
to sample.
6. All outfalls must be clearly marked in the field. Outfall signage shall be clearly visible from both land and water
perspectives where applicable.
7. It is a violation of Missouri Clean Water Law to fail to pay fees associated with this permit (§ 644.055, RSMo). The
fees can be found at 10 CSR 20-6.011.
MO-R80F000
Page 5 of 10
8. Compliance with all requirements in this permit does not supersede nor remove liability for compliance with county
and other local ordinances.
9. Compliance with all conditions in this permit is required. The full implementation of this operating permit shall
constitute compliance with all applicable federal and state regulations in accordance with §644.051 RSMo, and the
CWA section 402(k).
10. The Department may collect a sample of stormwater discharge during site inspection.
11. A record of each reportable release of hazardous substance/spill shall be retained along with the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and made available to the Department upon request. Reportable release records
are not required to be incorporated into the SWPPP, but may be kept separately so long as they are readily available
to the Department. The Department may also require the submittal of a written report detailing measures taken to
clean up the spill within 5 days of the spill. Such a report must include the type of material spilled, volume, date of
spill, date clean-up was completed, clean-up method, and final disposal method. If the spill occurs outside of normal
business hours, or if the permit holder cannot reach regional office staff for any reason, the permit holder is
instructed to report the spill to the Department's 24 hour Environmental Emergency Response hotline at (573) 634-
2436. Leaving a message on a Department staff member voice -mail does not satisfy this reporting requirement. This
requirement is in addition to the Noncompliance Reporting requirement found in Standard Conditions Part 1.
12. The SWPPP documents and record of reportable spills may be kept in an electronic format so long as a copy is
accessible to facility staff on site and to the Department upon request.
MO-R8OF000
Page 6 of 10
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
TABLE A STORMWATER EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The facility is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number(s) as specified in the application for this permit. These final
effluent limitations shall be effective at issuance of the Master General Permit and remain in effect for the life of the permit.
Stormwater discharges shall be controlled, limited and monitored by the facility as specified below: (Note l)
PARAMETERS, ALL OUTFALLS
UNITS
DAILY
MAXIMUM
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
SAMPLE
FREQUENCY**
SAMPLE TYPE
All Facilities with < 1,000 Jet Departures Annually
Limit Set: PD
Flow
mgd
*
*
Monthly
24 hour estimate
Biochemical Oxygen Demands (BOD)
mg/L
90
60
Monthly
grab
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
mg/L
120
90
Monthly
grab
pH***
SU
6.5 — 9,0
6.5 — 9.0
Monthly
grab
Total Suspended Solids
mg/L
70
70
Monthly
grab
Ethylbenzene
mg/L
0.32
0.32
Monthly
grab
Oil and Grease
mg/L
15
10
Monthly
grab
Chloride'
mg/L
860
860
Monthly
grab
Ammonia as Nitrogen'
mg/L _
*
*
Monthly
grab
Nitrate'
mg/L
*
*
Monthly
grab
All Facilities with ? 1,000 Jet Departures Annually (Note 2)
Limit Set: JD
Flow
mgd
*
Monthly
24 hour estimate
Biochemical Oxygen Demands (BODS)
mg/L
90
60
Monthly
grab
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
mg/L
120
90
Monthly
grab
pH***
SU
6.5 — 9.0
6.5 — 9.0
Monthly
_grab_
Total Suspended Solids
mg'L
70
70
Monthly
grab
Ethylbenzene
mg/L
0.32
0.32
Monthly
grab
Oil and Grease
mg!L
15
10
Monthly
grab
Chloride'
mg/L
860
860
Monthly
grab
Ammonia as Nitrogen'
mg/L
14.7
14.7
Monthly
grab
Nitrate'
mg/L
*
*
Monthly
grab
MONITORING REPORTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED MONTHLY FOR THE MONTHS OF JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND MARCH VIA THE DEPARTMENT'S
eDMR SYSTEM. SHOULD A WAIVER TO eDMR BE GRANTED 13Y THE DEPARTMENT, PAPER REPORTS SHALL. BE SUBMITTED IN A TIMELY
MANNER TO 111E APPROPRIATE REGIONAL OFFICE. THE FIRST REPORT IS DUE MONTH 28, YEAR. IT 1S A VIOLATION OF TI IIS PERMIT TO FAIL TO
SAMPLE.
Monitoring requirement only.
One sample must be taken monthly in the designated months ofJanuary, February and March when there is a discharge (a
discharge includes runoff from precipitation, sleet, or freezing rain as well as run off from melting frozen precipitation). See
Table B below. If there is no discharge for a particular month, report no discharge.
*** pI-1 is measured in pHstandard units and is not to be averaged.
•
Ifa facility uses a deicing product that contains no chloride and no urea, ammonia or nitrate -nitrogen, they may report a value of
"0" for this parameter. By reporting a value of zero, the facility certifies that they are using deicing products that do not contain
these parameters. 11 is the facility's responsibility to know what chemicals are in the products they use.
Note 1: When monitoring stormwater, a representative grab sample shall be taken during operational hours within the first 60 minutes of
stormwater discharge, if possible. Samples shall be collected from an active discharge on the facility property before entering any
water of the state. Stormwater samples shall not be collected from standing pools.
Note 2: Facilities in this category must use non -urea -containing deicers OR meet the effluent limit for Ammonia as Nitrogen in Table A.
Table B
Sample and Reporting Schedule
Report Type
_
Report Period
Report Due
Annual Report
January— December
January 28
Table A, Sample discharge for the
months of:
January
February
March
February 28
March 28
April 28
MO-R80F000
Page 7 of 10
STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS
1. When applying for coverage under this permit, the facility shall develop a SWPPP. The facility shall select, install,
use, operate, and maintain the BMPs prescribed in the SWPPP in accordance with the concepts and methods
described in the following document: Developing Your Stornnvater Pollution Prevention Plan, a Guide for
Industria! Operators, (EPA 833-B-09-002) published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
in June 2015 (https://www.epa.gov/npdes/industrial-stormwater-guidance). The selection of control measures that
prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater shall be specified in the SWPPP.
The SWPPP shall identify the BMPs that are reasonable and effective, taking into account environmental impacts
and costs. This analysis must document why no discharge or no exposure options are not feasible at the facility. This
selection and documentation of appropriate control measures shall serve as an alternative analysis of technology and
fulfill the requirements of Antidegradation [ 10 CSR 20-7.031(3) and 10 CSR 20-7.015(9)(A)5.]. Failure to
implement and maintain the chosen alternatives is a permit violation. Existing facilities with established SWPPPs
and BMPs need not conduct an additional alternatives analysis unless new BMPs are established to address effluent
limit exceedances.
The EPA has published a Fact Sheet addressing BMPs specifically for airports: Sector S Vehicle Maintenance Areas,
Equipment Cleaning Areas, or Deicing Areas Located at Air Transportation Facilities, (EPA -833-F-06-034)
published by the EPA in December 2006 which may be useful and can be found at:
www.ena.eov/sites/production/files/2016-04/documents/sector s airtransmaint.pdf.
(a) New Facilities:
New facilities that are being issued coverage under this general permit for the first time, the SWPPP must
be prepared within sixty (60) days and implemented within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit
issuance.
(b) Existing and Expanding Facilities:
(1) An existing facility was required to prepare a SWPPP for coverage under a previous version of this
permit. The existing SWPPP for the facility must be reviewed, revised as necessary and
implemented within 30 days of reissuance of coverage. The general permit requires all facilities to
develop and maintain a SWPPP. The SWPPP shall document any changes made to BMPs to
correct deficiencies.
(2) Expanding facilities are required to review and revise the SWPPP as necessary to account for the
facility expansion. Once expansion occurs the revised SWPPP must be implemented within 30
days of permit modification.
(c) All Facilities:
(1) Throughout coverage under this permit, the facility must perform ongoing SWPPP review and
revision to incorporate any site condition changes.
(2) The SWPPP must be kept on-site and be made readily available to the Department upon request.
(3) The SWPPP should not be sent to the Department unless specifically requested.
(4) The SWPPP must include the following:
a. An assessment of all stormwater discharges associated with the facility, facility activities,
and facility materials. This assessment must include a list of potential contaminants and
an annual estimate of amounts that will be used in the described activities.
b. A listing of BMPs and a narrative explaining how the BMPs will be implemented to
control and minimize the amount of potential contaminants that enter stormwater.
c. A schedule for monthly site inspections and a brief written report, which includes the
name of the inspector, the signature of the inspector, and the date. The inspections must
include observation and analysis of BMP effectiveness, deficiencies, and corrective action
that will be taken. Deficiencies must be corrected as soon as possible, but not longer than
seven (7) days from discovery and must be documented in the inspection report. The
facility may submit a written request to the Department justifying additional time, if
necessary, to complete corrective action. The purpose of the SWPPP and the BMPs listed
therein is to prevent pollution [ 10 CSR 20-2.010(56)] of waters of the state. A deficiency
of a BMP means it was not effective in preventing pollution of waters of the state or
meeting effluent limitations of this permit. Corrective action means the facility took steps
MO-R80F000
Page 8 of 10
to eliminate the deficiency. Inspection reports must be kept with the SWPPP and must be
made available to the Department upon request.
d. A provision for designating an individual to be responsible for environmental matters.
e. A provision for providing training to all personnel involved in material handling, material
storage, and housekeeping of areas having materials exposed to stormwater. Proof of
training must be made available to the Department upon request.
f. A provision for evaluating effluent limitations established in this permit.
2. The following minimum BMPs must be implemented at all facilities:
(a) Prevent the spillage or Toss of fluids, oil, grease, fuel, etc. from vehicle maintenance, equipment cleaning,
deicing or warehouse activities and thereby prevent the contamination of stormwater from these substances.
(b) Provide collection facilities on-site and arrange for proper disposal of waste products including, but not
limited to, petroleum waste products, solid waste, de-icing/anti-icing products, and solvents.
(c) Store all paints, solvents, petroleum products, petroleum waste products in storage containers (such as
drums, cans, or cartons) so that these materials, and the storage containers themselves (where possible), are
not exposed to stormwater or provide other prescribed BMPs such as plastic lids and/or portable spill pans
to prevent the commingling of stormwater with container contents. Commingled water may not be
discharged as stormwater under this permit. Commingled water must be disposed of in the same manner as
the substance or chemical with which it is commingled. Provide spill prevention, control, and
countermeasures to prevent any spill of these pollutants from entering waters of the state. Any containment
system used to implement this requirement shall be constructed of materials compatible with the substances
contained and shall prevent the contamination of groundwater.
(d) Provide sediment and erosion control sufficient to prevent sediment loss off of the property, pollution of
waters of the state, and to comply with the conditions of this permit, Missouri Clean Water Law, and the
CWA. This may require the use of silt fences, sediment basins or other treatment structures.
(e) Good housekeeping practices shall be maintained on the site to keep solid waste from entry into waters of
the state.
3. All stormwater samples should be collected within the first 60 minutes of discharge occurring as a result of
precipitation events of 0.1 inches or greater within a 24-hour period. Stormwater samples should be collected prior to
or at the leased or owned property boundary and before the discharge enters a water of the state on the facility
property. Local weather stations and on-site gauges are two methods for obtaining local precipitation amounts.
4. This permit stipulates effluent limits applicable to the facility's discharge. Exceedances believed to be the result of
legacy chemical use at the facility are not exempted from this requirement. Facilities are encouraged to contact the
Department to formulate a plan for investigation and clean-up if legacy chemical use is suspected to be the cause of
exceedances.
5. Effluent limitations in Table A are considered necessary to protect existing water quality and should not be exceeded
during discharges resulting from a precipitation event up to and including the 10 -year 365 -day rainfall event
(chronic) or the 25 year 24-hour rainfall event (catastrophic) according to National Weather Service data. Design
Storm Maps and Tables can be found at http://ag3.agebb.missouri.edu/design storm/ or
htto://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds map cont.html?bkmrk=mo. Failure to address a limit exceedance with
corrective action is a permit violation.
6. If data becomes available that indicates existing water quality will be protected by alternative limits specific to this
industry, the Department will propose to incorporate those limits into this permit as part of a permit modification.
Such data must be approved by the Department as appropriate and representative before it can be considered.
STANDARD CONDITIONS
In addition to specified conditions stated herein, this permit is subject to the attached Standard Conditions Part 1 dated
August 1, 2014, and hereby incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
MO-R80F000
Page 9 of l0
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
I. The full implementation of this operating permit, which includes implementation of any applicable schedules of
compliance, shall constitute compliance with all applicable federal and state statutes and regulations in accordance
with §644.051.16, RSMo, and the CWA section 402(k); however, this permit may be reopened and modified, or
alternatively revoked and reissued to comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation issued or approved
under Sections 301(b)(2)(C) and (D), 304(b)(2), and 307(a) (2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent standard or
limitation so issued or approved:
(a) Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than any effluent limitation in the permit; or
(b) Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
2. Changes in Discharges of Toxic Substances. The permittee shall notify the Director as soon as it knows or has reason
to believe:
(a) That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge of any toxic pollutant
which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of the following "notification
levels:"
(1) One hundred micrograms per liter (100 ug/L);
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter (200 ug/L) for acrolein and acrylonitrile;
(3) Five hundred micrograms per liter (500 ug/L) for 2,5 dinitrophenol and for 2 -methyl -4, 6-
dinitrophenol;
(4) One milligram per liter (1 mg/L) for antimony;
(5) Five (5) times the maximum concentration value reported for the pollutant in the permit
application;
(6) The level established in Part A of the permit by the Director.
(b) That they have begun or expect to begin to use or manufacture as an intermediate or final product or
byproduct any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application.
(c) A list of toxic pollutants can be found listed in 10 CSR -20, Chapter 7, Table A, or 40 CFR 122, Appendix
D.
The permit as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other requirements of the Clean Water
Act then applicable.
PERMIT RENEWAL
Unless terminated, the permittee shall submit an application for the renewal of this permit by submitting Form §-
Application for General Permit http://dnr.mo.gov/forms/780-0795-f.pdf no later than thirty (30) days prior to the
permit's expiration date. If a facility submits a timely and complete application in accordance with 10 CSR 20-
6.010(5) and (10)(E), as well as § 644.051.10 RSMo 2015, if the Department is unable, through no fault of the
permittee, to issue a renewal prior to expiration of the previous permit, the terms and conditions of the expired
permit are administratively continued and will remain fully effective and enforceable until such time when a permit
action is taken. Failure to submit a renewal application for a facility that is still in operation is a violation of the
Missouri Clean Water Law. Participation in the Department's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report Submission
System (eDMR) is required as part of a complete application. Facilities already participating in eDMR need not re-
apply upon renewal. More information can be found at: http://dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/edmr.htm. Failure to apply for
renewal of a permit may result in termination of this permit and enforcement action to compel compliance with this
condition and the Missouri Clean Water Law.
PERMIT TRANSFER
This permit may not be transferred to a new owner in any fashion except by submitting an Application for Transfer of
Operating Permit http://dnr.mo.gov/forms/780-1517-f.odf signed by the seller and buyer of the facility along with the
appropriate modification fee. In some cases, revocation and reissuance may be necessary. Facilities with transfers carried out
without prior notice to the Department will be considered to be operating without a permit and may be assessed an
administrative penalty.
MO-R80F000
Page l0 of l0
PERMIT TERMINATION
The permitee shall apply for permit termination when activities covered by this permit have ceased and no significant
materials [as defined by 10 CSR 20-6.200( I )(C)27.] remain on the property or if on the property, are stored in such a
way as to have no potential for pollution. Whenever a release or a potential for release from a permitted facility is
permanently eliminated the existing permit may be terminated. In order to terminate this permit, the permittee shall
notify the Department's appropriate regional office by completing and submitting Form H -Request for Termination
ofa General Permit http://dnr.mo.aov/forms/780-1409-fpdf. Inspection of the premises by the regional office may
be required as a part of the permit termination approval process.
PUBLIC NOTICE OF GENERAL PERMIT COVERED FACILITIES
As required by 10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(C)2., permits proposed to be issued to a newly constructed airport must undergo
public notification in accordance with 10 CSR 20-6.020 prior to issuance. Public Notice of reissuance is required only
if the facility was found to be in significant noncompliance during the time of the previous permit. All master general
permits are required to undergo not less than 30 days public notice before the permit becomes effective.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 1 of 10
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
FACT SHEET
FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENEWAL
OF
MO-R80F000
MASTER GENERAL PERMIT
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act [Clean Water Act (CWA)] Section 402 of Public Law 92-500 (as amended)
established the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. This program regulates the
discharge of pollutants from point sources into the waters of the United States, and the release of stormwater from certain
point sources. All such discharges are unlawful without a permit (Section 301 of the CWA). After a permit is obtained, a
discharge not in compliance with all permit terms and conditions is unlawful. Missouri State Operating Permits (permits)
are issued by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (Department) under an approved program, operated in
accordance with federal and state laws (Federal CWA and Missouri Clean Water Law Section 644 as amended). Permits
are issued for a period of five (5) years unless otherwise specified.
Per 40 CFR 124.56, 40 CFR 124.8, and 10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(A)2., a Fact Sheet shall be prepared to give pertinent
information regarding the applicable regulations, rationale for the development of effluent limitations and conditions, and
the public participation process for the permit. A Fact Sheet is not an enforceable part of a Missouri State Operating
Permit.
This Fact Sheet is for a:
❑ Major
❑ Minor
❑ Industrial Facility
❑ Variance
• Master General Permit
❑ Permit with widespread public interest
PART I — FACILITY INFORMATION
Facility Type: Industrial
Facility Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code and Activity:
4512 Air Transportation, Scheduled
4513 Air Courier Services
4522 Air Transportation, Nonscheduled
4581 Airports, Flying Fields and Airport Terminal Services
Facility Description:
This permit authorizes stormwater discharges from only those portions of the air transportation facility that are involved
in vehicle maintenance (including vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling and lubrication), equipment
cleaning operations or deicing operations.
Changes:
• Definitions have been added to the applicability section of this permit for clarity.
• The Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) requirement has been added to the permit and will be
used to submit DMRs and annual report.
• A new effluent limit has been added for Chloride.
• Annual reporting has been moved from October 31' to January 28'h to bring this permit into line with other
general permits.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 2 of 10
PART II — RECEIVING STREAM INFORMATION
APPLICABLE DESIGNATIONS OF WATERS OF THE STATE:
Per Missouri Effluent Regulations (10 CSR 20-7.015), the waters of the state are divided into seven (7) categories. Each
category lists effluent limitations for specific parameters, which are presented in each outfall's Effluent Limitation Table
and further discussed in the Derivation & Discussion of Effluent Limitations section. This permit applies to facilities
discharging to the following water body categories:
Missouri or Mississippi River [10 CSR 20-7.015(2)]:
Lake or Reservoir [ 10 CSR 20-7.015(3)]:
Losing [ 10 CSR 20-7.015(4)]:
Metropolitan No -Discharge [10 CSR 20-7.015(5)]: ❑
Special Stream [10 CSR 20-7.015(6)]:
Subsurface Water [10 CSR 20-7.015(7)]:
All Other Waters [10 CSR 20-7.015(8)]:
Missouri Water Quality Standards (10 CSR 20-7.031) defines the Clean Water Commission water quality objectives in
terms of "water uses to be maintained and the criteria to protect those uses". The receiving stream and/or 1' classified
receiving stream's beneficial water uses shall be maintained in accordance with 10 CSR 20-7.031(4). The effluent limits
established by this permit are intended to be protective of all streams that fall within the categories of receiving water
bodies indicated above. A general permit does not take into consideration site-specific conditions.
MIXING CONSIDERATIONS:
This permit applies to receiving streams of varying low flow conditions. Therefore, the effluent limitations must be based
on the smallest low flow streams considered, which includes waters without designated uses. As such, no mixing is
allowed.
• Not Applicable: Mixing Zone [10 CSR 20-7.031(5)(A)4.B.(I)(a)]
• Not Applicable: Zone of Initial Dilution [10 CSR 20-7.031(5)(A)4.B.(I)(b)]
RECEIVING STREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS:
• Not Applicable: No receiving water monitoring requirements recommended at this time.
Part III — Rationale and Derivation of Effluent Limitations & Permit Conditions
303(d) LIST & TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL):
Section 303(d) of the Federal CWA requires that each state identify waters that are not meeting Water Quality Standards
and for which adequate water pollution controls have not been required. Water Quality Standards protect such beneficial
uses of water as whole body contact, maintaining fish and other aquatic life, and providing drinking water for people,
livestock, and wildlife. The 303(d) list helps state and federal agencies keep track of waters that are impaired but not
addressed by normal water pollution control programs.
A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a body of water can absorb before its water
quality is affected. If a water body is determined to be impaired as listed on the 303(d) list, then a watershed management
plan will be developed that shall include the TMDL calculation. For facilities with an existing general permit before a
TMDL is written on their receiving stream, the Department will evaluate the permit and may require any facility
authorized by this general permit to apply for and obtain a site specific operating permit. For facilities requesting a new
general permit that are located within the watershed of an impaired water as designated on the 305(b) Report will be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis for inclusion under this permit.
• Conditional: The Department will review all discharges to 303(d) listed streams on a case by case
basis.
ANTI -BACKSLIDING:
A provision in the Federal Regulations [CWA §303(d) (4); CWA §402(c); 40 CFR 122.44(I)] that requires a reissued
general operating permit to be as stringent as the previous general operating permit with some exceptions.
• Not Applicable: All requirements and limitations in this stormwater permit are at least as protective as
those previously established.
MO -1180F000
Fact Sheet, Page 3 of 10
ANTIDEGRADATION:
Antidegradation policies ensure protection of water quality for a particular water body on a pollutant by pollutant basis to
ensure Water Quality Standards are maintained to support beneficial uses such as fish and wildlife propagation and
recreation on and in the water. This also includes special protection of waters designated as an Outstanding National
Resource Water or Outstanding State Resource Water [10 CSR 20-7.03I(3)(C)]. Antidegradation policies are adopted to
minimize adverse effects on water. The Department has determined that the best avenue forward for implementing the
Antidegradation requirements into general permits is by requiring the appropriate development and maintenance of a
SWPPP. The SWPPP must identify all Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are reasonable and effective, taking into
account environmental impacts and costs. This analysis must document why no discharge or no exposure options are not
feasible at the facility. This selection and documentation of appropriate control measures will then serve as the analysis of
alternatives and fulfill the requirements of the Antidegradation Rule and Implementation Procedure 10 CSR 20-7.031(3)
and 10 CSR 20-7.015(9)(A)5.
Any facility seeking coverage under this permit, which undergoes expansion or discharges a new pollutant of concern,
must update their SWPPP and select new BMPs that are reasonable and cost effective. New facilities seeking coverage
under this permit are required to develop a SWPPP that includes this analysis and documentation of appropriate BMPs.
Renewal of coverage for a facility requires a review of the SWPPP to assure that the selected BMPs continue to be
appropriate.
® Applicable: The pollutants of concern in this permit are chemical oxygen demand, biochemical oxygen
demand, pH, total suspended solids, ethylbenzene, oil and grease, ammonia as nitrogen, and chloride.
Compliance with the effluent limitations established in this permit, along with the evaluation and
implementation of BMPs as documented in the SWPPP, meets the requirements of Missouri's
Antidegradation Review [10 CSR 20-7.031(3), 10 CSR 20-7.031 Table A, and 10 CSR 20-
7.015(9)(A)5].
BENCHMARKS:
When a permitted feature or outfall consists of only stormwater, a benchmark may be implemented at the discretion of the
permit writer. Benchmarks require the facility to monitor, and if necessary, replace and update stormwater control
measures. Benchmark concentrations are not effluent limitations. A benchmark exceedance, therefore, is not a permit
violation; however, failure to take corrective action is a violation of the permit. Benchmark monitoring data is used to
determine the overall effectiveness of control measures and to assist the permittee in knowing when additional corrective
actions may be necessary to comply with the limitations of the permit.
Because of the fleeting nature of stormwater discharges, the Department, under the direction of EPA guidance, has
determined monthly averages are capricious measures of stormwater discharges. The Technical Support Document for
Water Quality Based Toxics Control (EPA/505/2-90-001; 1991) Section 3.1 indicates most procedures within the
document apply only to water quality based approaches, not end -of -pipe technology-based controls. Hence, stormwater
only outfalls will generally only contain a maximum daily limit (MDL) or benchmark, determined by the site specific
conditions including the receiving water's current quality.
Numeric benchmark values are based on water quality standards or other stormwater permits including the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's) Multi -Sector General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity
(MSGP). Because precipitation events are sudden and momentary, benchmarks based on state or federal standards or
recommendations use the Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) value, or acute standard. The CMC is the estimate of
the highest concentration of a material in surface water to which an aquatic community can be exposed briefly without
resulting in an unacceptable effect. The CMC for aquatic life is intended to be protective of the vast majority of the
aquatic communities in the United States.
® Not Applicable: This facility has stormwater-only outfalls with effluent limitations and does not contain
benchmarks. The effluent limitations listed are consistently achieved in stormwater discharges by a
variety of other industries with SWPPPs and is deemed protective of instream water quality and aquatic
life.
PUBLIC NOTICE OF COVERAGE FOR AN INDIVIDUAL FACILITY:
Public Notice of reissuance of coverage is not required unless the facility has been found to be in significant
noncompliance [10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(C)4.]. The need for an individual public notification process shall be determined
and identified in the permit [10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(C)51. Newly permitted facilities require public notice before the permit
is issued.
® Applicable: Issuance of coverage to individual airports covered under this permit for the first time shall
be placed on Public Notice for thirty (30) days in accordance with 10 CSR 20-6.020(1)(B) & (C)2.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 4 of 10
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS (RPA):
Federal regulation 40 CFR Part 122.44(d)(1)(i) requires effluent limitations for all pollutants that are or may be
discharged at a level that will cause or have the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an in -stream excursion
above narrative or numeric water quality standard. In accordance with 40 CFR Part 122.44(d)(iii) if the permit writer
determines that any given pollutant has the reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an in -stream excursion above
the water quality standard, the permit must contain effluent limits for that pollutant.
® Conservative assumption: A traditional statistical Reasonable Potential Analysis has not been
conducted for this master general permit; but instead the Department has made a reasonable potential
determination based on sources of pollutants related to water quality standards. Activities performed by
facilities covered under this master general permit were evaluated as to whether discharges have
reasonable potential to cause or contribute to excursions of general criteria listed in 10 CSR 20-
7.031(4). A reasonable potential to violate water quality standards is assumed for the pollutants of
concern due to the nature of the activities carried out under this permit, resulting in the effluent limits
contained in the permit.
(a) Water Quality Standards. To the extent required by law, discharges to waters of the state
shall not cause a violation of water quality standards rule under 10 CSR 20-7.031, including
both specific and general criteria. Each general criterion below was assessed in relation to
activities carried out by facilities covered under this permit and numeric limits assigned for
criteria where there was a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an excursion above
narrative or numeric water quality standards.
(b) General Criteria. The following general water quality criteria are applicable to all waters of
the state at all times including mixing zones. No water contaminant, by itself or in
combination with other substances, shall prevent the waters of the state from meeting the
following conditions:
(1) Waters shall be free from substances in sufficient amounts to cause the
formation of putrescent, unsightly or harmful bottom deposits or prevent full
maintenance of beneficial uses.
a. The Department has determined that there is reasonable potential for
equipment cleaning activities covered under this general permit to cause the
formation of putrescent, unsightly or harmful bottom deposits in waters of
the state. This has been addressed by assigning an effluent limit for Total
Suspended Solids and by requiring a SWPPP to address stormwater runoff.
The Department has determined that the limit and BMP implementation for
this pollutant are sufficient to protect water quality standard general criteria.
(2) Waters shall be free from oil, scum and floating debris in sufficient amounts to
be unsightly or prevent full maintenance of beneficial uses.
a. The Department has determined that there is reasonable potential for
equipment maintenance, lubrication and fueling activities exposed to
stormwater and covered under this general permit to cause oil, scum or
floating debris in waters of the state. This has been addressed by assigning
limits for Oil and Grease and Ethylbenzene, narrative conditions prohibiting
the discharge of waters with a visible sheen, and by requiring a SWPPP to
address stormwater runoff. The Department has determined that the limits
and BMP implementation for these pollutants are sufficient to protect water
quality standard general criteria.
(3) Waters shall be free from substances in sufficient amounts to cause unsightly
color or turbidity, offensive odor or prevent full maintenance of beneficial uses.
a. The Department has determined that there is reasonable potential for
equipment washing, vehicle rehabilitation and deicing activities covered
under this general permit to cause unsightly color and/or turbidity in waters
of the state. This has been addressed by assigning effluent limits for Total
Suspended Solids, Nitrate, and Ammonia as Nitrogen and by requiring a
SWPPP to address stormwater runoff. The Department has determined that
the effluent limitations and BMP implementation for this pollutant are
sufficient to protect water quality standards general criteria.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 5 of 10
(4) Waters shall be free from substances or conditions in sufficient amounts to
result in toxicity to human, animal or aquatic life.
a. The Department has determined that there is a reasonable potential for
equipment deicing, anti -icing, and fueling activities covered under this
permit to contribute to toxicity to human, animal or aquatic life. This has
been addressed by assigning effluent limitations for BOD5, COD, pH, Oil
and Grease, Chloride, Ammonia as Nitrogen, Nitrate, and Ethylbenzene, and
by requiring a SWPPP to address stormwater runoff. The Department has
determined that the effluent limitations and BMP implementation for these
pollutants are sufficient to protect water quality standard general criteria.
(5) There shall be no significant human health hazard from incidental contact with
the water.
a. Based on the activities carried out by the facilities under this general permit,
the Department has determined there is no reasonable potential for
contaminates to cause a significant health hazard from incidental contact
with the water.
(6) There shall be no acute toxicity to livestock or wildlife watering.
a. The Department has determined that there is reasonable potential for
equipment fueling, repair, lubrication, and deicing activities covered under
this general permit to cause acute toxicity to livestock or wildlife watering.
This has been addressed by assigning effluent limits for Ethylbenzene and
by requiring a SWPPP to address stormwater runoff. The Department has
determined that compliance with the effluent limitation values and BMP
implementation for these pollutants are sufficient to protect water quality
standard general criteria.
(7) Waters shall be free from physical, chemical or hydrologic changes that would
impair the natural biological community.
a. The Department has determined that there is a reasonable potential for
activities covered under this permit to contribute to physical, chemical or
hydrologic changes that would impair the natural biologic communities
within waters of the state. This has been addressed by assigning effluent
limitations for BOD5, COD, pH, Oil and Grease, Chloride, Ammonia as
Nitrogen, Nitrate, and Ethylbenzene, and by requiring a SWPPP to address
stormwater runoff. The Department has determined that compliance with the
effluent limitations and BMP implementation for these pollutants are
sufficient to protect water quality standard general criteria.
(8) Waters shall be free from used tires, car bodies, appliances, demolition debris,
used vehicles or equipment and solid waste as defined in Missouri's Solid Waste
Law, section 260.200, RSMo, except as the use of such materials is specifically
permitted pursuant to section 260.200-260.247.
a. Based on the activities carried out by the facilities under this general permit,
the Department has determined there is no reasonable potential for the
deposition of used tires, car bodies, appliances, demolition debris, used
vehicles or equipment or solid waste into waters of the state other than what
is addressed by the implementation of a SWPPP for the facility.
SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE (SOC):
A schedule of remedial measures included in a permit, including an enforceable sequence of interim requirements
(actions, operations, or milestone events) leading to compliance with the Missouri Clean Water Law, its implementing
regulations, and/or the terms and conditions of an operating permit.
® Not Applicable: This permit does not contain a Schedule of Compliance.
SETBACKS:
Setbacks are common elements of general permits and are established to provide a margin of safety in order to protect the
receiving water from accidents, spills, unusual events, etc. Per 10 CSR 20-7.015(6)(B) and 7.031(3)(C) Outstanding
National and State Resource Waters are protected against any degradation in water quality, so stricter setbacks apply in
these watersheds. Larger setbacks are also applied to biocriteria reference locations, and streams lakes or reservoirs with
the designated use of drinking water supply or identified as critical habitat for endangered species.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 6 of 10
SPILL REPORTING:
Any emergency involving a hazardous substance must be reported to the Department's 24 hour Environmental
Emergency Response hotline at (573) 634-2436 at the earliest practicable moment after discovery. The Department may
require the submittal of a written report detailing measures taken to clean up a spill. These reporting requirements apply
when the spill results in chemicals or materials leaving the permitted property or reaching waters of the state. This
requirement is in addition to the noncompliance reporting requirement found in Standard Conditions Part I.
http://dnr.mo.gov/env/esp/spillbill.htm.
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP):
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.44(k) Best Management Practices (BMPs) must be used to control or abate the discharge
of pollutants when:
(1) Authorized under section 304(e) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the control of toxic pollutants and
hazardous substances from ancillary industrial activities;
(2) Authorized under section 402(p) of the CWA for the control of stormwater discharges;
(3) Numeric effluent limitations are infeasible; or
(4) The practices are reasonably necessary to achieve effluent limitations and standards or to carry out the purposes
and intent of the CWA.
In accordance with the Developing Your Stornnwater Pollution Prevention Plan, a Guide for Industrial Operators, (EPA
833-B-09-002) published by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2015
(https://www.epa.gov/npdes/industrial-stormwater-guidance), BMPs are measures or practices used to reduce the amount
of pollution entering waters of the state from a permitted facility. BMPs may take the form of a process, activity, or
physical structure. Additionally in accordance with the Stormwater Management, a SWPPP is a series of steps and
activities to (1) identify sources of pollution or contamination, and (2) select and carry out actions which prevent or
control the pollution of storm water discharges.
A SWPPP must be prepared by the permittee if the SIC code is found in 40 CFR 122.26(6)(14) and/or 10 CSR 20-
6.200(2). A SWPPP may be required of other facilities where stormwater has been identified as needing better
management. The purpose of a SWPPP is to comply with all applicable stormwater regulations by creating an adaptive
management plan to control and mitigate pollution of stormwater runoff. Developing a SWPPP provides opportunities to
employ appropriate BMPs to minimize the risk of pollutants being discharged during storm events. The following
paragraph outlines the general steps the permittee should take to determine which BMPs will work to achieve the
benchmark values or limits in the permit. This section is not intended to be all encompassing or restrict the use of any
physical BMP or operational and maintenance procedure that will assist in pollution control. Additional steps or revisions
to the SWPPP may be required to meet the requirements of the permit.
Areas which should be included in the SWPPP are identified in 40 CFR 122.26(b)(14). Once the potential sources of
stormwater pollution have been identified, a plan should be formulated to best control the amount of pollutant being
released and discharged by each activity or source. This should include, but is not limited to, minimizing exposure to
stormwater, good housekeeping measures, proper facility and equipment maintenance, spill prevention and response,
vehicle traffic control, and proper materials handling. Once a plan has been developed, the facility will employ the
control measures that have been determined to be adequate to achieve the benchmark values or effluent limitations
discussed above. The facility will conduct monitoring and inspections of the BMPs to ensure they are working properly
and re-evaluate any BMP not achieving compliance with permitting requirements. For example, if sample results from an
outfall show values of TSS above the benchmark value or effluent limit, the BMP being employed is deficient in
controlling stormwater pollution. Corrective action should be taken to repair, improve, or replace the failing BMP. This
internal evaluation is required at least once per month but should be continued more frequently if BMPs continue to fail.
If failures do occur, continue this trial and error process until appropriate BMPs have been established.
If failures continue to occur and the permittee feels there are no practicable or cost-effective BMPs that will sufficiently
reduce a pollutant concentration in the discharge to the benchmark value or effluent limit established in the permit, the
permittee can submit a request to re-evaluate the values. This request needs to include:
(1) A detailed explanation of why the facility is unable to comply with the permit conditions and unable to establish
BMPs to achieve the benchmark values or limits;
(2) Financial data of the company and documentation of cost associated with BMPs for review; and
(3) The SWPPP, which should contain adequate documentation of BMPs employed, failed BMPs, corrective
actions, and all other required information.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 7 of 10
This will allow the Department to conduct a cost analysis on control measures and actions taken by the facility to
determine cost-effectiveness of BMPs. The request shall be submitted in the form of an operating permit modification;
the application is found at: http://dnr.mo.gov/forms/index.html.
® Applicable: A SWPPP shall be developed and implemented for each site and shall incorporate
required practices identified by the Department, incorporate erosion control practices specific to site
conditions, and provide for maintenance and adherence to the plan.
VARIANCE:
Per the Missouri Clean Water Law Section 644.061.4, variances shall be granted for such period of time and under such
terms and conditions as shall be specified by the commission in its order. The variance may be extended by affirmative
action of the commission. In no event shall the variance be granted for a period of time greater than is reasonably
necessary for complying with the Missouri Clean Water Law Section 644.006 to 644.141 or any standard, rule, or
regulation promulgated pursuant to Missouri Clean Water Law Section 644.006 to 644.141.
® Not Applicable: This permit is not drafted under premises of a petition for variance.
WASTELOAD ALLOCATIONS (WLA) FOR LIMITS:
Per 10 CSR 20-2.010(78), the amount of pollutant each discharger is allowed by the Department to release into a given
stream after the Department has determined total amount of pollutant that may be discharged into that stream without
endangering its water quality.
® Not Applicable: Wasteload Allocations include an allowance for mixing. No mixing is allowed under
general permits, so Water Quality Standards are used in place of Wasteload Allocation.
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS:
Per 10 CSR 20-7.031(4), General Criteria shall be applicable to all waters of the state at all times including mixing zones.
Additionally, 40 CFR 122.44(d)(1) directs the Department to establish in each NPDES permit to include conditions to
achieve water quality established under Section 303 of the Clean Water Act, including State narrative criteria for water
quality.
WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY (WET) TEST:
Per 10 CSR 20-7.031(1)(FF), a toxicity test conducted under specified laboratory conditions on specific indicator
organism; and per 40 CFR Section 122.2, the aggregate toxic effect of an effluent measured directly by a toxicity test. A
WET test is a quantifiable method of determining if a discharge from a facility may be causing toxicity to aquatic life by
itself, in combination with, or through synergistic responses when mixed with receiving stream water.
® Not Applicable: At this time, the facility is not required to conduct a WET test.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 8 of 10
Part IV — Effluent Limitation Determination
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS TABLE:
PARAMETER
UNIT
BASIS
FOR
LIM ITs
DAILY
MAXIMUM
WEEKLY
AVERAGE
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
MODIFIED
PREVIOUS PERMIT
LIMITATIONS
FLOW
GPD
1
*
*
NO
PH (S.U.)
SU
2, 3
6.5 — 9
6.5 — 9
NO
6.5-9.0
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
MG/L
2, 8
70
70
NO
70/70
ETHYLBENZENE
MG/L
2, 3
0.32
0.32
NO
0.32/0.32
OIL & GREASE (MG/L)
MG/L
2, 3
15
10
NO
15/10
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
MG/L
3, 8
120
90
NO
120/90
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMANDS
MG/L
3, 8
90
60
NO
90/60
CIILORIDE
MG/L
2, 8
860
860
YES
NOT PREVIOUSLY
LIMITED
AMMONIA AS N FOR > 1,000 JET
DEPARTURES ANNUALLY
MG/L
1
14.7
14.7
YES
AMMONIA AS N FOR < 1,000 JET
DEPARTURES ANNUALLY
MG/L
1, 8
*
*
NO
NITRATE
MG/L
2, 8
*
*
NO
*monitoring requirement only
Basis for Limitations Codes:
1. State or Federal Regulation/Law
2. Water Quality Standard
3. Water Quality Based Effluent Limits
4. Lagoon Policy
5. Ammonia Policy
6. Antidegradation Policy
7. Water Quality Model
8. Best Professional Judgement
9. TMDL or Permit in lieu of TMDL
10. WET test Policy
DERIVATION AND DISCUSSION OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS:
The CWA requires that all NPDES discharges to Waters of the U. S. contain technology-based or water quality -based
effluent limitations, whichever is more stringent. When the EPA has not established industry specific technology based
Effluent Limitation Guidelines, Missouri uses EPA's Technical Support Document for Water Quality Based Toxics
Control (TSD) method for calculating site-specific water -quality based effluent limitations. The TSD method is based on
assumptions and statistics that apply to continuous discharges, not intermittent stormwater discharges and thus may not
apply to this permit. In that case, it is the Department's policy to consult the EPAs Effluent Limits Guidelines or other
applicable documents or guidance.
• art: In accordance with 10 CSR 20-7.031(5)(E) effluent limits are established to meet water quality standards.
The state water quality standard for pH is 6.5-9.0 SU. In accordance with the Clean Water Act section
301(b)(1)(C), the more stringent standard must be applied to the permit. There are no TBELs for this industry.
Therefore, the state water quality standard 6.5-9.0 SU will be carried over from the previous permit and
implemented in this permit.
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS): Effluent limits for each type of receiving water body were set according to 10
CSR 20-6.200 and are considered necessary for protection of Water Quality Standards 10 CSR 20-7.031(4).
The Department has retained the previous effluent limit of 70 mg/L in this permit for all SIC codes. This is a
technology based limit and is deemed to be achievable using best available technology. The Department has
determined that these values are protective of state general criteria cited above and technologically achievable.
• Ethvlbenzene: The previous permit effluent limit of 0.32 mg/L, based on water quality standards for protection
of aquatic life, was retained in this permit. Based on the water quality standards in 10 CSR 20-7.031 Table A,
the Department has determined that this value is protective of state general criteria cited above and
technologically achievable.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 9 of 10
• Oil & Grease: This permit has water quality based effluent limit of 10 mg/L for the protection of aquatic life
per 10 CSR 20-7.031. Oil and Grease is a conventional pollutant, in accordance with 10 CSR 20-7.031 Table A:
Criteria for Designated Uses; 10 mg/L monthly average (chronic standard). The existing effluent limit was
carried over from the previous permit.
• Chemical Oxygen Demand: Effluent limits carried over from previous permit to protect for the General
Criteria in the Water Quality Standard. The Department has determined that these values are protective of state
general criteria and technologically achievable.
• Nitrate: Monitoring only requirement was carried over from previous permit. This parameter is monitored
because of the deicing chemicals used at some airports with contain nitrate which can cause undesirable
conditions in receiving streams. This parameter may be reevaluated in subsequent permit cycles depending on
data received during this permit cycle's directed monitoring.
• Biochemical Oxygen Demands: Effluent limits carried over from previous permit to protect for the General
Criteria in the Water Quality Standard. The Department has determined that these values are protective of state
general criteria and technologically achievable.
• Ammonia as N: An effluent limit is set because deicing chemicals containing urea have been demonstrated to
have toxic impacts to receivng streams'. Per Effluent Limit Guidelines in 40 CFR 449.10, all airports with
greater than or equal to 1,000 jet (non -propeller aircraft) departures must either use only non -urea -containing
deicers OR they must meet the effluent limit of 14.7 mg/L. An analysis of available data demonstrates that in the
past, airports under this general permit discharged well below the water quality based effluent limit of 12.1 mg/L
(results range from 0.015 mg/L to 10 mg/L, average of 0.3 mg/L, n = 173 samples). In the previous permit cycle,
annual reporting was due in October and consequently most monitoring was conducted in September. This
makes extrapolation of the available data to evaluate effluent values during the winter season difficult at best.
Because of limitations that exist with the available data, the Department intends to reevaluate this limitation in
subsequent permit cycles to determine the appropriateness of water quality based limits for this parameter. For
these reasons and in light of the fact that stormwater discharges are short term and intermittent, the Department
has made the reasonable potential determination that the technology based limit representing the degree of
effluent reduction available by the application of best available technology, along with the evaluation and
implementation of BMPs as documented in the SWPPP, is appropriate at this time.
• Chloride: Chlorides found in some deicing chemicals authorized in this permit and can be harmful to aquatic
life. The previous permit required monitoring only. An effluent limitation of 860 mg/L has been added to protect
water quality. The acute water quality standard for protection of aquatic life is applied directly because the
discharge only occurs during ice or snowmelt.
2 Corsi, S., Booth, N., Hall, D. USGS Aircraft and runway deicers at General Mitchell International Airport. Milwaukee,
Wisconson. USA. 1. Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Dissolved Oxygen in receiving streams. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry, Vol. 20, No. 7, pp. 1474-1482, 2001.
MO-R80F000
Fact Sheet, Page 10 of 10
PART V — ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
On the basis of preliminary staff review and the application of applicable standards and regulations, the Department, as
administrative agent for the Missouri Clean Water Commission, proposes to issue a permit(s) subject to certain effluent
limitations, schedules, and special conditions contained herein and within the operating permit. The proposed
determinations are tentative pending public comment.
PUBLIC MEETING:
A public meeting was held at the May 4, 2017 Clean Water Forum in Jefferson City, Missouri.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
The Department shall give public notice that a draft permit has been prepared and its issuance is pending. Additionally,
public notice will be issued if a public hearing is to be held because of a significant degree of interest in and water quality
concerns related to a draft permit. No public notice is required when a request for a permit modification or termination is
denied; however, the requester and permittee must be notified of the denial in writing.
The Department must issue public notice of a pending operating permit or of a new or reissued statewide general permit.
The public comment period is the length of time not less than 30 days following the date of the public notice which
interested persons may submit written comments about the proposed permit.
For persons wanting to submit comments regarding this proposed operating permit, then please refer to the Public Notice
page located at the front of this draft operating permit. The Public Notice page gives direction on how and where to
submit appropriate comments.
® The Public Notice period for this operating permit was from August 24, 2017 to September 25, 2017.
Two comments were received and are summarized below:
Comment 1:
Requirements — Item 11 (page 5 of 9): This requirement addresses reportable releases of hazardous substances. Facilities
are already regulated under 24-3.010 to report hazardous substances. If the Department keeps this requirement in the
permit, I request that it be written to have records of reports "readily available" versus "retained with the SWPPP".
Response I:
Requirement 11 requiring that a record of the release of hazardous substance/spill to be retained with the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and made available upon request is essentially the same conditions that you
requested in your comment. The requirement is to keep those records with the SWPPP not be incorporated into the
SWPPP. The Department will clarify the intent of the requirement.
Comment 2:
In addition to the above comment, I request that the records, including the spill reports and SWPPP, may be retained
electronically.
Response 2:
The Department agrees with this request and has added language to the permit requirements indicating that the SWPPP
and hazardous substance release/spill records may be kept in an electronic format so long as they are readily available to
facility staff and the Department upon request.
DATE OF FACTSHEET: AUGUST 17, 2017
SUSAN J. HIGGINS
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST 111
MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
WATER PROTECTION PROGRAM
OPERATING PERMITS SECTION
573-526-1002
Sussn.HigainsQdn r.mo.gov