DWQ-2025-003641

Official Draft Public Notice Version Month Day, year
The findings, determinations, and assertions contained in this document are not final and subject to change following the public comment period.
FACT SHEET
MORGAN CITY CORPORATION
RENEWAL PERMIT: DISCHARGE
UPDES PERMIT NUMBER: UT0020893
MINORMUNICIPAL
FACILITY CONTACTSOperator Name:Morgan City CorporationContact:Ty BaileyPosition: CityManagerPhone Number:[phone]Person Name:Kale WatkinsPosition:Senior Water/Wastewater OperatorPhone
Number:[phone]Permittee Name:Morgan City CorporationFacility Name:Morgan City Wastewater Treatment PlantMailing and Facility Address:PO Box 1085Morgan, Utah 84050Telephone:(801)
821-6324
Actual Address:90 West Young Street
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY
The Morgan City Wastewater Treatment Facility (Facility) is located approximately 1.5 miles northwest of Morgan, Utah in Morgan County. Morgan has a population of approximately 4,200
with 1,400 sewer connections. The design capacity of the Facility is 0.45 million gallons per day (MGD).
The Facility comprises of two influent lift stations with an 8-inch influent Parshall Flume, influent flow meters, grinders, headworks, screening and grit removal system, four aerated
lagoon cells, switchover chlorination, dichlorination equipment, reaeration equipment, effluent 90 degree “v” notch weir and effluent flow meter. Chlorination takes place in two maze
type configuration contact basins following the last stabilization cell before discharge into the Weber River.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM PREVIOUS PERMIT
Monitoring for total dissolved solids (TDS) was added as monitoring only as the Facility discharges into a Class 4 waterbody.
Total residual chlorine effluent limits decreased in accordance with the wasteload analysis (WLA).
DISCHARGE
DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE
The Facility has been reporting self-monitoring results on Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR)on a monthly basis. OutfallDescription of Discharge Point
001 Locatedat latitude 41 03' 07" and longitude 111 41' 57" effluent is discharged through a 12-inch pipe located on the southwest side of the lagoon system into the Weber
River.
RECEIVING WATERS AND STREAM CLASSIFICATION
Discharge into the Weber River occurs, which is a Class1C, 2B, 3A, and 4according to UAC R317-2-13:
Class 1C -- Protected for domestic purposes with prior treatment by treatment processes as required by the Utah Division of Drinking Water
Class 2B -- Protected for infrequent primary contact recreation. Also protected for secondary contact recreation where there is a low likelihood of ingestion of water or a low degree
of bodily contact with the water. Examples include, but are not limited to, wading, hunting, and fishing.
Class 3A -- Protected for cold water species of game fish and other cold-water aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain.
Class 4 -- Protected for agricultural uses including irrigation of crops and stock watering.
TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) REQUIREMENTS
According to the Utah’s 2024 303(d) Water Quality Assessment Report, the receiving water for the discharge, Weber River between East Canyon Creek Confluence and Lost Creek Confluence
(UT16020102-022_00, Weber-6) is impaired for Benthic Macroinvertebrates Bioassessments and requires a TMDL.
BASIS FOR EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Effluent limitations for E. coli and pH are based on current Utah Secondary Treatment Standards, UAC R317-1-3.2. Effluent limitations on biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) and total suspended
solids (TSS) are based UAC R317-1-3.2.G (alternative permit limits for lagoon systems). Percent removal for BOD5 and TSS have not been included in this permit renewal as the Facility
meets the requirement defined in UAC R317-1-3.2.E, consistent with previous permits. Oil and grease limitations are based on best professional judgment (BPJ) and consistent with the
previous permit. Total residual chlorine (TRC), dissolved oxygen, and phosphoruswere based on theattached Wasteload Analysis (WLA) for this discharge into the Weber River. It has been
determined that this discharge will not cause a violation of water quality standards. An Antidegradation Level II review is not required since the Level I review shows that water quality
impacts are minimal. The permittee is expected to be able to comply with these limitations.
Reasonable Potential Analysis
Since January 1, 2016, DWQ has conducted reasonable potential analysis (RP) on all new and renewal applications received after that date. RP for this permit renewal was conducted following
DWQ’s September 10, 2015Reasonable Potential Analysis Guidance (RP Guidance). There are four outcomes defined in the RP Guidance: Outcome A, B, C, or D. These Outcomes provide a frame
work for what routine monitoring or effluent limitations are required
An initial effluent metals screening and RP check was performed on arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, and zinc to determine if there was reasonable
potential for the discharge to exceed the applicable water quality standards. Based on the initial effluent metals screening, none of the metals were found to have a reasonable potential
to exceed the most stringent chronic water quality standard. A copy of the effluent metals and RP screening is included at the end of this Fact Sheet.
RP was also conducted on ammonia and ammonia will remain monitoring only in this Permit renewal. A copy of the RP input/out table is included at the end of this Fact Sheet.
The permit limitations are
Parameter
Table 1: Effluent Limitations(a)
Maximum Monthly Avg
Maximum Weekly Avg
Yearly
Maximum
Daily Minimum
Daily Maximum
Total Flow, MGD

--
--
--
--
0.450
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5), mg/L
45
65
--
--
--
Total Suspended Solids (TSS), mg/L
45
65
--
--
--
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L
--
--
--
5.0
--
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC), mg/L
Summer (Jul-Sep)
Fall (Oct-Dec)
Winter (Jan-Mar)
Spring (Apr-Jun)
3.20
0.515
0.336
2.00
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
2.88
0.473
0.311
1.81
E. coli, No./100mL
126
158
--
--
--
Total Phosphorus (as P), lbs/year
--
--
8,583
--
--

Oil & Grease, mg/L
--
--
--
--
10.0
pH, Standard Units
--
--
--
6.5
9
SELF-MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTSThe following self-monitoring requirements are the same as in the previous permit with the addition of monthly monitoring for TDS. The permit
requires reports to be submitted monthly and annually, as applicable, on DMR forms due 28 days after the end of the monitoring period. Effective January 1, 2017, monitoring results
shall be submitted using NetDMR unless the permittee has successfully petitioned for an exception. Lab sheets for biomonitoring, metals and toxic organics shall be attached to the DMRs.
Table 2: Self-Monitoring and Reporting Requirements(a)
Parameter
Frequency
Sample Type
Units
Total Flow(b)(c)
Continuous
Recorder
MGD
BOD5 (d)
Influent
Effluent
Monthly
Monthly
Composite
Composite
mg/L
mg/L
TSS (d)
Influent
Effluent
Monthly
Monthly
Composite
Composite
mg/L
mg/L
E. coli
Monthly
Grab
No./100mL
pH
Daily
Grab
SU
Total Ammonia (as N)
Monthly
Composite
mg/L
DO
Monthly
Grab
mg/L
TRC(e)
Daily

Grab
mg/L
Oil & Grease(f)
Monthly
Grab
mg/L
Orthophosphate (as P) (g)
Effluent
Monthly
Composite
mg/L
Total Phosphorus (as P)(d)(g)
Influent
Effluent
Monthly
Monthly
Composite
Composite
mg/L
mg/L
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen,
TKN (as N) (d)(g)
Influent
Effluent
Monthly
Monthly
Composite
Composite
mg/L
mg/L
Nitrate, NO3(d)
Monthly
Composite
mg/L
Nitrite, NO2(d)
Monthly
Composite
mg/L
Temperature
Weekly
Composite
℉
TDS
Monthly
Composite
mg/L
Metals
Arsenic, Total
Cadmium, Total
Chromium, Total
Copper, Total
Cyanide, Total
Lead, Total
Mercury, Total
Nickel, Total
Selenium, Total
Silver, Total
Zinc, Total
Effluent
Quarterly

Composite
mg/LNotes Tables 1 and 2See Definitions, Part VIII, for the definition of terms.Flow measurements of influent/effluent volume shall be made in such a manner that the Permittee can affirmatively
demonstrate that representative values are being obtained.If the rate of discharge is controlled, the rate and duration of discharge shall be reported.In addition to monitoring the final
discharge, influent samples shall be taken and analyzed for this constituent at the same frequency as required for this constituent in the discharge.Analytical results less than 0.06
mg/l will not be considered out of compliance with the permit. For purposes of calculating averages and reporting on the Discharge Monitoring Report form, the following will apply:
analytical values less than 0.02 mg/L shall be considered zero; andanalytical values less than 0.06 mg/L and equal to or greater than 0.02 mg/L will be recorded as measured.Oil & Grease
sampled when sheen is present or visible. If no sheen is present or visible, report NA.These reflect changes required with the adoption of UAC R317-1-3.3, Technology-based Phosphorus
Effluent Limits rule.
BIOSOLIDS
The State of Utah has adopted the 40 C.F.R. § 503 federal regulations for the disposal of sewage sludge (biosolids) by reference. However, since this facility is a lagoon, there is
not any regular sludge production. Therefore 40 C.F.R. § 503 shall not apply at this time. In the future, if the sludge needs to be removed from the lagoons and is disposed in some
way, the DWQ must be contacted prior to the removal of the sludge to ensure that all applicable state and federal regulations are met
STORM WATER
Separate storm water permits may be required based on the types of activities occurring on site.
Permit coverage under the Construction General Storm Water Permit (CGP) is required for any construction at the facility which disturb an acre or more, or is part of a common plan of
development or sale that is an acre or greater. A Notice of Intent (NOI) is required to obtain a construction storm water permit prior to the period of construction.
Information onstorm water permit requirements can be found at http://stormwater.utah.gov
PRETREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
The permittee has not been designated for pretreatment program development because it does not meet conditions which necessitate a full program. The flow through the plant is less than
five (5) MGD, there are no categorical industries discharging to the treatment facility, industrial discharges comprise less than 1 percent of the flow through the treatment facility,
and there is no indication of pass through or interference with the operation of the treatment facility such as upsets or violations of the POTW's UPDES permit limits.
Although the permittee does not have to develop a State-approved pretreatment program, any wastewater discharges to the sanitary sewer are subject to Federal, State and local regulations.
Pursuant to section 307 of the Clean Water Act, the permittee shall comply with all applicable Federal General Pretreatment Regulations promulgated, found in 40 C.F.R. § 403 and the
State Pretreatment Requirements found in UAC R317-8-8.
An industrial waste survey (IWS) is required of the permittee as stated in Part II of the permit. The IWS is to assess the needs of the permittee regarding pretreatment assistance.
The IWS shall be submitted within sixty (60) days after the issuance of the permit. If an Industrial User begins to discharge or an existing Industrial User changes their discharge
the permittee shall resubmit an IWS no later than sixty days following the introduction or change as stated in Part II of the permit.
It is required that the permittee submit for review any local limits that are developed to the DWQ for review. If local limits are developed it is required that the permittee perform
an annual evaluation of the need to revise or develop technically based local limits for pollutants of concern, to implement the general and specific prohibitions 40 C.F.R. §, Part 403.5(a)
and Part 403.5(b). This evaluation may indicate that present local limits are sufficiently protective, may need to be revised, or should be developed.
BIOMONITORING REQUIREMENTS
A nationwide effort to control toxic discharges where effluent toxicity is an existing or potential concern is regulated in accordance with the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Permit and Enforcement Guidance Document for Whole Effluent Toxicity Control (biomonitoring), dated February 2018. Authority to require effluent biomonitoring is provided in Permit
Conditions, UAC R317-8-4.2, Permit Provisions, UAC R317-8-5.3 and Water Quality Standards, UAC R317-2-5 and R317 -2-7.2.
The Facilityis a minor municipal facility that will be discharging an infrequent amount of effluent, in which toxicity is neither an existing concern, nor likely to be present. Based
on these considerations, and the absence of receiving stream water quality monitoring data, there is no reasonable potential for toxicity in the Facility’s discharge (per State of Utah
Permitting and Enforcement Guidance Document for WET Control). As such, there will be no numerical WET limitations or WET monitoring requirements in this permit. However, the permit
will contain a toxicity limitation re-opener provision that allows for modification of the permit should additional information indicate the presence of toxicity in the discharge.
PERMIT DURATIONIt is recommended that this permit be effective for a duration of five (5) years.Drafted and ReviewedbyLindsay Cowles, Discharge Permit WriterDaniel Griffin, BiosolidsJennifer
Robinson, PretreatmentLonnie Shull, BiomonitoringCarl Adams, Storm WaterChristine Osborn, TMDL/Watershed ProtectionLindsay Cowles, Reasonable Potential AnalysisSuzan Tahir,Wasteload
Analysis/ADRUtah Division of Water Quality, [phone]PUBLIC NOTICE INFORMATION (to be updated after)Began: Month Day, YearEnded: Month Day, YearComments will be received at: 195
North 1950 West PO Box 144870 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870The Public Notice of the draft permit was published on State of Utah and/or DWQ’s website for at least 30 days as required.During
the public notice and comment period provided under UAC R317-8-6.5, any interested person may submit written comments on the draft permit and may request a public hearing, if no hearing
has already been scheduled. A request for a public hearing shall be in writing and shall state the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the hearing. All comments will be considered
in making the final decision and shall be answered as provided in UAC R317-8-6.12.ADDENDUM TO FSSOBDuring finalization of the Permit certain dates, spelling edits and minor language
corrections were completed. Due to the nature of these changes, they are considered minorchangesand the permit is not required to be re Public Noticed as provided in UAC R317-8-5.6(3)Responsiveness
Summary(Explain any comments received and response sent. Actual letters can be referenced, butnot required to be included).
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
ATTACHMENT 1
Industrial Waste Survey
This Page Intentionally Left BlankIndustrial Pretreatment Wastewater SurveyDo you periodically experience any of the following treatment works problems:foam, floaties or unusual colorsplugged
collection lines caused by grease, sand, flour, etc.discharging excessive suspended solids, even in the wintersmells unusually badwaste treatment facility doesn’t seem to be treating
the waste rightPerhaps the solution to a problem like one of these may lie in investigating the types and amounts of wastewater entering the sewer system from industrial users.An industrial
user (IU) is defined as a non-domestic user discharging to the waste treatment facility which meets any of the following criteria: 1.has a lot of process wastewater (5% of the flow
at the waste treatment facility or more than 25,000 gallons per work day.)Examples:Food processor, dairy, slaughterhouse, industrial laundry.2.is subject to Federal Categorical Pretreatment
Standards;Examples:metal plating, cleaning or coating of metals, blueing of metals, aluminum extruding, circuit board manufacturing, tanning animal skins, pesticide formulating or packaging,
and pharmaceutical manufacturing or packaging,3.is a concern to the POTW.Examples:septage hauler, restaurant and food service, car wash, hospital, photo lab, carpet cleaner, commercial
laundry.All users of the water treatment facility are prohibited from making the following types of discharges:1.A discharge which creates a fire or explosion hazard in the collection
system.2.A discharge which creates toxic gases, vapor or fumes in the collection system.3.A discharge of solids or thick liquids which creates flow obstructions in the collection system.4.An
acidic discharge (low pH) which causes corrosive damage to the collection system.5.Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will

cause problems in the collection system or at the waste treatment facility.6.Waste haulers are prohibited from discharging without permission. (No midnight dumping!)When the solution
to a sewer system problem may be found by investigating the types and amounts of wastewater entering the sewer system discharged from IUs, it’s appropriate to conduct an Industrial Waste
Survey.An Industrial Waste Survey consists of:Step 1: Identify Industrial UsersMake a list of all the commercial and industrial sewer connections.Sources for the list:business license,
building permits, water and wastewater billing, Chamber of Commerce, newspaper, telephone book, yellow pages.Split the list into two groups:domestic wastewater only--no further information
neededeveryone else (IUs)Step 2: Preliminary InspectionGo visit each IU identified on the “everybody else” list. Fill out the Preliminary Inspection Form during the site visit.Step
3: Informing the StatePlease fax or send a copy of the Preliminary inspection form (both sides) to:Jennifer RobinsonDivision of Water Quality288 North 1460 WestP.O. Box 144870Salt Lake
City, UT 84114-4870Phone: [phone]Fax:[phone]E-mail:[e-mail]:\WP\Pretreatment\Forms\IWS.doc
PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FORM
INSPECTION DATE / /
Name of Business Person Contacted
Address Phone Number
Description of Business
Principal product or service:
Raw Materials used:
Production process is: [ ] Batch [ ] Continuous[ ] Both
Is production subject to seasonal variation? [ ] yes[ ] no
If yes, briefly describe seasonal production cycle.
This facility generates the following types of wastes (check all that apply):
1. [ ] Domestic wastes(Restrooms, employee showers, etc.)
2. [ ] Cooling water, non-contact3. [ ] Boiler/Tower blowdown
4. [ ] Cooling water, contact5. [ ] Process
6. [ ] Equipment/Facility washdown7. [ ] Air Pollution Control Unit
8. [ ] Storm water runoff to sewer9. [ ] Other describe
Wastes are discharged to (check all that apply):
[ ] Sanitary sewer[ ] Storm sewer
[ ] Surface water[ ] Ground water
[ ] Waste haulers[ ] Evaporation
[ ] Other (describe)
Name of waste hauler(s), if used
Is a grease trap installed?YesNo
Is it operational?YesNo
Does the business discharge a lot of process wastewater?More than 5% of the flow to the waste treatment facility?YesNoMore than 25,000 gallons per work day?YesNo
Does the business do any of the following:[ ] Adhesives[ ] Car Wash[ ] Aluminum Forming[ ] Carpet Cleaner[ ] Battery Manufacturing[ ] Dairy[ ] Copper Forming[ ] Food
Processor[ ] Electric & Electronic Components[ ] Hospital[ ] Explosives Manufacturing[ ] Laundries[ ]Foundries[ ] Photo Lab[ ]Inorganic Chemicals Mfg. or Packaging[ ]
Restaurant & Food Service[ ] Industrial Porcelain Ceramic Manufacturing[ ] Septage Hauler[ ] Iron & Steel[ ]Slaughter House
[ ] Metal Finishing, Coating or Cleaning
[ ] Mining
[ ] Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing
[ ]Organic Chemicals Manufacturing or Packaging
[ ] Paint & Ink Manufacturing
[ ] Pesticides Formulating or Packaging
[ ] Petroleum Refining
[ ] Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing or Packaging
[ ] Plastics Manufacturing
[ ] Rubber Manufacturing
[ ] Soaps & Detergents Manufacturing
[ ] Steam Electric Generation
[ ] Tanning Animal Skins
[ ] Textile Mills
Are any process changes or expansions planned during the next three years? YesNo
If yes, attach a separate sheet to this form describing the nature of planned changes or expansions.
Inspector
Waste Treatment Facility
Please send a copy of the preliminary inspection form (both sides) to:
Jennifer Robinson
Division of Water Quality
P. O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]E-Mail:[e-mail]

Industrial User
Jurisdiction
SIC Codes
Categorical Standard Number
Total Average Process Flow (gpd)
Total Average Facility Flow (gpd)
Facility Description
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
ATTACHMENT 2
Effluent Monitoring Data
This Page Intentionally Left BlankEffluent Monitoring Data
ATTACHMENT 3
Wasteload Analysis
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
ATTACHMENT 4
Reasonable Potential Analysis
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Water Quality has worked to improve our reasonable potential analysis (RP) for the inclusion of limits for parameters in the permit by using an EPA provided model. As a result of the
model, more parameters may be included in the renewal permit. A Copy of the Reasonable Potential Analysis Guidance (RP Guide) is available at water Quality. There are four outcomes
for the RP Analysis. They are;
Outcome A:A new effluent limitation will be placed in the permit.
Outcome B:No new effluent limitation. Routine monitoring requirements will be placed or increased from what they are in the permit,
Outcome C:No new effluent limitation. Routine monitoring requirements maintained as they are in the permit,
Outcome D:No limitation or routine monitoring requirements are in the permit.
(REASONABLE POTENTIAL LANGUAGE)Initial screening for metals values that were submitted through the discharge monitoring reports showed that a closer look at the metals is not needed.
A copy of the initial screening is included in the “Effluent Metals and RP Screening Results” table in this attachment
The RP model was run on ammonia using the most recent data back through 2020. This resulted in 56 data points and that there is a Reasonable Potential for an acute limit for ammonia.
Reviewing the data showed that there could be at least one outlier in the data. The EPA ProUCL model was used to evaluate the data. The results of the model are that there is not acute
and chronic RP at 95% confidence, and there is acute and chronic RP at 99% Confidence. This result indicates that the inclusion of an effluent limit for ammonia is not required at this
time, but routine monitoring requirements will be added or increased in the permit.(Outcome B from Reasonable Potential Guide)
The Metals Initial Screening Table and RP Outputs Table are included in this attachment.
A Summary of the RP Model inputs and outputs are included in the following table. Effluent Metals and RP Screening ResultsRP input/output summary
RP Procedure Output
Outfall Number:
Parameter
Ammonia
Distribution
Lognormal
Reporting Limit
(0.1)
Significant Figures
3
Maximum Reported Effluent Conc.
41.7
Coefficient of Variation (CV)
1.15
Acute Criterion
57.090

Chronic Criterion
57.090
Confidence Interval
95
99
Projected Maximum Effluent Conc. (MEC)
42.500
96.6
RP Multiplier
1.02
2.32
RP for Acute?
NO
YES
RP for Chronic?
NO
YES
Outcome
B