NC0020451_PERMIT ISSUANCE_20010430

MPDES DOCUNEEMT SCANNIM& COVER $MEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0020451
West Jefferson WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Correspondence
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
Aril 30, 2001
This document is pririted oa reuse paper - iaxxore ax y
content on the reYex-ae +vide

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
April 30, 2001
Mr. Gregory Edney, Town Manager
Town of West Jefferson
P.O. Box 490
West Jefferson, North Carolina 28694
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NCO020451
West Jefferson W WTP
Ashe County
Dear Mr. Edney:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordin�iv, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the
requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between
North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently
amended.) The following modifications have been made to the permit:
An effluent page for 0.500 MGD has been added based on the request for expansion of the facility.
Effluent limitations for oxygen -consuming constituents, metals, and a chronic toxicity test at the
expansion flow of 0.500 MGD have been included. These limits will not be effective until
construction for modifications above the existing 0.369 MGD treatment plant have been
completed.
The daily maximum limits for cadmium and nickel have been revised based on updated Division
procedure. The Division revised the procedure for assignment of weekly average and daily
maximum limits on April 28, 1999.
The North Carolina standard for cadmium in trout waters is 0.4 pg/l and based on the 7Q10 of the
receiving stream of 0.6 cfs in the UT Little Buffalo Creek, the allowable concentration for cadmium is
0.8 pg/l. The allowable concentration is given as the weekly average limit for the protection of chronic
toxic effects. The daily maximum limit of 2.1 µg/l that is given is based on the Environmental
Protection Agency's Final Acute Value for cadmium for the protection of acute toxic effects. A review
of West Jefferson's effluent data showed that only seven (7) of approximately one hundred values were
above the detection level in the years 2000 and 1999 and none of the detectable values exceeded 1.6
ug/l. The Division recognizes that the revised daily maximum limit is slightly more stringent, however,
the reported detection values for cadmium were less than the new daily maximum limit. In addition,
the detection levels reported in the i1.000 and 1999 data were 0.8 ug/l and 0.7 ugll, which would indicate
that the laboratory could detect the limit of 2.1 ug/l. Please remember that any values reported as less
than the detection levels can be considered zero (and averaged as such) for the purposes of compliance.
The same procedure was followed for the assignment of nickel limits. The weekly average limit of
156 pg/l based on a standard of 88 pg/l and the 7Q10 stream flow. The daily maximum limit of 261
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone]FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

µg/l is the Environmental Protection Agency's Final Acute Value for nickel for the protection of acute
toxic effects on aquatic life.
The assignment of daily maximum and weekly average limits for metals have been a part of West
.Jefferson's permit for the past five years, therefore no compliance schedule for these revised limits can
be given. Compliance schedules are usually only given for the assignment of newly limited parameters.
Instream monitoring for conductivity will be discontinued based on revised DWQ procedure.
Instream monitoring for dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform and temperature will be continued.
if any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 160B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings,
6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit
shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. Part 11, EA, addresses the requirements to be
followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge. This permit does not affect the legal
requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality or permits
required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act, or any other Federal or Local
governmental permits may be required.
If you have any questions or need additional infonmation, please contact Ms. Jacquelyn Nowell at
telephone number [phone], extension 5 12.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Kerr T. Stevens
CC Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office / Water Quality Section
Point Source Compliance/Enforcement Unit
.NPDES.Umt/P.ermit 'F_iled
Aquatic Toxicology Unit

Permit No. NCO020451
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PFRIIAIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. as amended,
Town of West Jefferson
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
West Jefferson'L'4'aste,,ater Treatment Facility
Off of U. S. 221
On Clear Water Drive
West Jefferson
Ashe County
to receiving waters designated as the Unnamed Tributary to the Little Buffalo Creek in the New River
Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitorinc, requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts 1. II. III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective June 1, 2001
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on March 31, 2006
Signed this day April 30, 2001
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0020451
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of West Jefferson
is hereby authorized to:
Continue to operate an existing 0.369 MGD wastewater treatment facility
consisting of bar screen, influent %yet well. secondary clarifier, aerated digester,
sludge holding basin, chlorine contact chamber and dechlorination unit, located at
West Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Faciiity, off of U.S. 221, on Clear Water
Drive, West Jefferson, Ashe County,
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division of Water Quality
construct and operate a wastewater treatment facility up to 0.500 MGD, and
3. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map
into an unnamed tributary of Little Buffalo Creek, which is classified C-Trout +
waters in the New River Basin.

Facility Information
Latitude: 36"24'20- Sub -Basin: 05-07-02
L.oneiwde: 30"29'24"
uad #; B 13NW
Stream Class: C Trout
Receiving Stream: UT Unle Buffalo Creek
Permitted Flow: 0.369, 0.500 MGD
Facility
"
Location''`'"`
West Jefferson WW7P
NC0020451

I
A (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Permit No. NCO020451
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expansion above 0.369 MGD or expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) 001.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS '=
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Ty pe
Sample Locations
Flow
0.369 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD5 z
30.0 mg/l
45.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
E.I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
E.I
_NH3-N
3/Week
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen,3
3/Week
Grab
E, U, D
Fecal Coliform
200/100 ml
4001100 ml
3/Week
Grab
E, U. D
.pH4
3/Week
Gran
E
Total Residual Chlorines
28 ugll
3/Week
Grab
E
-Temperature
Dailv
Grab
E, U. D
-Conductivity
3/Week
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen NO2 + NO3 + TKN
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity'
Quarterly
Composite
E
Cadmium
0.8 ugll
2.1 ugll
Weekly
Composite
E
Nickel
180.0 ug/I
26 1. 0 pg/I
Weekly
Composite
E
Mercury?
0.025 ugll
Weekly
Composite
E
Copper
Monthly
Composite
E
Zinc
Monthly
Composite
E
Notes:
o Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream approximately 50 feet above the discharge point, D - Downstream at the mouth of the tributary, Stream samples shall be collected three times
per week during June, July, August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
2 The monthly average BOD$ and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The daily average dissolved oxygen effiuent concentrations shall not be less than 5 mg/l.
4 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units..
5 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
6 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) @ 45%; January, April, July, October. See A (3) Special Conditions of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
7 The quantilation limit for mercury shall be 0.2 µgll (0.2 ppb). Levels reported as "<0.2 pgfl" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

e
A (2), EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Permit No. NCO020451
During the period beginning upon expansion above 0.369 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outiafl(s) 001. Such discharges shall be limited
and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTSM- s t:
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily Maximum
Measurement -
FrequencyT
Sample : ' ,'1=
e
= Sample,11ocation.� .
- :�t`, • :;1rF t' -'
Flow
0.500 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
OD52 (April 1 through October 31)
5.0 mg/l
7.5 mg/1
3/Week
Composite
E,1
.BOD52 (November 1 through March 31)
10.0 mg/I
15.0 mg/l
3/Week
Composite
E,I
Total Suspended Solidsz
10.0 mg/1
15.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
E,I
NH3-N (April 1 through October 31)
2.0 mgll
3/Week
Composite
E
NH3-N (November 1 through March 31)
4.0 mg/1
3/Week
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
3/Week
Grab
E. U, D
Fecal Colilorm
2001100 ml
400/100 ml
3/Week
Grab
E, U, D
H4
3/Week
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine$
28 ugll
3/Week
Grab
E
-Temperature
Daily
Grab
E, U, D
Conductivity
31Week
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen NO2 + NO3 + TKN
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Semi -Annual
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity6
Quarterly
Composite
E
Cadmium C7
0.7 ugll
2.1 ugll
Weekly
Composite
E
,Nickel g a
156.0 ugll
261.0 ugll
Weekly
Composite
E
ercury7r__V1
0,021 ugll
Weekly
Composite
E
_Capper C7
Monthly
Composite
E
.Zinc =
Monthly
Composite
E
Notes:
1 Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I — Influent, U — Upstream approximately 50 feet above the discharge point, D — Downstream at the mouth of the tributary, Stream samples shall be collected_ three times
per week during June, July, August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
2 The monthly average BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentrations shall not be less than 6 mgll.
4 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units..
5 Monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
6 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) @ 56%; January, April, July, October. See A (4) Special Conditions of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
7 The quantitalion limit for mercury shall be 0.2 µgll (0.2 ppb). Levels reported as "<0.2 µgll" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit No. NCO020.151
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING RE9UIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (3), CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (gUARTERLII @ 0.369 MGD
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphilia
dubia at an effluent concentration of 45 %.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase
II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of January, April, July, and October. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at
the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the permit limit, then
multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months as described in "North
Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and
further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase 11 Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Aonitoring Form
(AIR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP313 for the pass/fail results and THP313
for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Water Quality
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no later than 30 days after the
end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and all concentration/response
data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the
effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, the permittee
will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility name, permit
number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the
form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required
during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring
requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism survival,
minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will
require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the month of the initial
monitoring.

Permit No. NCO020451
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (4). CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT 19UARTERLY) @ 0.500 MGD
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to Ceriodaphnin
dubia at an effluent concentration of 56 %.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North Carolina
Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1999, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase
II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity 'Pest Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the inonth.s or January, April, July, and October. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at
the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below the permit limit, then
multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months as described in "North
Carolina Phase 11 Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February I998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the highest concentration
having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable
impairment of reproduction or, survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and
further statistical methocls are specified in the "North Carolina Phase 11 Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity 'Pest Pr'oCedure"
(Revised-Februar}• 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form
(MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP313 for the pass/fail results and THP3B
for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Water Quality
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity 'Pest Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no later than :10 ds.ys after the
end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemicaliphysical measurements and all concentration/response
data, and be certified oy laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the
effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, the permittee
will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility name, permit
number, pipe number, county, and the month year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the
form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be required
during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring
requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism survival,
minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will
require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the month of the initial
monitoring.

PUBLIC NOTICE;
STATE OFC�i
it *rnation •- 'to' .11tha3 ' NC'n-.
Division`;Of Wafer Quality..;
"AORTRI AROLIlli j
. �;11,8,ai�ove.address,or-i
. ^ENVIR0t4 MENTAL
o$U GIs : Chrfstie,.Jackson
MANAGEMENT
ati;[phone]P eaten-'Fi
"Please.
COMMISSION I NPOES
sue. 538. include',
-Art _
tilk'NPDES permit number
9617 MAIL SERVICE'
(attached) in any -bommu=
CENTER.
nieation • Interested per-
" RALEIGH;';NC . .r
abns may:also:Jislt'the! Di-;,j
;
27899-1617. _
n. of
v*`.Water'-Quality at
• 'NOTIFICATION OF
51? 'N: Salisbury Street,
_
-jNTENT. TO ISSUE:A.'
F aieigh,. ,NC. 27604-1148
;h DES WASTE WATER
between.. -the . "hours. of
PERMIT„and
'5:00 p n. i
F -
to'. review e information on'.:.
grxsthe,basis of, thorough
tie•+ r
staff: review and applica--�
tion�of NC General Staiute'
IDES. Permit ,'Number
1 �3,21, ' Public law 92-500-
NC.`0083470: Town, -, of
and,other,lawful standardsw.
Jefferson,_ %vv.TP.-.,,US"
ands regulations, the North°_
221/Academy .,Street,Pb
Carolina -Environmental
M6,rlageme6.t,
6Dac 67;` Jeffeison,
28i 6 has ••applied
Commission
for
proposes to issue
a, permit renewal for '
a:` National --Pollutant Di;='
charge Elimination -System`,
a,",•'- facility. located in
Ashe,-,County discharging
NODES),%'waste water..
on!r eated waste water in#o"'
discharge : permit • to the ;
pgrson(s) listed- .below-
ah`;Unriar'ed,.Tributary to
• •Nsked'Creek In;:the:New
.effgctive•45-days froin'the
F �►errBesin::'Currently are
pubiishdate. ofthis- notice.%
water qualitylimited: This-i
w
"dlsbharge7" ;may affect'.
Written do ments-regard
future allocatlons ,ln; thls
i6g'.the, "pr`oposed permit"`
portion :of the {receiving -;
vAUp;be accepted, until.-30
stream: •
nays after,the publish date; ,
;
of .ahis, notate:.,tom';
NPIDES; Permit r Number -
ments received prior to: •
that date are considered in
-N60026451 Y .,. WEST
JFFEfiSON = -: WWTP."
the. final,: determinations: ,
tbWN:CF, P.O: BOX 490,
WEST:JEFFEASON,'
regarding ;the proposedd
NC
permit. The,Director of the
28¢94 •has" applie6 for, a,,
NC"_ Division 'of . Water. "
Quality may'decide to hold''
f8aility ; locatedr 'in:, ASHE
County,.'discharging :waste
a;; public "meeting for. the,'
proposed - permit should'• •
!voter._; into;- . UT :• LITTL' E"
WFFAL'O ` CS `-in'•"the -''
the., Division; a" , ,
l`N�W River. Basin] Curreni- --
_receive
signiflcant:degree of.:public`j
ly are, watery guality.limltedt ;
interest
This ,discharge may' affect,
future, allocations, in_,thik,,
Copies of the draft••permit
por j6ri ^of. the . receiving',
and Other infor-;
sppArling
:mation-on,.E-uE*d4o-deb'
:
- -
termine conditions 'present
-in ,"the draft -permit are
avaMUe---upon -request-s
and payment of the costs, 11
oi,reproduction. Mail torn-.,:
mentsiand/or requests, for,:
Publisher's
Affidavit
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHE COUNTY, ss:
The attached information personally appeared before me,
the undersigned, Rexford A. Goss, General Manager of
the JEFFERSON POST, a public newspaper, of general
circulation, published in West Jefferson, in the county
aforementioned who, being duly sworn, upon his oath
sayeth that -the notice which is attached is a true copy, and
was duly published in said paper the following
dates: 4 ,�_ r O 1
Publication Fee $ 7 ' /0
Subscribed and sworn to before m4 � 1, 20 n f
aaaata�r����
My commission expires (r. = ` ,.,.� RY '
t geQ� 2s. 1G
COO
p�
�ti••� Zti
'•�,���yF= C,C Vaaa���

West Jefferson
Subject: West Jefferson
Date: Fri, lb Mar 2001 09:00:16 -0500
From: George Smith <[e-mail]>
ID
Organization: NC DENR Water Quality
To: Jackie Nowell <Jackie,NoweII@ncmaiLnet>
Jackie,
I talked with Greg Edney, Town Manager. He is going to send comments to
you concerning the permit. They feel the Cd is rather low. Anything I
can do let me know.
George
George Smith <[e-mail]>
Environmental Chemist
Division of Water Quality
Environment & Natural Resources
f of 1 3/16/01 9:05 Awl

MANAGER:
Greg Edney
MAYOR:
Dale Baldwin
FINANCE OFFICER:
Katherine Howell
`Town of West reffe
"Prosperity, Growth, Achievement"
March 16, 2001
Ms. Jacquelyn M. Nowell
NPDES Unit-NCDENR
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Dear Ms. Nowell:
I
ALDERMEN:
ca
Ted Huffman
'
4 Bob McCoy
a:
o
Earl McNeill
r z
CD
Grant Price
C'J -
Brett Suinmey
This letter is in response to the proposed permit issued by your office for the West Jefferson
Treatment Plant expansion. After looking over the draft permit, there are several points I would
like to discuss.
The changes in the permit are not large in nature, but nevertheless effect us greatly. We are
effected both from an enforcement perspective and a practicality standpoint. The issues that we
have with the permit are related to the changes in cadmium and mercury. I am have a hard time
understanding why the cadmium level is so low, almost undetectable. This new level poses a
problem for the, labs that do not have the equipment to get down to this limit. Most labs can
detect a 1 UGL.
Also, the change in the mercury limit of 0.21 UGL is understandable, but as we are already over
allocated for mercury this will make it harder to meet the plant -loading requirement. I feel as our
pretreatment program expands, the limits will be easier to meet. We need some time and
patience in meeting all the requirement of the new permit.
West Jefferson is growing very fast and it is difficult, with our limited staff, to educate all of the
new industrial and commercial customers as quickly as we need. I appreciate the time and effort
that you have put in to our permit and ask that you review and discuss with us our concerns. If
you have any questions, or I can be of any help, please call me. I look forward to working with
you on this project.
Sincerely,
eg E ney
490, 01 S. JEFFERSON AVENUE
WEST JEFFERSON, N.C. 28694
PHONE: [phone]

�1� 1
NORTH CAROLINA
FORSYTH COUNTY
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said. County and State, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths, personally
appeared D.H. Stanfield, who being duly sworn, deposes and says: that he is
Controller of the Winston-Salem Journal, engaged in the publishing of a newspaper
known as Winston-Salem Journal, published, issued and entered as second class mail
in the City of Winston-Salem, in said county and State: that he is authorized to
make this affidavit and sworn statement: that the notice or other legal advertisement,
a true copy of which is attached hereto, was published in Winston-Salem Journal on
the following dates:
February 11, 2001
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper document, or legal
advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every such publication, a
newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the =
General Statues of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning
of Section 1-597 of the general statues of North Carolina.
This 12th day of February, 2001
(signature of bers4nnaking affidavit)
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 12th day of February, 2001
Noiar4 Public
My Commission expires: September 28, 2005
OFFICIAL SEAL
Notary Public, North Carolina,.
GOUNTY OF FOasYTH f
KIMALEY�OH� ON
My Commission Expires �
"PUBLIC NOTICE ; •N ,.
! STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENTCOMMISSIOWNPDES UNIT
1617 Mail Service Center; Raleigh, NC 27699•16t7" .
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO ISSUE A
NPOES WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the hasis otthoroughstaff review and application of NC General Stat•
i to 143 21, Public Law..92.500 and cuidir lawful standards aatd regula• i
lions, the North Carolina Errmonmental Management Comn-Ession pro•
poses,. to issue'a"National Pollulant'Discharge Efimrnadiin System
(NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the lawson(s) fated below ef-
fective 45 days from the publish dale of this notice..
Written comments rel a*dirg the proposed permit will be acid" unto
ays 30 dafter the publish date of this nonreceived ce. All comments prior
to that date are considered in the final determinations regarding the pro-
posed permit. The Director of the NC Division of Water Qually may Ue»
tide to told a public meeting fa the proposed permit should Me Division
!receive a significant degree of public interest. ' -4
Copies of the draN permit and other supporting information an file used
to determine conditions present in the draft permit are availa4ile upon re�
quest and payment of the costs of repioducbm. hlaii comments andtor
requests for irdomelimto the NC Division of Water Oualayat the above
address or tail Ms. Christie Jackson of (919).733-5083, etQmnsion SM.
Please induciethe NPDES permit number (at6ched} in any rzsmmuni(a't
lion: Interested person may also visit the Division of Water Quality at
512 N � Sa€isbury Street,' Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 between On hours of
B:00 a.m- and 5:00 p.m.4o review information on Tile. ,f
NPDES Permit Number NC0083470, Town of Jefferson WTP, US 221)
Academy Sheet, P.O. Box 67, Jefferson; NC 28640 has applied to a per.
ma renewal for a facdq located in Ashe County discharging uttrexed
wastewater into an Unnamed Tributary to Naked Creek in the Slew River.
Basin, Currently are waterquality limited. This discharge rn" affect to -
turn allocations in this portion of the receiving stream.
NPDES Permit Number NC0020451,1WEST JEFFERSON WWTP,
TOWN OF, P.O. BOX 490, WEST J�FFERSON, NG 28694 has applied
for a tad' located in A E County d scharg ng wastewater irxo UT IJT-
TLE BUF�ALO CRK in the NEW Rver Basin_ Currenf1y are wanes quality
rzrrited. TNs discharge may affect future allocations in ibis Peron of the
receiving stream.
WSJ: February11; 2001. _
6

DENR/ DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO020451
Facility Information
A licant Facility` Name: "'
Town of West Jefferson WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 490 West Jefferson. NC 28694
;~ aciIit . Address:, '; :.
Clearwater Drive, West Jefferson
Permitted Flow
0.369 MGD, 0.500 MGD
e.of Waste:..
Domestic and industrial
Facilit` Permit Status:
Modification and renewal
Facility Classification
Ill
County:..
Ashe
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream`.
UT Little Buffalo
Creek
Regional Office:
Winston-Salem
Stream Classification:
C Tr +
USGS To ` o Quad:
B 13NW
303 d Listed?:
Yes
Permit Writer:
Jackie Nowell
Subbasin
05-07-02
Date::
January 30, 2001
Drainage Area mil :
1.8
1
s
Summer 7,Q10. cfs
0.6
Winter7Q10 (cfs):
0.9
Average Flow cfs :
4.0
IWC %:,
45% 146%
Primary SIC Code:
4952
UMMARY OF FACILITY AND WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
West Jefferson is requesting renewal of existing NPDES permit in addition to an expansion of the
existing 0.369 MGD facility to 0.500 MGD. Existing limits are 30/30 with fecal and chlorine limits,
monitoring for copper and zinc, quarterly chronic toxicity test at 45%, and metals limits for:
Da. max. Weekly Avg.
Cadmium 3.0 t,gll 0.8 µg/l
Nickel 720 µgll 180 µgll
Mercury 0.025 µg/l NA
West Jefferson discharges into UT Little Buffalo Creek in the New River Basin, Little Buffalo
Creek from the source to Buffalo Creek is listed on the 2000 303d list for impaired streams in North
Carolina. It is rated partially supporting its waters, with an unknown cause for the biological
impairment. Potential sources for the impairment include a minor municipal point source, urban
runoff/storm sewers.
The unnamed tributary of Little Buffalo Creek has a stream classification of C Trout +. The
plus (+) symbol identifies the receiving stream as being subject to a special management strategy to
protect downstream waters designated as ORW (outstanding resources water). West Jefferson's
WWTP is located upstream of the segment of the New River that has been reclassified as C ORW.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has specific management strategies for the New River
that have been approved to protect the exceptional resource waters. This strategy includes designated
limitations for new and expanded dischargers, stormwater controls, 50% of the total instream flow not
to be exceeded by total volume of upstream discharges, and safety factors for toxics and toxicity to be
protected at the ORW segment. The specific action recommended for the South Fork New and New
Rivers ORW area per 15A NCAC 2B.0225 (e)(4)(B) and (C) states that "new or expanded NPDES
permitted discharges located upstream of the designated ORW" will comply with limits for oxygen
consuming wastes of BOD5 of 5 mg/1 and NH3-N of 2 mgll. A dissolved oxygen limit of 6 mg/1 and a
fecal colifortn limit of 200/100ml are also required. In addition, a limit for total suspended solids of 10
mgll will be applied to all discharges to trout waters. Therefore, the following effluent limitations for
tertiary treatment will be applicable to future expansions for the West Jefferson facility: RECEIVED
14.C. flept. of !— k.1 r
West Jefferson WWTP Fact Sheet FEB 16 2001
NPDES Renewal
Page 1 HIV irk
Office

Summer
Winter
BOD5
5 mg/I
10 mg/1
NH3-N
2 mg/1
4 mg/1
DO
6 mg/l
6 mg/1
TSS
10 mg/I
10 mg/1
Fecal
2 00/ 100m I
200/ 100 m l
Chlorine
28 µg/I
28 Ag/l
The increase in wasteflow to 0.500 MGD should not increase the pollutant loading of BOD5, TSS, or
NH3 in the UT Little Buffalo Creek due to the tertiary limits that will be assigned. The expansion
should be allowed
TOXICITY TESTING:
Current Requirement: Chronic Ceriodaphnia @ 45% Jan Apr July Sept
Proposed Requirement upon expansion: Chronic Ceriodaphnia @ 56% Jan Apr July Sept
All PASS in 2000, one FAIL in Jan. 1999, followed by PASS, one FAIL in Oct. 1997, followed by a
PASS. Overall toxicity record is good, only 2 fails in 16 tests since Jan. 1997.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY:
10/26/00 - NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection - violations for cadmium, mercury,
and nickel
10/28/99 - NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection - violations for fecal coliform and
toxicity test failure, resample was a PASS
5/17/99 - NOV - violations for fecal coliform
3/22/99 - NOV - toxicity test failure
11 /20/98 - NOV and civil penalty assessment
10/26/98 - NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection, monthly violations for flow, fecal
coliform, TSS, BOD and mercury.
10/23/98 - NOV and assessment of civil assessment
7/21/98 - NOV and assessment of civil assessment for $687.00 failures for cadmium, nickel,
mercury, and copper
INSTREAM MONITORING:
Facility takes instream samples 50 ft. above discharge and 50 ft. below discharge. There have been no
documented violations of the instream DO standard of 6 mg/I upstream or downstream of West
Jefferson. For the past three years, average upstream values have ranged from 8.1 - 9.8 mg/l.
Average downstream values have ranged from 7.49 to 9.08 with most values around 8.2 mg/l. The
lowest downstream DO value was 6.7 mg/l. In all cases, the downstream DO was lower than the
upstream DO, which shows that the trib is impacted by the discharge.
In addition, upstream and downstream fecal coliform values are well above the 200/100ml standard. In
1998 and 1999, upstream and downstream fecal values averaged over 2500/100ml. There was some
improvement in 2000, however all upstream and downstream averages fecal were above 200 except in
August. The upstream range was 211 - 900/100ml. The downstream range was 134 - 755/100m1.
These numbers still exceed the standard and indicate some stream degradation.
Recommend the continuation of instream monitoring for temperature, DO, and fecal coliform
because of the high instream values and the 303d listing of Little Buffalo Creek.
PROPOSED CHANGES:
The following modifications have been made to the permit:
• Modification of the daily maximum limits for cadmium (from 3.0 ug/I to 2.1 ug/I - '/z FAV value) and
nickel (from 720 ug/I to 261 ug/I - '/2 FAV value) based on revised DWQ procedure for assignment of
daily max. and weekly average limits (April 28, 1999 memorandum)
• Deletion of instream monitoring for conductivity
• Addition of effluent limits for 0.500 MGD
• Addition or chronic toxicity test @ 56% upon expansion to 0.500 MGD
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
Draft Permit to Public Notice: 02/07/2001
Permit Scheduled to Issue: 04/02/2001
West Jefferson WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 2

STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Jackie Nowell
at (919) 733a5083 ext. 512.
NADATE:
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENT: D�
ti,�.c , t rem a.,-•,�r o . S� rn� D c ct—�" o o
/Yyl-�
NAME: DATE: 3 - 7-D 1
NPDES SUPERVISOR COMMENT:
r
N10
NAME: vim- `�/�u `�� DATE:
41 ?-
West Jefferson W WTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 3

Permit Notes
NCO020451
West Jefferson is requesting renewal of existing NPDES permit in addition to an
expansion of the existing 0.369 MGD facility to 0.500 MGD. Existing limits are 30/30
with fecal and chlorine limits, monitoring for copper and zinc, quarterly chronic toxicity
test at 45%, and metals limits for:
Da. max. Weekly Avg,
Cadmium 3.0 µg/1 0.8 µg/l
Nickel 720 µg/l 180 µg/l
Mercury 0.025 µg/1 NA
West Jefferson discharges into UT Little Buffalo Creek in the New River Basin.
Little Buffalo Creek from the source to Buffalo Creek is listed on the 2000 303d list
for impaired streams in North Carolina. It is rated partially supporting its waters, with
an unknown cause for the biological impairment. Potential sources for the
impairment include a minor municipal point source, urban runoff/storm sewers.
The unnamed tributary of Little Buffalo Creek has a stream classification of C
"Trout +. The plus (+) symbol identifies the receiving stream as being subject to a special
management strategy to protect downstream waters designated as ORW (outstanding
resources water). West Jefferson's WWTP is located upstream of the segment of the New
River that has been reclassified as C ORW.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has specific management strategies for the
New River that have been approved to protect the exceptional resource waters. This
strategy includes designated limitations for new and expanded dischargers, stormwater
controls, 50% of the total instream flow not to be exceeded by total volume of upstream
discharges, and safety factors for toxics and toxicity to be protected at the ORW segment.
The specific action recommended for the South Fork New and New Rivers ORW area per
15A NCAC 213.0225 (e)(4)(B) and (C) states that "new or expanded NPDES permitted
discharges located upstream of the designated ORW" will comply with limits for oxygen
consuming wastes of BOD5 of 5 mg/I and NH3-N of 2 mg/l. A dissolved oxygen limit of
6 mg/1 and a fecal coliform limit of 200/100ml are also required. In addition, a limit for
total suspended solids of 10 mg/1 will be applied to all discharges to trout waters.
Therefore, the following effluent limitations for tertiary treatment will be applicable to
future expansions for the West Jefferson facility:
Summer
Winter
BOD5
5 mg/1
10 mg/1
NH3-N
2 mg/1
4 mg/l
DO
6 mg/1
6 mg/l
TSS
10 mg/1
10 mg/l
Fecal
200/ 100m l
200/ 100 m l
Chlorine
28 µg/l
28 µg/1

Permit Notes
NCO020451
Page 2
Comparison of pollutant loading for existing wasteflow and expansion wasteflow:
0.369 MGD
(8.34)
(30 mg/1 BOD5) =
92.3 Ibs/day
0.369 MGD
(8.34)
(30 mg/1 TSS) =
92.3 Ibs/day
0.369 MGD
(8.34)
(20 mg/1 NH3) =
61.5 Ibs/day
0.500 MGD
(8.34)
(10 mg/1 TSS) =
41.7 lbs/day
0.500 MGD
(8.34)
(5 mg/1 BOD5) =
20.85 lbs/day
0.500 MGD
(8.34)
(10 mg/1 BOD5) =
41.7 lbs/day
0.500 MGD
(8.34)
(2 mg/1 NH3) —
8.34 Ibs/day
0.500 MGD
(8.34)
(4 mg/1 NH3) =
16.68 lbs/day
The increase in wasteflow to 0.500 MGD should not increase the pollutant loading of
BOD5, TSS, or NH3 in the UT Little Buffalo Creek due to the tertiary limits that
will be assigned. The expansion should be allowed
Toxicity test results — existing quarterly chronic toxicity test at 45% in Jan Apr Jul Oct
All PASS in 2000, one FAIL in Jan. 1999, followed by PASS, one FAIL in Oct. 1997,
followed by a PASS. Overall toxicity record is good, only 2 fails in 16 tests since Jan.
1997. Upon expansion to 0.500 MGD, it is recommended that chronic tox test
continue at 56% in Jan Apr Jul Oct.
instream Data:
Facility takes instream samples 50 ft. above discharge and 50 ft. below discharge. (Data
attached). There have been no documented violations of the instream DO standard of 6
mg/1 upstream or downstream of West Jefferson. For the past three years, average
upstream values have ranged from 8.1 — 9.8 mg/l. Average downstream values have
ranged from 7.49 to 9.08 with most values around 8.2 mg/l. The lowest downstream DO
value was 6.7 mg/I. In all cases, the downstream DO was lower than the upstream DO,
which shows that the trib is impacted by the discharge.
In addition, upstream and downstream fecal coliform values are well above the
200/100ml standard. In 1999 and 1999, upstream and downstream fecal values averaged
over 2500/100ml. There was some improvement in 2000, however all upstream and
downstream averages fecal were above 200 except in August. The upstream range was
211 — 900/100m1. The downstream range was 134 — 755/100m1. These numbers still
exceed the standard and indicate some stream degradation.
Recommend the continuation of instream monitoring for temperature, DO, and
fecal coliform because of the high instream values and the 303d listing of Little
Buffalo Creek.

Permit Notes
NCO020451
Page 3
Review of Correspondence File:
10126100 — NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection — violations for
cadmium, mercury, and nickel
8117100 — Environmental Review of Water and Sewer Improvements / Wal-Mart
Stores
1124100 — HWA review
10128199 — NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection — violations for fecal
coliform and toxicity test failure, resample was a PASS
5117199 — NOV — violations for fecal coliform
3122199 — NOV — toxicity test failure
3111199 — Remission request of civil penalty assessment
1128199 - Remission request of civil penalty assessment
1112199 -- Payment acknowledgement of civil penalty assessment
1/11199 — Remission request of civil penalty assessment
11120198 — NOV and civil penalty assessment
11/17198— Remission request of civil penalty assessment
1.1112198 — Remission request of civil penalty assessment
10126198 — NOV and Compliance Evaluation Inspection, monthly violations for
flow, fecal coliform, TSS, BOD and mercury.
10123198 —NOV and assessment of civil assessment
7121198 - NOV and assessment of civil assessment for $687.00 failures for
cadmium, nickel, mercury, and copper
6/1/98 — Remission request of civil penalty assessment
Telecon to David Hamilton, ORC — called to check on metal violations. Asked about
Ni value of 526 ug/1 reported 7/00. He said that they had not figured out where the value
came from. Lab had indicated that it was a real number. They did not resample. This
was the only value that was this high because most values were below detects. Will
probably drop the 526 from the RPA, however there was another nickel value of 135 ug/l
in 1999. Based on this number, the nickel limit will still be required in the NPDES.
Also asked about a Hg values of 70 and 6.2 ug/l reported in 2/00. Hamilton said that they
were doing trunkline monitoring to determine the sources of Hg. They found that Ashe
Co. Cheese was discharging Hg, but they had since changed the process now. There was
another industry that was suspected, supposedly only had bathroom waste. However,
while doing repairs within the plant Flg switches were being used. He asked whether the
switches could have been washed down the drains and the industry said no. West
Jefferson is still unsure about sources of mercury, most values are BDL but there have
been some hits at 0.2 ug/l.

Permit Notes
NCO020451
Page 4
Reasonable Potential Analysis - reviewed 1999 and 2000 DMR data. Existing limits for
cadmium, nickel, and mercury will be maintained, in addition to monitoring for copper
and zinc. Also did RPA on LTNIP data for Arsenic, cyanide, chromium, lead, selenium,
and silver. Based on RPA, no limits needed, will recommend that these parameters
continue to be monitored in LTMP. During conversation with ORC, did ask West
Jefferson to start including the quarterly LTMP data in DMR forms submitted to
DWQ.
RPA Recommendation: limits for Cd, Ni, and Hg. Effluent monitoring for copper
and zinc. Based on new procedure for the assignment of daily max. and weekly
avg. values for metals with an EPA '/Z FAV. The following metal limits will be given
for 0.369 MGD:
at 0.500 MGD:
Other limits at 0.369 MGD:
at 0.500 MGD:
Da. max.
Weekly Avg.
Cadmium 2.1 µg/l
0.8 µg/l
Nickel 261 µg/l
180 µg/l
Mercury 0.025 µg/l
NA
Cadmium
Nickel
Mercury
Da. max.
2.1 µg/l
261 µg/l
0.021 µg/l
Weekly Avg.
0.7 µg/l
156 µg/l
NA
BOD5
30 mg/l
NH3-N
monitor
DO
5 mg/l
TSS
30 mg/l
Fecal
200/100ml
Chlorine
28 µg/l
Chronic toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) @ 45% in Jan Apr Jul Oct
Summer
Winter
BOD5
5 mg/l
10 mg/1
NH3-N
2 mg/1
4 mg/1
DO
6 mg/l
6 mg/l
TSS
10 mg/1
10 mg/l
Fecal
200/100ml
200/100ml
Chlorine
28 µg/l
28 µg/l
Chronic toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) @ 56% in Jan Apr.lul Oct

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Facility Name west jefferson P
NPDES # NC0020451
Qw (MGD) d6.3
7Q 10s (cfs)
1WC M 5
c'ving Stream UT Little Buffalo
Stream Class C Tr
FINAL RESULTS
Cadmium
14 9 o Uv "
ax. Pred Cw
5.25
ug/I
OAJ j j
Allowable Cw
0.7
ug/I
Max. Value
3.5
Nickel
ex. Pred Cw
310.5
ug/I
1 ( (?
f—
Allowable Cw
156.1
ug/1
Max. Value
135
Mercury
ex. Pred Cw
16.74
ug/I
%/� t
Allowable Cw
0.021
ugll
Max. Value
6.2
Copper
ax. Pred Cw
1349
ug/I�
t ��
Allowable Cw
12.4
ugll
Max. Value
190
Zinc
ax. Pred Cw
3041.5
ug/I
A40W t-[Z)►2,
Allowable Cw
88.7
ug/I
Max. Value
553
As
ax. Pred Cw
6
ugll
�
Allowable Cw
88.7
ug/I
Max. Value
5
Cax.
/ / J !�'l,
SCi /✓4/�
Pred Cw
7.5
ug/I
L�"� F7 I (!� lam`( bf
Allowable Cw
8.9
ug/I
C/
Max. Value
5
Cr
ax. Pred Cw
2.5
ug/I
Allowable Cw
88.7
ug/I
Max. Value
2.5
Pb
ex. Pred Cw
5
ug/l
C� %% _
Allowable Cw
44.4
ug/1
Max. Value
5
Sax. Pred Cw
6
ug/l
Allowable Cw
8.9
ug/1
Max. Value
5
Ag
ax. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
2.5
0.1
ug/I
ug/I
/� — ,Ae L Bvw
Max. Value
2.5
1124/01

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Facility Name west jefferson P
NPDES # NC0020451
Qw (MGD) 0.369
7Q10s (cfs) 0.6
1WC (%) 48.80
CVing Stream UT Little Buffalo Cr
Stream Class C Tr
FINAL RESULTS
:admium
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
lickel
ex. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
lercury
ex. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
topper
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
Jnc
ex. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
's
ex. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
.n
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
:r
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
'b
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
;e
ax. Pred Cw
dlowable Cw
Max. Value
,g
ex. Pred Cw
k1lowable Cw
Max. Value
1/24/01
5.25
ug/I
0.8
ug/I
t t
3.5
310.5
ug/I
180.3
ug/1
135
16.74
ug/1
0.025
ugll
6.2
1349ug/I�-0�
14.3
ug/I
190
3041.5
ug/I�
l �ryt
102.5
ug/1
553
ATM P -AL L 13PC15
7.5 ug/1 I l !'f �� — �� J LC�/ (/ /%i[ 6 r l �✓i RAJ
�cs
10.2 uU/l
2.5 1 ug11 (_To
/✓1f. �jj7 L S
102.5 uall
5 ugll C,-r1A t � 8065
51.2 uall
6 ug/1 �/�� rJ C✓
10.2 ua/l 1
2.1 ugll ug
0.A (-'rA' P — 4 " M.L 806,5

Cadmium
0.4 Ng/I
BDL=1/2DL tual Data
0.4 <0.8
0.9 0.9
0.9 0.9
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.9 0.9
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.5 <1
1 <2
0.5 <1
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
1 <2
1 <2
1.6 1.6
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.5 1.5
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
0.4 <0.8
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
3.5 <0.7
1124101
Parameter= Nickel
Standard = 88 Ng/I
TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Parameter= Mercury
Standard = 0.012 Ng/I
RESULTS
n
DL=1/2Dltual Data RESULTS
Std Dev.
1.443447081
1
2.5 <5
Std Dev.
13.375
Mean
2.125252525
2
2.5 <5
Mean
6.7398
C.V.
0.679188503
3
5 <10
C.V.
1.9845
4
5 <10
5
5 <10
Mult Facto 1.5
6
5 <10
Mult Facto 2.3
Max. Value
3.5 pg/I
7
5 <10
Max. Value
135
pg/I
Max. Pred C
5.25 pg/l
8
5 <10
Max. Pred C
310.5
Ng/I
Allowable C
0.71 pg1l
9
5 <10
Allowable C
156.13
pgll
10
5 <10
11
5 <10
12
5 <10
13
5 <10
14
5 <10
15
5 <10
16
16
16
17
5 <10
18
5 <10
19
5 <10
20
10
10
21
5 <10
22
5 <10
23
5 <10
24
5 <10
25
5 <10
26
5 <10
27
5 <10
28
5 <10
29
5 <10
30
5 <10
31
5 <10
32
5 <10
33
5 <10
34
5 <10
35
5 <10
36
5 <10
37
5 <10
38
5 <10
39
5 <10
40
5 <10
41
2.5 <5
42
5 <10
43
5 <10
44
5 <10
45
5 <10
46
135
135
47
5 <10
48
5 <10
49
5 <10
50
5 <10
51
5 <10
52
5 <10
53
5 <10
54
5 <10
55
5 <10
56
5 <10
Parameter= Copper
Standard = Ng/I
n DL=1/2DLctual Dat RESULTS
1 0.1 <0.2
Std Dev.
0.6706
2 0.1 <0.2
Mean
0.199
3 0.1 <0.2
C.V.
3.3703
4 0.1 <0.2
5 0.1 <0.2
6 0.1 <0.2
Mult Facto 2.7
7 0.1 <0.2
Max. Value
6.2 pg/I
8 0.1 <0.2
Max. Pred C
16.74 pg/I
9 0.1 <0.2
Allowable C
0.02 pg/I
10 0.1 <0.2
11 0.1 <0.2
12 0.1 <0.2
13 0.1 <0.2
14 6.2 6.2
15 0.1 <0.2
16 0.1 <0.2
17 0.1 <0.2
18 0.1 <0.2
19 0.2 0.2
20 0.2 0.2
21 0.1 <0.2
22 0.1 <0.2
23 0.1 <0.2
24 0.2 0.2
25 0.1 <0.2
26 0.1 <0.2
27 0.1 <0.2
28 0.1 <0.2
29 0.1 <0.2
30 0.1 <0.2
31 0.1 <0.2
32 0.1 <0.2
33 0.1 <0.2
34 0.1 <0.2
35 0.1 <0.2
36 0.1 <0.2
37 0.1 <0.2
38 0.1 <0.2
39 0.1 <0.2
40 0.1 <0.2
41 0.1 <0.2
42 0.1 <0.2
43 0.1 <0.2
44 0.1 <0.2
45 0.1 <0.2
46 0.1 <0.2
47 0.1 <0.2
48 0.1 <0.2
49 0.3 0.3
50 0.3 0.3
51 0.1 <0.2
52 0.1 <0.2
53 0.1 <0.2
54 2.7 2.7
55 0.1 <0.2
56 0.1 <0.2
n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
DL=1/2DLctual DataRESULTS
8
8 Std Dev.
38.2897
2.5 <5
Mean
16.1522
8
8 C.V.
2.37056
10
10
6
6
6
6 Mult Facto 7.1
6
6 Max. Value
190 Ng/I
2.5 <5
Max. Pred C
1349 Ng/I
10
10 Allowable C
12.42 pg/I
2.5 <5
IQ
16
7
7
20
20
11
11
5
5
190
190
3
3
10
10
3
3
3
3
23
23
12
12
7
7
Pa
S

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
3.5 <0.7
57
5 <10
57
0.1 <0.2
57
3.5 <0.7
58
5 <10
58
0.1 <0.2
58
3.5 <0.7
59
5 <10
59
0.3 0.3
59
3.5 <0.7
60
5 <10
60
0.1 <0.2
60
3.5 <0.7
61
5 <10
61
0.1 <0.2
61
3.5 <0.7
62
5 <10
62
0.1 <0.2
62
3.5 <0.7
63
27 27
63
0.1 <0.2
63
3.5 <0.7
64
15 15
64
0.1 <0.2
64
3.5 <0.7
65
5 <10
65
0.1 <0.2
65
3.5 <0.7
66
5 <10
66
0.1 <0.2
66
3.5 <0.7
67
5 <10
67
0.1 <0.2
67
3.5 <0.7
68
5 <10
68
0.1 <0.2
68
3.5 <0.7
69
5 <10
69
0.1 <0.2
69
3.5 <0.7
70
5 <10
70
0.1 <0.2
70
3.5 <0.7
71
5 <10
71
0.1 <0.2
71
3.5 <0.7
72
5 <10
72
0.1 <0.2
72
3.5 <0.7
73
5 <10
73
0.1 <0.2
73
3.5 <0.7
74
5 <10
74
0.1 <0.2
74
3.5 <0.7
75
5 <10
75
0.1 <0.2
75
3.5 <0.7
76
5 <10
76
0.1 <0.2
75
3.5 <0.7
77
5 <10
77
0.1 <0.2
77
3.5 <0.7
78
5 <10
78
0.1 <0.2
78
3.5 <0.7
79
5 <10
79
0.1 <0.2
79
3.5 <0.7
80
5 <10
80
0.1 <0.2
80
3.5 <0.7
81
5 <10
81
0.1 <0.2
81
3.5 <0.7
82
5 <10
82
0.1 <0.2
82
3.5 <0.7
83
5 <10
83
0.1 <0.2
83
1 <2
84
5 <10
84
0.1 <0.2
84
1 <2
85
5 <10
85
0.1 <0.2
85
1 <2
86
5 <10
86
0.1 <0.2
86
1 <2
87
5 <10
87
0.1 <0.2
87
88
5 <10
88
0.1 <0.2
88
1 `2
89
5 <10
89
0.1 <0.2
89
1 <2
90
5 <10
90
0.1 <0.2
90
0.5 <1
91
5 <10
91
0.1 <0.2
91
0.5 <1
92
5 <10
92
0.1 <0.2
92
0.5 <1
93
5 <10
93
0.1 <0.2
93
0.5 <1
94
5 <10
94
0.1 <0.2
94
0.5 <1
95
5 <10
95
0.1 <0.2
95
0.5 <1
96
5 <10
96
0.1 <0.2
95
0.5 <1
97
5 <10
97
0.1 <0.2
97
0.5 <1
98
5 <10
98
0.5 <1
gg
98
99
99
100
100
100
1124101

rameter= Zinc
tandard = 50 Ng/I
n DL=1/2DLctual Data RESULTS
1 34
34 Std Dev.
110.05
2 24
24 Mean
61.957
3 19
19 C.V.
1.7763
4 127
127
5 25
25
6 29
29 MultFacto 5.5
7 28
28 Max. Value
553 Ng/1
8 35
35 Max. Pred C
3041.5 Ng/1
9 22
22 Allowable C
88.71 Ngl1
10 64
64
11 37
37
12 67
67
13 46
46
14 85
85
15 12
12
16 553
553
17 24
24
18 29
29
19 15
15
20 39
39
21 38
38
22 41
41
23 32
32
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
1 /24/01
TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Parameter= As
Parameter=
Parameter= Cr
Standard = 50 Ng/l
�L--�Cn
Standard = -J Ng/I
Standard = 50 Ngll
p
n DL=112DL ctual Data RESULTS n DL=112DLctual
Data RESULTS
n
DL=1/2DL dual Data RESULTS
1
2.5 <5
Std Dev. 0.7906 1
2.5 <5
Std Dev.
0.79057
1
2.5 <5
Std Dev.
0
2
5 <10
Mean 4.75 2
2.5 <5
Mean
2.75
2
2.5 <5
Mean
2.5
3
5 <10
C.V. 0.1664 3
2.5 <5
C.V.
0.28748
3
2.5 <5
C.V.
0
4
5<10
4
2.5<5
4
2.5 <5
5
5<10
5
2.5<5
5
2.5<5
6
7
5 <10
Mult Facto 1.2 6
2.5 <5
Mult Facto 1.5
6
2.5 <5
Mult Facto
5 <10
Max. Value 5 Ng/I 7
2.5 <5
Max. Value
5 Ng/I
7
2.5 <5
Max. Value
2.5 Ng/I
8
5 <10
Max. Pred C 6 Ng/I 8
2.5 <5
Max. Pred C
7.5 Ng/I
8
2.5 <5
Max. Pred C
2.5 Ng/1
9
5 <10
Allowable C 88.71 Ng/I 9
2.5 <5
Allowable C
8.87 Ng/l
9
2.5 <5
Allowable C
88.71 Ng/I
10
5<10
10
5
5
10
2.5<5
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
19
19
19
20
20
20
21
21
21
22
22
22
23
23
23
24
24
24
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
29
30
30
30
31
31
31
32
32
32
33
33
33
34
34
34
35
35
35
36
36
36
37
37
37
38
38
38
39
39
39
40
40
40
41
41
41
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
44
44
45
45
45
46
46
46
47
47
47
48
48
48
49
49
49
50
50
50
51
51
51
52
52
52
53
53
53
54
54
5455
55
55
56
56
56

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Parameter= Pb
Parameter= Se
Parameter= Ag
P
Standard = 25 ugll
'Standard = pgll
Standard = 0.06 ug11
n DL=112DLctual Data
RESULTS
n DL=112DLctual
Data RESULTS
n DL=1120Lctual Data RESULTS
1
5 <10
Sid Dev.
0 1
5 <10
Sid Dev.
0.79057
1
2.5 <5
Sid Dev.
0
2
5 <10
Mean
5 2
5 <10
Mean
4.75
2
2,5 <5
Mean
2.5
3
5 <10
C.V.
0 3
5 -10
C.V.
0.16644
3
2.5 <5
C-V.
0
4
5<10
4
5<10
4
2.5<5
5
5 <10
5
5 <10
5
2.5 <5
6
5 <10
Mutt Facto 6
5 <10
Mult Factof 1.2
6
2.5 <5
Mutt Facto
1 7
5 <10
Max. Value
5 Ngll 7
5 <10
Max. Value
5 Ngtl
7
2.5 <5
Max. Value
2.5 pgll
1 8
5 <10
Max. Pred C
5 Ng11 8
5 <10
Max. Pred C
6 Ngtl
8
2.5 <5
Max. Pred C
2.5 Ngll
1 9
5 <10
Allowable C
44.35 Ng11 9
5 <10
Allowable C
8.87 Ngtl
9
2.5 <5
Atiowable C
0.11 vgll
10
5<10
10
2.5<5
10
2.6<5
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
I 15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
19
19
19
20
20
2
21
21
21
22
22
22
23
23
23
24
24
24
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
29
30
30
30
31
31
31
32
32
32
33
33
33
34
34
34
35
35
35
36
36
36
37
37
37
38
38
38
1 39
39
39
40
40
40
41
41
41
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
44
44
45
45
45
46
46
46
47
47
47
48
48
48
49
49
49
50
50
50
51
51
51
52
52
52
53
53
53
54
54
54
55
55
55
56
56
56
0
1124/01

i
i
y' Sawole Date
8r1r9
Spreadsheet
9r1r9
Instructions: ,
1) Data
101119
entered only In
11? 119
Heavy
Bordered cells.
121119
Hest of
workst+oet is
. .: it lr9
prdected, .
2r 1r9
password Is
I 311991i
41 119
detection �,
51119
enter "-" In'�"
column, and
6r1r9
enter detection
7110
kwei In
Influent or
Effluent mgA .
rMEMOcolumns.
1
Spreadsheet:
will auto-
maticalty
calculate • '-
averages and•
removal rates
using 112 '
value entered.
j
3) Iwcument'
' i
removal Rat(,=
choke
Coltmm Av&ages =}
4) Formulas in
Cnmpro-
'
hensive Guide
'
HWA Chapter.
Section E, g
page 1. .
i
removal. rate. 8, 99. not, paired
a
Removal Rates
Page 1 of 'I Gages
12/t419P f'; AM
Revision: =: ist 1999
f .
Removal Rate Calculations i
Unpaired Site Specific RR = >r3n-571
LiteraturerDefault RR=> 85. 00 %
{
Influent
7n1 jL
lased in .
Calculation {
Effluent
m rI.
Used in
Calculation
13
13
9
15
15
6
14
148F
71
7
1941
19
91
9
1961
19
1
17
2971
29
9
2351
23
1
13
2541
25
2
21
1841
18
1
15
21
21
8
35
35
8
23
23
9
217.3333
Unpaired Site Specific RR =y
LiteraturerDefault RR =>r
10.91567
94.
—8 5-0-0 Y,
0 % of data is BDL b of data is BDL 1
RR for this EWA =3 96.24 Y RR for this JIWA-=>
DN91
AV s — 9�1 Y
l

i
rem6val.rate,8,99.not paired
F
Removal Rates
Page 1 of wages
121141992 AM
;Revisio�'� i399 n: ~
i •
Removal Rate Calculations
Influent
I m rL
I Used in
Calcuhtion C
Effluent
m rL
Used in
Calcination
Sample Date
2121991
3181
3.81
1. Q
1.4
311?9
T.4
7.4
0.21
0.2
3191991
7.51
7.51
1.81
1.8
3r101991
6.91
6.91
1.81
1.8
4112r9
10,11
10.11
1
1
41139
.7.31
7.
0.21
0.2
4114r9
6.
6.
0.81
0.8
513J991
81
21
2
51419
0.81
0.8
5r519
8
t
0.
0.05
Coiurrm Averages => 7.33
ftaired Site Specific RR =>
LiteraturerDefault RR =s
1.005
6.2 'I.
85.00 3X
5 1 of data is BM
I RR for this HWA => $6.29 x
f
1 ;
1
.1 S
x<
S;

Removal Rate Calculations
S le Date '
2121g
31119
31919
31101
411219
411319
411419
51319
51419
r
5151g
'1
1
Column Averages =>
■
<
Influent
' TTI 1i
Used in
Calculation �c
Effluenk
�,m 1L
Used in '
Calculation
0.0051
0.002
<
'0-0051
0.0025
,Q.a
�Q.aO
<
0.0
0.005
<
- • .o.a
10.0051
a.a
a.aa5
a
. o.o
0.00
<
� 0.0
0.045
<
0.0
4.04
<
. 0.0
0.005
<
� 0.0
' 0.0051
<
0.0
0.045
<
� 0.0
10.00
<
1 0.0
0.005
<
a.o
0.0051
0.0
0.005
c
° ' 0.0
<
= 0.0
0.005
<
� 0.0
' 0.00
<
0.0
0.005
.
t
4.a448 i
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
LiteraturelDefault RR =>
0.0048
50 '/. BIJiL
45.Oa
100 of data is BM
RR for this HWA => 45.00 X
removal.rate,8,99.not paired
Removal Rates
Page 2 of S-lgges
12114199 . �2 AM
Revision: dust 1999
f
Influent
m �,
Used in
Car�uratian <
Effluent
m rI.
Used in
Calculation
c
O.aO
0.000
t
0.04
4.4405
<
o.00
a.00
�
o.00
a.va 1
c
O.Oa
0.00
{
0.00
O.Oa 1
• a.44
0.00
a.aQ
o.oa 1
c
0.00
0.00
t
0.00
0.041
<
4.40
0.00
�
O.aO
4.041
<
O.aaO
Q.0003
i
a.0a0
0.00035
<
a.aa
o.ao
t
Q.oa4
a.40435
a.a4
o.oa
<
a.oaQ
p.00a35
<
0.00
OAO
<
0.400
O.00Q35
a.poos
Urrpaired Site Specific RR =>
LiteraturelDefault RR =>
a.aoa�
50 Y. B
fa7.00 Y.
100 V. of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => fr7.00 i
Ynfluenk
"m rI.
■
U,cd in
Galculation
;iREfluert[
"• rrti 1L'' '
Used in
Calculation
� 0.00
• • 0.442
<
� .�� O.a4
0.0025
o.oa
o.00z
<
� -: a.ao
o.oa2s
< a.a4
a.aa2
<
: -•o.aa
4.aa25
< a.aa
• 0.002
<
' O.QO
0.0025
< o.00
a.ao2
<
��o.ao
0.0025
< Q.00
O.QO
<
0.40
O.a025
c 0.00
Q002
<
O:OQ
0.0025
� 0.00
4.042
c
.0.00
0.0025
t
0.00
4.002
�
0.00
0.0025
<
- 0.00
0.002
<
• 0.00
a.0025
S
a.aaz5 - i'
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
LiteraturelDefaultkRR =>
0.0025
O x BDQ
82.00
100 Y. of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 1 82.00
e,

SaMle Date
21219
31119
31919
WIWI
1. 4112991
4113 991
s. 41
5
51419
5
it
Column Averages =>
L
J
Removal Rate Calculations
j.,
A
Influent
1l ent
'rnqjL
U,- ed in t
n
U----d 7i
I ,
Calculation <
:Effluent
mq[L
U;ed in
Calcul*ion'
0.03
10.0391
0.011;
0.011
0.741
7
'- 0.741
0.02
' 0.024
0.2161
10.2161
1 0.01
0.011
-0.0781
'0.0781
0.01
0.011
0.0721
0.0721
:0.011
0.014,
0.08
0.08
0.0121
0.012
0.0741
.0.07
0.0051
0.005
Q.1449F
Unpaired Site Specific RE =>
LitefatufelDefault RR .>r86.00
6.6115
X. 1
0 % of data is BM
BE for thii HOA => r 72=.06%
removal -rate, 8, 99.notpaired
Removal Rates
Page 3 of gages
iW14199ei -'. 2 AM
Revision: 1999
influent
U,-cd in
Calculation <
Effluent
MgjL
Used in
Calculation
0.0071
0.005
0.005
4.00
0.0081
<
0.005
0,0025
0.10
0.10
<
0.0051
0,0025
0.0051
0.00251
<
0.003
0.0025.
<
0.0015
1 0.00251
<
0.0051
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.00251
<
0.0051
0.0025
0.
0.0051
0.002
<
0.0051
0.0025.
Unpaired Site Specific RE = >
L itera tu(elDe fault IRE = >
F50 -./.B M
r -69-00-7- 1
Influent
=lL
I
' UvAd in -
Calculationn <
Calculation
I Effluent
rn
U,,.td in
Calculation
0.0
' ' 0.0051(
1
- 0.qtL
005
0.01
0.0051
-C
i 0.01
0,005
<
0.011
0.0051
A,
0.01
0.005
<
0.0
0.0051<11
0.01
0,005.
<
0.0
0.0051
<I
- 0.71
0.0051
<
0.0
0.005
<
1; '-'0.071
0.005
0.00
<
0.01
0.005
<
a.q
0.00
<
0.0 I0.445
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
0.00
<
0.01
j
070050 J
Unpaired Site Specifio'RR =>
LitefatufelDelaultRR=>F61.iTOX1
50 X. B
80 V. of data is BM 100 V. of data is BDL
ortfiis HWA=AM8O1M-/- RR for this HWk => 61.00 %
7/0

Influent
Used in
■
Effluent
Used in
S !e Date
< ' Ytt rL.
Caltulatio <
Tn 1L
calculation
21219
<
D.000
0.000 1 €
1 0.0004
0,0001
311991
0.000 L<
0.00021
0.0001
3191991
<
1 0.000
0.000 <11
0.00021
0.0001
31 101991
€
1 -.0.000-
0.000 €
1, 0.000
0.0001
411219
<
0.000
0.000 <
0.000
0.0001
411319
<
0.000
0.000 <
4.ODD
0.0401'
r 411419
<
0.0004
0.00 <
0.000
0.4001
51319
<
0.04 <
O.ODO
0.0001
51419
O.OuUn
wVVk4€
0.000
4.0001
.l
51519
€
00 €
O.00D
0.0001
,
's
t
Column Averages =>
F 0.00013
0.40010
'
L
Unpaired Site Specific'RR =>
50 % BDI
Lite(aturelDefaultFR=>
f;0.00l.
95 X of data is BT)L
s
: RR for tbis HWA _> 60.04
l
•
i
r
removal.rate,8,99.not.paired
Removal Rates
'
Pape 4 of ;ages
12ft4199„§ �?2 AM
Revision: AiZi"st 1999
'
Removal Rate Calculations
1
<
Influent
79I jL
Uscd in
Calculation <
Effluent
m j
Used in
I Calculation
<
OM
0. 00251
<
0.001
0.0025
<
0.00
0.002
<
0.0051
0.00 55
<
1 0.0051
0.002
<
0.0051
0.0025
<
0-.0051
0.002
<
0.00
0,0025
<
0.0051
0.002
€
0.0051
0,0025
<
0,0051
0.002
<
0.04
0.0025
<
0.00
0,002
<
0.00rO00025
€
0.00
0.042
€
0A0
<
0.04
OA42
<
0.00
0.0025
[Impaired Site Specific RR =>
O.OQ25
F50 i BDL
LiteraturelDe#cult RR
42.00
LiteraturelDefault RR =>
33.00

g. Removal Rate Calculations
I
<
InEluenk
m rL
Used in
CaICUlation'�<
Effluent
M 1L
Uscd in .
Calculation
Oa
0.002
<
0.00
0.0025
HO.
a.o
' 0.0a
<
0.0
0,005
<
:. O.R
0.00
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
0.00
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
0.00
<
3: 0.0
0.005
<
= 0.0
; 0,00
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
' 0,00
<
0.0
6.0 55
<
' ° 0.0
• 0.00
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
.0.00
<
0.0
0.005
<
0.0
0.00
<
0.0
0.005
t
I,.
S
i
0.0048
0.0048
Unpaired Site Specific. RE => SO Y. BL4.
LiteraturelDefault RR -> 50.00 X
100 % of data is BM
RR for this HWA => 50.00.1.
i
removal.rate, 8,99. not.paired
Removal Rates ;
Page 5 of,! ges
12J1419q
fit�2 AM '
i
Revision: t 1999
<
Influent
m 1L
Used in
Calculatioio<
Effluent
m 1L
Used in
Calculation
0.00
0.0020.00
0.0025
0.01
0.0 1
0.00
0.0025
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.0025
0.00
0.00
<
0.00
0.0025
0.0121
0.01
'<
, 0.0051
0.0025
0.1961
0.1961'<l
0.00
0.0025
0.0051
0.002514
i 0.00
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.002
'A
i 0.00
0.0025
0.0081
0.00
<
0.00
0.00.25
0.0091
0.00
'<
0.00
0.0025
0.0263
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
LiteraturelDefault RR =>
a.aa25
0
75.0 X
65 X of data!
R for this HWA => 90.48 %
=
<
Influent
'.. m a
: Used in
Calculation <
i Effluent
r.
an 1L
Used in
Calculation
0.10
0.10
j ' 0.04
0.R45
0.07
0.07
' • 0.02
0.023
0.13
- - -0.1331
1 0.0231
0.023
0.121
0.1
0.05
0.058
0.0961.
0.09
a.03
0.035
0.03
- 0.03
i' .0.03
0.033
0.10
0.10
� • 0.02
0.025
0.09
0.09
•0.02
0.021
0.0948
Unpaired Site Speaifia RR=>.
Literature?Defaultf RR =>
6 .3
79.00 '/.
0 V. of data is BDL
RR (of this HWA => 65.30
.V i • }''

j
i
°s
3
7
1
removel.rate,8,99.notpaired
Removal Rates
Page 1 of 1- ages
12114199,O;A" l AM
Revision: August 1999
E
Removal Rate Calculations ;
-Colurrm Averages =>
cent
Used in
Effluent
[ciniC;Acumion
��'
{L
<
m I
Csn
i4i
2.5
AD
94
5
5
5
t51
2.5
.4
^j
10
.10
<I
51
2.5
6fi
6
51
2.5
;
731
7
c
2.5
•f
:i
iy •
1 .
'
A
71.1667
F2.9167
f
Unpaired Site Specific RR ->
5. 0 X
LiteraturerDefault RR
42 Y. of data i
R for this HWA => 92.90
_
D ��
5/
ICON 1 • IlY! +r b
vj -
I

AV&4 civf"-
ZP0
Yg7
Y
7
A 6 y
e-1/
/6, 7
8 ov
17,
Z zy
Y67
/o,3
x0v
/3Y
o
ram,
2?.�-Y
31?Y
/9,s^
-1,Z7
z3
&/
r?,l
f,67
yn,
76
�,/6
/z_
/ /3,
g,G %
-7
-- z
m
Q q r Y, 9
,T, -7
YA50
/n s
X, I
s-/?r-
- o
ql� 1g, s
&
7,9
36/�
gN /B,
Y700
/919
7,7
Y66�
�a-9
73
y
8 l 71 8
?ZY 8 7
s� /Z,8
5,7Z-
z��
/z,�
2s
t75
�� �lry4v
CO, ©
?I P 0
7, "L
H73-
8

(" i �4V74-
zev v
Ile
J
f
f
,4-9-
7
J
h76) _• -1 -

Akv -cc--z-
3hlz/j�
Fo
I
CAI"

ell
tjr
! 4�, 6r� O� 6, Z
de
�lz-07
3f /� 7 _ AV
, zi =/ U

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 24, 2000
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Dave Goodrich
NPDES Unit
MAR 2 8 2000
Wig`:
FROM: George Smith A
SUBJECT: Town of West Jefferson - Plant Expansion
NPDES Permit No. NCO020451
Ashe County
Attached you will find an application for a plant expansion from
0.369 to 0.500 MGD for the subject Town. Also you will find a
photocopy of the check and a voucher showing the check was
deposited.
cc: WSRO
MAR 2 9 2000 U
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH

MANAGER:
Greg Edney
MAYOR:
Dale Baldwin
FINANCE OFFICER:
Katherine Howell
March 16, 2000
RECEIVED ALDERMEN:
N.C..Dept. of EHNR Ted Huffman
W 2 0 2W
winstnn,Satem
Regiondi office
`Town of West refferson
"Prosperity, Growth, Achievement"
George Smith
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 2 710 7
Dear George:
Enclosed is the application for the expansion of the West Jefferson Wastewater Plant that
you requested. As you are aware, the Town of West Jefferson was recently
awarded$3, 000, 000 to upgrade its facility. We plan to increase the permitted flow from
369, 000 to 500, 000 gallons. If you have any questions, please advise.
P.O. BOX 490, 01 S. JEFFERSON AVENUE
WEST JEFFERSON, N.C. 28694
PHONE: [phone]
Bob McCoy
Earl McNeill
Grant Price
Brett Summey