NC0020567_Fact Sheet_20200617

Page 1 of 9

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NC0020567

Permit Writer/Email Contact Nick Coco, [e-mail]:
Date: June 17, 2020
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Complex Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017

Permitting Action:
☒ Renewal
☐ Renewal with Expansion
☐ New Discharge
☐ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)

Note: A complete application should include the following:
 For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
 For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
 For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.

Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.

1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority/YVSA Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP)
Applicant Address: 500 NC Highway 268 West, Elkin, NC 28621
Facility Address: 211 Marion Road, Elkin, NC 28621
Permitted Flow: 1.8 MGD
Facility Type/Waste: Major Municipal; 88.3% domestic and 11.7% industrial*
Facility Class: Grade III
Treatment Units: Mechanical bar screen, grit chamber, influent flume, continuous
recording flow measurement, primary clarifiers, trickling filter, aeration
basin, dual secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact chamber,
dechlorination, automatic sampler, aerobic digester, sludge holding
tanks, sludge drying beds
Pretreatment Program (Y/N) Y
County: Surry
Region Winston Salem
*based on permitted flows

Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority has applied for an NPDES permit renewal at 1.8 MGD in July 2018. This facility serves a
population of 6,766 residents with 1 significant industrial user (SIU) in their pretreatment program.
Treated wastewater is discharged into the Yadkin River, a class C water in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River
Basin. The facility has a primary Outfall 001. The average flow as reported in the 2018 permit renewal
application was 0.844 MGD.
Page 2 of 9

2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s): Outfall 001 – Yadkin River
Stream Segment: 12-(53)
Stream Classification: C
Drainage Area (mi2): 878
Summer 7Q10 (cfs) 317
Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 454
30Q2 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs): 1400
IWC (% effluent): 0.87
303(d) listed/parameter: No
Subject to TMDL/parameter: Yes- State wide Mercury TMDL implementation.
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC: Yadkin-Pee Dee River/03-07-02/ 03040101
USGS Topo Quad: C15NE

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of August 2016 through February 2020.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Parameter Units Average Max Min Permit Limit
Flow MGD 0.824 3.434 0.358 MA 1.8
BOD mg/l 3.6 25 2 WA 45
MA 30
NH3N mg/l 2.3 21.5 0.04
TSS mg/l 5 26 2.5 WA 45.0
MA 30.0
pH SU 6.3 7 6 6.0 ≥ pH ≤ 9.0
Fecal coliform #/100 ml 5.1 430 1
(geometric)
WA 400
MA 200
Temperature ° C 19.3 28 10
TRC ug/l 18.6 50 9 DM 28
Total Nitrogen mg/l 7.4 17.07 1.82
Total Phosphorous mg/l 0.4 1.66 0.06
MA-Monthly Average, WA-Weekly Average, DM-Daily Maximum, DA=Daily Average, QA = Quarterly
Average
The facility’s discharge is effluent limited. The Permittee is not required to monitor for dissolved oxygen and the
permit has no dissolved oxygen limits. Throughout the facility’s history, this has always been the case. In 2007,
the Permittee requested speculative limits for an expansion to 2.5 MGD. At that time, the Division conducted a
Level B model with secondary limits and found that the secondary limits were protective of the 5 mg/L dissolved
oxygen standard in the stream. While the facility never expanded, the model demonstrated that the dissolved
oxygen standard was protected in the stream, and no dissolved oxygen or ammonia limits were proposed at an
even higher flow tier. As such, no changes are proposed for dissolved oxygen.

Page 3 of 9

4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions
when model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/l of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to
verify model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other
instream concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also
Monitoring Coalitions established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in
which case instream monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this
permit action: The current permit does not require instream monitoring. The draft permit maintains the
same instream monitoring requirements as the current permit.
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (Y/N): NO
Name of Monitoring Coalition: NA

5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): The facility reported no limit
violations resulting in enforcement between August 2016 and February 2020.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results
(past 5 years): The facility passed 16 of 16 quarterly chronic toxicity tests between March 2016 and
December 2019, as well as all 4 second species chronic toxicity tests.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The last facility inspection conducted
in June 2019 reported that the facility was in compliance.

6. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non-carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA

Oxygen-Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen-consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD= 30 mg/l for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: The current permit
limits for BOD are secondary TBEL limits based on 40 CFR 133.102. No changes are proposed.
Page 4 of 9

Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/l (summer) and 1.8 mg/l (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria,
utilizing a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non-Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 ug/l) and capped at 28 ug/l (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/l are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The current
permit does not set limits for ammonia. This decision has been reviewed in the attached WLA form. Since
the calculated allowable discharge concentration for ammonia in both the summer and winter was greater
than 35 mg/L, no limit has been added to the permit. Monitoring has been maintained.
The facility uses chlorination as its primary disinfection. The current permit limits TRC at 28 ug/L as a
daily maximum. Though several reported TRC values exceeded the 28 ug/L daily maximum limit, the
facility is considered compliant with its permit since all reported values were less than 50 ug/L. The TRC
limit has been reviewed in the attached WLA and has been found to be protective. No changes are
proposed for TRC.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of ½ detection limit for “less than” values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected in the Permittee’s 2015,
2016 and 2017 effluent pollutant scans. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections
and associated water quality standards/criteria. The data set was limited for all pollutants of concern.
Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for this permit:
 Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality-based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable
water quality standards/criteria: N/A
 Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor-only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria,
but the maximum predicted concentration was >50% of the allowable concentration: NA
 No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality
standards/criteria and the maximum predicted concentration was <50% of the allowable
concentration: Arsenic, Beryllium, Cadmium, Total Chromium, Copper, Cyanide, Lead, Nickel,
Selenium, Silver, Zinc, Total Phenolic Compounds

Page 5 of 9

If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.

Toxicity Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging “complex” wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several
exceptions. The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in
NPDES permits, using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test
failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This is a Major POTW, and a chronic WET limit a will
continue on a quarterly frequency at Outfall 001 at 0.87% effluent.

Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply
with EPA’s mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year), and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (~2% of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (>1 ng/l) will
receive an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case-by-case basis, depending if mercury is a
pollutant of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed
the WQBEL value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/l) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL
value of 47 ng/l
Table 3. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2015 2016 2017 2019
# of Samples 1 1 1 1
Annual Average Conc. ng/L < 200 6.9 7.1 4.04
Maximum Conc., ng/L < 200 6.9 7.1 4.04
TBEL, ng/L 47
WQBEL, ng/L 32.6

Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since no annual average mercury
concentration exceeded the WQBEL, and no individual mercury sample exceeded the TBEL, no mercury
limit is required. Since the facility is < 2 MGD, no MMP special condition is required in the permit.

Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation
within this permit: The permit maintains a special condition for a nutrient reopener clause, allowing for
Page 6 of 9

the reopening and modifying of the NPDES permit to implement nutrient requirements in accordance
with any future TMDL and/or nutrient management strategy for High Rock Lake.

Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: NA
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody: NA
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H.0107( c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: NA
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA

7. Technology-Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/l
BOD5/TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg/l for BOD5/TSS for Weekly Average). YES
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA

Are 85% removal requirements for BOD5/TSS included in the permit? YES
If NO, provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA

8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit
must document an effort to consider non-discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105( c)(2). In all
cases, existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is
maintained and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: NA

9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(l) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): NO
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: NA
Page 7 of 9

10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following
regulations and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.0500; 2)
NPDES Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance,
Reduced Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best
Professional Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not
considered effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti-
backsliding prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
The Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority was granted monitoring frequency reductions for BOD5, Total
Suspended Solids, and Fecal Coliform for their 2014 NPDES permit renewal based on DWR Guidance
Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing
Facilities. The last three years of the facility’s data for these parameters have been reviewed in
accordance with the criteria outlined in the guidance. The Division has decided to maintain the 2/week
monitoring frequency requirements for BOD5, Total Suspended Solids, and Fecal Coliform.

11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective
December 21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports
(DMRs) electronically. Effective December 21, 2020, NPDES regulated facilities will be required to
submit additional NPDES reports electronically. This permit contains the requirements for electronic
reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.

12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
Table 4. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 1.8 MGD
Parameter Current Permit Proposed Change Basis for Condition/Change
Flow MA 1.8 MGD No changes 15A NCAC 2B .0505
BOD5 MA 30.0 mg/l
WA 45.0 mg/l
2/Week Monitoring
No changes TBEL. Secondary treatment
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
2B .0406. DWR Guidance
Regarding the Reduction of
Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
Permits for Exceptionally
Performing Facilities
NH3-N Monitor Weekly No changes 15A NCAC 2B .0500 – Surface
Water Monitoring: Reporting

TSS MA 30 mg/l
WA 45 mg/l
2/Week Monitoring
No changes TBEL. Secondary treatment
standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
2B .0406. DWR Guidance
Regarding the Reduction of
Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
Page 8 of 9

Permits for Exceptionally
Performing Facilities
Fecal coliform MA 200 /100ml
WA 400 /100ml
2/Week Monitoring
No changes WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200. DWR Guidance
Regarding the Reduction of
Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
Permits for Exceptionally
Performing Facilities
pH 6 – 9 SU No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200
Temperature Monitor and Report
daily
No change 15A NCAC 2B .0500 – Surface
Water Monitoring: Reporting
TRC DM 28 No change WQBEL. Based on 2016 and 2020
IWC-based calculations; see WLA
attached
Total Nitrogen

Monitor and Report
Monthly
No change

15A NCAC 2B .0500 – Surface
Water Monitoring: Reporting
Total Phosphorus Monitor and Report
Monthly
No change 15A NCAC 2B .0500 – Surface
Water Monitoring: Reporting
Total Hardness No requirement Quarterly monitoring
Upstream and in
Effluent
Hardness-dependent dissolved
metals water quality standards
approved in 2016; facility with
pretreatment program
Toxicity Test Chronic limit, 0.87%
effluent
No change WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
amounts. 15A NCAC 2B.0200 and
15A NCAC 2B.0500
Effluent Pollutant
Scan
Three times per permit
cycle
No change 40 CFR 122
Electronic
Reporting
Electronic Reporting
Special Condition
No change In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD – Million gallons per day, MA - Monthly Average, WA – Weekly Average, DM – Daily Max, QA
– Quarterly Average

13. Public Notice Schedule:

Permit to Public Notice: 04/7/2020

Per 15A NCAC 2H .0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.

14. NPDES Division Contact:
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Nick Coco at [phone] or via email at [e-mail]
Page 9 of 9

15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):

The draft permit was also submitted to EPA Region 4, the Winston Salem Regional Office, the DWR
Operator Certification Program, the DWR Aquatic Toxicology Branch, and the DWR PERCS unit for
comment. No comments pertaining to the permit were received from each of these groups.

Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): YES
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:
 The Electronic Reporting wording in Section (A)(5)(1) has been updated.

16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
 RPA Spreadsheet Summary
 BOD and TSS Removal
 Dissolved Metals Implementation/Freshwater
 Waste Load Allocation Spreadsheet
 Mercury TMDL Spreadsheet
 Toxicity Summary
 PERCS Form
 Instream Monitoring Summary
 Compliance Inspection Report
NORTH CAROLINA
SURRY 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 Sandra Hurley who being first duly
sworn, deposes and says: that he (she) is Regional Publisher
(Publisher or other officer or employee authorized to make affidavit) of
ADAMS PUBLISHING GROUP, LLC, engaged in the publication of a
newspaper known as THE TRIBUNE, published, issued, and entered as
periodicals class mail in the city of Elkin in said County and State; that he
(she) 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 THE TRIBUNE on the following dates:
y't 51 abaii)
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 of the requirements and
qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of Notch Carolina
and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section 1-597 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 1day of
Sworn to
Signature of person making affidavit
subscribed before me, this
\man
2020
day of
2020
you \\ , aoatll
My Commission expires: PiP
I `1
Lo"
✓l/yIIJ!!!If ��
��r s
CLIPPING OF
LEGAL
ADVERTISEMENT
ATTACHED HERE
Public Notice
North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission/
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a
NPDES Wastewater Permit
N00020567 Yadkin Valley
Sewer Authority
The North Carolina Environ-
mental Management Commis-
sion proposes to issue a NP-
DES wastewater discharge
permit to the person(s) listed
below. Written comments re-
garding the proposed permit
will be accepted until 30 days
after the publish date of this
notice. The Director of the NC
Division of Water Resources
(DWR) may hold a public hear-
ing should there be a signific-
ant degree of public interest.
Please mail comments and/or
information requests to DWR
at the above address. inter-
ested persons may visit the
DWR at 512 N. Salisbury
Street, Raleigh, NC to review
information on file. Additional
information on NPDES per-
mits and this notice may be
Sewer Authority requested 1
newal of permit NCO02 red for
its W WTP in Surry County; this
facility discharge is treated do-
mestic wastewater to Yadkin
River, Yadkin -Pee Dee River
Basin.
Publish: 4-16-20 70035872 x2

Thursday, April 9, 2020 at 2:37:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Page 1 of 3
Subject:[External] FW: NC0020567 YVSA WWTP Addi>onal Informa>on Request
Date:Friday, March 20, 2020 at 9:18:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From:Morris, Lisa
To:Coco, Nick A
CC:'[e-mail]', Stainback, Gary, Transou, Hal
AHachments:image001.png, YVSA UPSTREAM HARDNESS D.pdf, YVSA WW RPT RVSD AUG 17.pdf, YVSA WW
RPT RVSD JAN 17.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open a_achments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an a_achment
to [e-mail]
Good Morning

I have a_ached revised wastewater report for January and August 2017. The BOD was inadvertently lec off of
these reports. I have also a_ached the upstream hardness data for 2017 through 2020.

· In conformity with the DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduc>on of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES
Permits for Excep>onally Performing Facili>es, I need you to verify/confirm the following criteria:
The facility has no more than one civil penalty assessment for permit limit viola>ons for each
target parameter during the previous three years. Correct
Neither the permi_ee nor any of its employees have been convicted of criminal viola>ons of the
Clean Water Act within the previous five years. Correct
The facility is not currently under an SOC for target parameter effluent limit noncompliance.
Correct
The facility is not on EPA’s Quarterly Noncompliance Report for target parameter limit viola>ons.
Correct

Please let me know if you need any further informa>on.

Lisa

From: Stainback, Gary <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 9:32 AM
To: Morris, Lisa <[e-mail]>; Blackwell, Nadine <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: NC0020567 YVSA WWTP Addi>onal Informa>on Request

We will need to provide responses to the state’s ques>ons.

Gary

Page 2 of 3
From: Nicole Johnston <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 9:14 AM
To: Stainback, Gary <[e-mail]>
Cc: BENJIE THOMAS <[e-mail]>; Transou, Hal <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fwd: NC0020567 YVSA WWTP Addi>onal Informa>on Request

Gary,

It looks like they’re working on renewing our permit. Can you handle this for me please? Thanks.

Nicole
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Coco, Nick A" <[e-mail]>
Date: March 13, 2020 at 8:48:45 AM EDT
To: Nicole Johnston <[e-mail]>
Subject: NC0020567 YVSA WWTP AddiRonal InformaRon Request
Hi Nicole,

I hope all is well.

I’ve been assigned and am working on the renewal for the NPDES permit NC0020567 for the
YVSA WWTP. Acer reviewing the applica>on and beginning dracing the permit I just had a few
ques>ons:
· No influent BOD data was reported in January or August 2017. Would you please speak
to why this was?
· Would you please provide, if available, upstream hardness data? When conduc>ng our
analysis, due to the hardness-dependent metals standards, we conduct basically a mass
balance on hardness for the calcula>ons in the reasonable poten>al analysis. When we
do not have data, we use a default value of 25 mg/L. I figured actual data would be
be_er than the default here.
· In conformity with the DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduc>on of Monitoring
Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Excep>onally Performing Facili>es, I need you to
verify/confirm the following criteria:
The facility has no more than one civil penalty assessment for permit limit
viola>ons for each target parameter during the previous three years.
Neither the permi_ee nor any of its employees have been convicted of criminal
Page 3 of 3
viola>ons of the Clean Water Act within the previous five years.
The facility is not currently under an SOC for target parameter effluent limit
noncompliance.
The facility is not on EPA’s Quarterly Noncompliance Report for target parameter
limit viola>ons.

Let me know if you have any ques>ons or concerns. Thanks for your help.

Nicholas A. Coco, EI
Engineer
NPDES Complex Permisng Unit
NC DEQ / Division of Water Resources / Water Quality Permisng

919 707-3609 office
919 707 9000 main office
[e-mail]

Physical Address: 512 North Salisbury St.,Raleigh, NC, 27604
Mailing Address: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1617

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Before prin*ng a copy of this email, please consider the environment. This email and any a9achments are confiden*al
and intended for the named recipient or en*ty to which it is addressed only. If you are not the intended recipient, you
are hereby no*fied that any review, re-transmission, or conversion to hard copy, copying, circula*on or other use of
this message and any a9achments is strictly prohibited. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard their content, emails
are not secure and SUEZ cannot guarantee that a9achments are virus free or compa*ble with your systems and does
not accept liability in respect of viruses or computer problems experienced. SUEZ reserves the right to monitor all
email communica*ons through its internal and external networks
Reduction in Frequency EvalautionFacility:Permit No.Review period (use 3 yrs)Approval Criteria:Y/N?YYNData Review UnitsWeekly average limitMonthly average limit50% MA3‐yr mean (geo mean for FC)< 50%?200% MA# daily samples >200%<15?200% WA# daily samples >200%< 20?# of non‐monthly limit violations> 2?# civil penalty asessment> 1?Reduce Frequency? (Yes/No)BOD mg/L 45 30 15 2.2530917 Y 60 0 Y 0 N 0 N YTSS mg/L 45 30 15 1.9274563 Y 60 0 Y 0 N 0 N YFecal Coliform #/100 400 200 100 4.2835338 Y 800 0 Y 0 N 0 N Y1. Not currently under SOS2. Not on EPA Quarterly noncompliance report3. Facility or employees convicted of CWA violationsYVSA WWTPNC00205672/2017 ‐ 2/2020
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Name WQS Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Facility Name YVSA WWTP Par01 Arsenic Aquactic Life C 150 FW 340 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class III Par02 Arsenic Human Health
Water Supply C 10 HH/WS N/A ug/L
NPDES Permit NC0020567 Par03 Beryllium Aquatic Life NC 6.5 FW 65 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 Cadmium Aquatic Life NC 0.5899 FW 3.2396 ug/L
Flow, Qw (MGD)1.800 Par05 Chlorides Aquatic Life NC 230 FW mg/L
Receiving Stream Yadkin River Par06 Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Water Supply NC 1 A ug/L
HUC Number 03040101 Par07 Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A ug/L
Stream Class Par08 Chromium III Aquatic Life NC 117.7325 FW 905.0818 ug/L
Par09 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 11 FW 16 µg/L
7Q10s (cfs)317.00 Par10 Chromium, Total Aquatic Life NC N/A FW N/A µg/L
7Q10w (cfs)454.00 Par11 Copper Aquatic Life NC 7.8806 FW 10.4720 ug/L
30Q2 (cfs)Par12 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 22 10 ug/L
QA (cfs)1400.00 Par13 Fluoride Aquatic Life NC 1,800 FW ug/L
1Q10s (cfs)256.67 Par14 Lead Aquatic Life NC 2.9416 FW 75.4871 ug/L
Effluent Hardness 38.85 mg/L (Avg)Par15 Mercury Aquatic Life NC 12 FW 0.5 ng/L
Upstream Hardness 23.32 mg/L (Avg)Par16 Molybdenum Human Health NC 2000 HH ug/L
Combined Hardness Chronic 25 mg/L Par17 Nickel Aquatic Life NC 37.2313 FW 335.2087 µg/L
Combined Hardness Acute 25 mg/L Par18 Nickel Water Supply NC 25.0000 WS N/A µg/L
Data Source(s)Par19 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 56 ug/L
Par20 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.06 FW 0.2964 ug/L
Par21 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 126.7335 FW 125.7052 ug/L
Par22
Par23
Par24
Follow directions for data entry. In some cases a To appy a Model IWC %: Once the
Table 1. Project Information Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Note: Upstream Hardness reported for June 2018
was considered an outlier and was removed from
the data set during analysis.
C
CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
Apply WS Hardness WQC
RPA, input
3/26/2020
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1 H2 Par01 & Par02
Effluent Hardness Upstream Hardness Arsenic
Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results
1 7/15/2019 28 28 Std Dev.27.2640 1 2/1/2017 20 20 Std Dev.39.0244 1 3/4/2015 <5 2.5 Std Dev.0.0000
2 7/17/2019 1 1 Mean 9.7500 2 3/1/2017 28 28 Mean 29.5000 2 6/8/2016 <5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 7/22/2019 2 2 C.V.2.7963 3 4/1/2017 32 32 C.V.1.3229 3 9/13/2017 <5 2.5 C.V.0.0000
4 7/24/2019 1 1 n 58 4 5/1/2017 32 32 n 38 4 n 3
5 7/29/2019 4 4 10th Per value 1.00 mg/L 5 6/1/2017 40 40 10th Per value 14.00 mg/L 5
6 7/31/2019 10 10 Average Value =9.75 mg/L 6 7/1/2017 20 20 Average Value =29.50 mg/L 6 Mult Factor =1.00
7 8/5/2019 1 1 Max. Value 210.00 mg/L 7 8/1/2017 36 36 Max. Value 258.00 mg/L 7 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 8/7/2019 8 8 8 9/1/2017 20 20 8 Max. Pred CwNO DETECTS ug/L
9 8/12/2019 8 8 9 10/1/2017 32 32 9
10 8/14/2019 4 4 10 11/1/2017 20 20 10
11 8/19/2019 7 7 11 12/1/2017 20 20 11
12 8/21/2019 12 12 12 1/1/2018 32 32 12
13 8/26/2019 4 4 13 2/1/2018 44 44 13
14 8/28/2019 5 5 14 3/1/2018 24 24 14
15 9/3/2019 1 1 15 4/1/2018 16 16 15
16 9/5/2019 210 210 16 5/1/2018 20 20 16
17 9/9/2019 12 12 17 6/1/2018 258 258 17
18 9/11/2019 5 5 18 7/1/2018 32 32 18
19 9/16/2019 15 15 19 8/1/2018 32 32 19
20 9/18/2019 4 4 20 9/1/2018 24 24 20
21 9/23/2019 8 8 21 10/1/2018 28 28 21
22 9/25/2019 5 5 22 11/1/2018 28 28 22
23 9/30/2019 10 10 23 12/1/2018 37 37 23
24 10/2/2019 11 11 24 1/1/2019 16 16 24
25 10/7/2019 9 9 25 2/1/2019 16 16 25
26 10/9/2019 2 2 26 3/1/2019 8 8 26
27 10/14/2019 1 1 27 4/1/2019 24 24 27
28 10/16/2019 10 10 28 5/1/2019 28 28 28
29 10/21/2019 4 4 29 6/1/2019 16 16 29
30 10/23/2019 7 7 30 7/1/2019 12 12 30
31 10/28/2019 7 7 31 8/1/2019 16 16 31
32 10/30/2019 3 3 32 9/1/2019 16 16 32
33 11/4/2019 8 8 33 10/1/2019 16 16 33
34 11/6/2019 6 6 34 11/1/2019 16 16 34
35 11/11/2019 5 5 35 12/1/2019 14 14 35
36 11/13/2019 <1 0.5 36 1/1/2020 20 20 36
37 11/18/2019 9 9 37 2/1/2020 14 14 37
38 11/20/2019 3 3 38 3/1/2020 14 14 38
39 11/25/2019 10 10 39 39
40 11/27/2019 6 6 40 40
41 12/2/2019 9 9 41 41
42 12/4/2019 3 3 42 42
43 12/9/2019 1 1 43 43
44 12/11/2019 1 1 44 44
45 12/16/2019 4 4 45 45
46 12/18/2019 1 1 46 46
47 12/23/2019 11 11 47 47
48 12/27/2019 6 6 48 48
49 12/30/2019 25 25 49 49
50 1/3/2020 4 4 50 50
51 1/6/2020 1 1 51 51
52 1/8/2020 4 4 52 52
53 1/13/2020 5 5 53 53
54 1/15/2020 3 3 54 54
55 1/21/2020 5 5 55 55
56 1/23/2020 2 2 56 56
57 1/27/2020 11 11 57 57
58 1/29/2020 3 3 58 58
Use "PASTE
SPECIAL-Values"
then "COPY" .
Maximum data
points = 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Use "PASTE
SPECIAL-Values"
then "COPY" .
Maximum data
points = 58
- 1 -
RPA, data
3/20/2020
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par03 Par04 Par07
Beryllium Cadmium Total Phenolic Compounds
Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results
1 3/4/2015 <1 0.5 Std Dev.0.0000 1 3/4/2015 <1 0.5 Std Dev.0.0000 1 3/4/2015 <5.0 2.5 Std Dev.0.0000
2 6/8/2016 <1 0.5 Mean 0.5000 2 6/8/2016 <1 0.5 Mean 0.5000 2 6/8/2016 <5.0 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 9/13/2017 <1 0.5 C.V.0.0000 3 9/13/2017 <1 0.5 C.V.0.0000 3 9/13/2017 <5.0 2.5 C.V.0.0000
4 n 3 4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5 5
6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =1.00
7 Max. Value 0.50 ug/L 7 Max. Value 0.500 ug/L 7 Max. Value 2.5 ug/L
8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L
9 9 9
10 10 10
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 54
55 55 55
56 56 56
57 57 57
58 58 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
- 2 -
RPA, data
3/20/2020
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par10 Pa11 Par12
Chromium, Total Copper Cyanide
Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results
1 3/4/2015 <5 3 Std Dev.0.0 1 3/4/2015 <10 5 Std Dev.4.5092 1 3/4/2015 <5 5 Std Dev.0.0000
2 6/8/2016 <5 3 Mean 2.5 2 6/8/2016 10 10 Mean 9.6667 2 6/8/2016 <5 5 Mean 5.00
3 9/13/2017 <5 3 C.V.0.0 3 9/13/2017 14 14 C.V. (default)0.6000 3 9/13/2017 <5 5 C.V.0.0000
4 n 3 4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5 5
6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =3.00 6 Mult Factor =1.00
7 Max. Value 2.5 µg/L 7 Max. Value 14.00 ug/L 7 Max. Value 5.0 ug/L
8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS µg/L 8 Max. Pred Cw 42.00 ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L
9 9 9
10 10 10
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 54
55 55 55
56 56 56
57 57 57
58 58 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
- 3 -
RPA, data
3/20/2020
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par14 Par17 & Par18 Par19
Lead Nickel Selenium
Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results Date Data
BDL=
1/2DL Results
1 3/4/2015 <5 2.5 Std Dev.0.0000 1 3/4/2015 <10 5 Std Dev.0.0000 1 3/4/2015 <10 5 Std Dev.0.0000
2 6/8/2016 <5 2.5 Mean 2.5000 2 6/8/2016 <10 5 Mean 5.0000 2 6/8/2016 <10 5 Mean 5.0000
3 9/13/2017 <5 2.5 C.V.0.0000 3 9/13/2017 <10 5 C.V.0.0000 3 9/13/2017 <10 5 C.V.0.0000
4 n 3 4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5 5
6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =1.00
7 Max. Value 2.500 ug/L 7 Max. Value 5.0 µg/L 7 Max. Value 5.0 ug/L
8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS µg/L 8 Max. Pred Cw NO DETECTS ug/L
9 9 9
10 10 10
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 54
55 55 55
56 56 56
57 57 57
58 58 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points
= 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points =
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-
Values" then "COPY" .
Maximum data points = 58
- 4 -
RPA, data
3/20/2020
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par20 Par21
Silver Zinc
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 3/4/2015 <5 2.5 Std Dev.0.0000 1 3/4/2015 29 29 Std Dev.13.0767
2 6/8/2016 <5 2.5 Mean 2.5000 2 6/8/2016 26 26 Mean 35.0000
3 9/13/2017 <5 2.5 C.V.0.0000 3 9/13/2017 50 50 C.V. (default)0.6000
4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5
6 Mult Factor =1.00 6 Mult Factor =3.00
7 Max. Value 2.500 ug/L 7 Max. Value 50.0 ug/L
8 Max. Pred CwNO DETECTS ug/L 8 Max. Pred Cw 150.0 ug/L
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-Values"
then "COPY" . Maximum data
points = 58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL-Values"
then "COPY" . Maximum data
points = 58
- 5 -
RPA, data
3/20/2020
YVSA WWTP ≥Outfall 001
NC0020567 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 1.8 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD) = 1.80 WWTP/WTP Class:III COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
1Q10S (cfs) = 256.67 IWC% @ 1Q10S = 1.07531026 Acute = 25 mg/L
7Q10S (cfs) = 317.00 IWC% @ 7Q10S = 0.872447544 Chronic = 25 mg/L
7Q10W (cfs) = 454.00 IWC% @ 7Q10W = 0.610783949
30Q2 (cfs) = NO 30Q2 DATA IWC% @ 30Q2 = N/A
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) = 1400.00 IW%C @ QA = 0.198889356
Receiving Stream:Stream Class:C
PARAMETER RECOMMENDED ACTION
Chronic Applied
Standard Acute n # Det.Max Pred Cw
Acute (FW):31,618.8
Arsenic C 150 FW(7Q10s)340 ug/L
3 0 NO DETECTS Chronic (FW):17,193.0
Max MDL = 5
Arsenic C 10 HH/WS(Qavg)ug/L Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic (HH):5,027.9
Limited data set Max MDL = 5
Acute:6,044.77
Beryllium NC 6.5 FW(7Q10s)65 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:745.03
Limited data set Max MDL = 1
Acute:301.272
Cadmium NC 0.5899 FW(7Q10s)3.2396 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:67.612
Limited data set Max MDL = 1
Acute:NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds NC 300 A(30Q2)ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:IWC?
Limited data set Max MDL = 5
Acute:84,169.4
Chromium III NC 117.7325 FW(7Q10s)905.0818 µg/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:13,494.5
Acute:1,487.9
Chromium VI NC 11 FW(7Q10s)16 µg/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:1,260.8
Chromium, Total NC µg/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9
Limited data set Max MDL = 5
Acute:973.86
Copper NC 7.8806 FW(7Q10s)10.4720 ug/L 3 2 42.00
Note: n ≤ 9 Default C.V.Chronic:903.28
Limited data set No value > Allowable Cw
Acute:2,045.9
Cyanide NC 5 FW(7Q10s)22 10 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:573.1
Limited data set Max MDL = 10PQLUNITSTYPE
(1)Allowable Cw
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTSNC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
Yadkin River HUC 03040101
No detects, no monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
a. No Monitoring required if all Total Chromium
samples are < the Chromium VI Allowable Cw
Page 1 of 2
RPA, rpa
3/26/2020
YVSA WWTP ≥Outfall 001
NC0020567 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 1.8 MGD
Acute:7,020.030
Lead NC 2.9416 FW(7Q10s)75.4871 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:337.169
Limited data set Max MDL = 5
Acute (FW):31,173.2
Nickel NC 37.2313 FW(7Q10s)335.2087 µg/L
3 0 NO DETECTS Chronic (FW):4,267.5
Note: n ≤ 9 Max MDL = 10
Nickel NC 25.0000 WS(7Q10s)µg/L Limited data set Chronic (WS):2,865.5
Max MDL = 10
Acute:5,207.8
Selenium NC 5 FW(7Q10s)56 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:573.1
Limited data set Max MDL = 10
Acute:27.564
Silver NC 0.06 FW(7Q10s)0.2964 ug/L 3 0 NO DETECTS
Note: n ≤ 9 Chronic:6.877
Limited data set Max MDL = 5
Acute:11,690.1
Zinc NC 126.7335 FW(7Q10s)125.7052 ug/L 3 3 150.0
Note: n ≤ 9 Default C.V.Chronic:14,526.2
Limited data set No value > Allowable Cw
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
No RP, Predicted Max < 50% of Allowable Cw - No
Monitoring required
Page 2 of 2
RPA, rpa
3/26/2020
3/13/20 WQS = 12 ng/L V:2013-6
Facility Name
/Permit No. :
Total Mercury 1631E PQL = 0.5 ng/L 7Q10s = 317.000 cfs WQBEL = 1375.44 ng/L
Date Modifier Data Entry Value Permitted Flow = 1.800 47 ng/L
6/8/16 6.9 6.9 6.9 ng/L - Annual Average for 2016
9/13/17 7.1 7.1 7.1 ng/L - Annual Average for 2017
10/18/19 4.04 4.04 4.0 ng/L - Annual Average for 2019
YVSA WWTP/NC0020567 No Limit Required
MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION
No MMP Required
YVSA WWTP/NC0020567
Mercury Data Statistics (Method 1631E)
2016 2017 2019
# of Samples 1 1 1
Annual Average, ng/L 6.9 7.1 4.0
Maximum Value, ng/L 6.90 7.10 4.04
TBEL, ng/L
WQBEL, ng/L 1375.4
47
NC0020567 YVSA WWTP 3/20/2020
Month RR (%)Month RR (%)Month RR (%)Month RR (%)
August-16 97.06 February-19 98.67 August-16 96.71 February-19 96.32
September-16 97.48 March-19 98.83 September-16 97.37 March-19 97.67
October-16 96.37 April-19 98.38 October-16 95.03 April-19 96.64
November-16 98.16 May-19 97.41 November-16 97.01 May-19 98.32
December-16 97.67 June-19 97.55 December-16 97.98 June-19 95.69
January-17 98.05 July-19 98.31 January-17 97.00 July-19 97.07
February-17 98.67 August-19 98.93 February-17 96.60 August-19 97.77
March-17 98.03 September-19 99.31 March-17 98.65 September-19 97.95
April-17 96.19 October-19 99.08 April-17 96.21 October-19 97.83
May-17 97.01 November-19 99.06 May-17 96.09 November-19 96.84
June-17 98.20 December-19 98.05 June-17 97.58 December-19 90.99
July-17 98.52 January-20 98.32 July-17 99.02 January-20 93.73
August-17 98.21 February-20 August-17 98.57 February-20
September-17 98.25 March-20 September-17 97.59 March-20
October-17 98.52 April-20 October-17 97.10 April-20
November-17 98.77 May-20 November-17 96.80 May-20
December-17 98.01 June-20 December-17 95.03 June-20
January-18 98.40 July-20 January-18 98.21 July-20
February-18 97.61 August-20 February-18 97.39 August-20
March-18 98.86 September-20 March-18 96.53 September-20
April-18 97.14 October-20 April-18 96.29 October-20
May-18 93.62 November-20 May-18 93.54 November-20
June-18 96.66 December-20 June-18 93.88 December-20
July-18 98.14 January-21 July-18 98.17 January-21
August-18 98.08 February-21 August-18 97.33 February-21
September-18 98.55 March-21 September-18 97.85 March-21
October-18 97.95 April-21 October-18 98.43 April-21
November-18 97.70 May-21 November-18 95.59 May-21
December-18 96.85 June-21 December-18 93.41 June-21
January-19 98.35 July-21 January-19 97.19 July-21
Overall BOD removal rate 97.93 Overall TSSD removal rate 96.69
BOD monthly removal rate TSS monthly removal rate
NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Facility: YVSA WWTP
PermitNo. NC0020567
Prepared By: Nick Coco
Enter Design Flow (MGD):1.8
Enter s7Q10 (cfs):317
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):454
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/l)Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/l)
s7Q10 (CFS)317 s7Q10 (CFS)317
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)1.8 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)1.8
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)2.79 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)2.79
STREAM STD (UG/L)17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/l)0 Upstream Bkgd (mg/l)0.22
IWC (%)0.87 IWC (%)0.87
Allowable Conc. (ug/l)1949 Allowable Conc. (mg/l)89.6
Cap at 28 ug/L. Maintain limit.Allowable Conc. > 35 mg/L; Monitor only
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/l)
Fecal Coliform w7Q10 (CFS)454
Monthly Average Limit:200/100ml DESIGN FLOW (MGD)1.8
(If DF >331; Monitor)DESIGN FLOW (CFS)2.79
(If DF<331; Limit)STREAM STD (MG/L)1.8
Dilution Factor (DF)114.62 Upstream Bkgd (mg/l)0.22
IWC (%)0.61
Allowable Conc. (mg/l)258.9
Allowable Conc. > 35 mg/L; Monitor only
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/l to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals)
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis)
If the allowable ammonia concentration is > 35 mg/L, no limit shall be imposed
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non-Muni)

NPDES/A uifer Protection Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART: I PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER veu net this form hark
Check all that
apply1frOm
rtta;b:
- Notify PERCS if LTMP/STMP data we said should be
Ion DMRs is not really there, so we can get it for you
I (or NOV POTW).
- Notify PERCS if you want us to keep a specific POC
in LTMP/STMP so you will have data for next permit
Irenewal.
-Email PERCS draft permit, fact sheet, RPA.
- Send PERCS paper copy of permit (w/o NPDES
boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet. Email RPA if,
changes.
Date of Request
3/18/2020
munici al renewall
x
Requestorj
Nicholas Coco
new industries
I
_Faqity, Name
YVSA WWTP
WWTP expansion
Permit Numberl
NC0020567
S eculative limitsi
Region
Winston Salem
stream reclass.1
Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
outfall relocation
7Q10 change
other
Facility is rated 1.8 MGD wtih 1 SIU listed in its application.
CHO, HIW, LTN, LUM, NES NEW, ROA, YAD V
d I - Monti Hassan (807-6314)
PERCS PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
3) facility has SIUs and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV' if program still under development)
3a) Full Program with LTMP
3b) Modified Program with STMP
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
Flow, MGDj Permitted Actual I Time Reriod for dual j
Industrial _ _ i
STMP time frame:_
Most recent:
Next C cle:
a POC due to
Parameter of Required Fp�'�� POC STMP LTMP
r.... — rpnri NPDES/ Non- Required by k„ crh� POC due_;_
H
g
uiscn rermn EPA"
Check List Limit
BOD
TSS y-
NH3
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
to SIU*** —'-""' _...__...
Sludge** below)**** Freq
4
4
4
4
4
1 4
1 4
_...__...
Freq
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q = Quarterly
M =Monthly
1/
IV
v`
Cyanide
4
Q M
Is all data on DMRs?
Lead
4
Q M
YES
ercury
4
1 Q M
I NO attach data).
'Molybdenum
Nickel
Silver
Selenium
4
4
4
4
j Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
Zinc
4
Q M
I Is data in spreadsheet?
Total Nitrocien
4
Q M
YES email to writer
Phosphorus
4
Q M
NO
4
4
4
4
Q M
Q M
Q M
Q M
*Always in the LTMP/STMP ** Only in LTMP/STMP if sludge land app or composte (dif POCs for incinerators)
*** Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW **** Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
L�rrc.+.�ti� �v5� his :L Stui �S��d.t-to�J>LV�I(, u�(eye�Qk�er �i�
Ito U c w ,� ac
PERC NPDE P treatment.request.form.may2016 (0000000 ).xlsx
Revised: July24, 2007

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary Woodlake Yacht Club (Aqua)NC0061719/0012.8% (0.3 MGD), 4.6Ceri7dPFBegin:8/1/2016Freq:QFeb May Aug NovNonComp:County:MooreRegion:FROBasin:CPF147Q10:16IWC:8.82SOC_JOC:PF:0.5JFMAMJJASOND2016‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐2017‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐2018‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐2019‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐Worsley Co./Dixie Boy Truck/003NC0065307/003Ac P/F Monit: 90% FtFthd24PFBegin:8/1/2014Freq:QJan Apr Jul OctNonComp:County:New HanoverRegion:WIROBasin:CPF177Q10:26.3IWC:NASOC_JOC:PF:‐JFMAMJJASOND2016 Pass‐‐Fail‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2017 Fail‐‐Fail‐‐Fail‐‐Pass‐‐2018 Fail‐‐Fail‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2019 Fail‐‐Pass‐‐Fail‐‐Fail‐‐WSACC‐Mt. Pleasant WTPNC0044717/001Chr Monit:  90% ‐ No Ceri7dPFBegin:6/1/2009Freq:x/QJan Apr Jul OctNonComp:County:CabarrusRegion:MROBasin:YAD127Q10:IWC:SOC_JOC:waiverPF:0.03JFMAMJJASOND2016 H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐2017 H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐2018 H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐H‐‐2019 H‐‐H‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Yadkin Valley Sewer Auth WWTP (Elkin)NC0020567/001chr lim: 0.87%Ceri7dPFBegin:9/1/2014Freq:QMar Jun Sep DecNonComp:SingleCounty:SurryRegion:WSROBasin:YAD027Q10:317.0IWC:0.87SOC_JOC:PF:1.8JFMAMJJASOND2016‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass2017‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass >3.48(P)‐‐>3.48(P) Pass2018‐‐Pass >3.48(P)‐‐>3.48(P) Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass2019‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐PassYadkinville WWTPNC0020338/001chr lim: 50%Ceri7dPFBegin:8/1/2014Freq:QJan Apr Jul OctNonComp:SingleCounty:YadkinRegion:WSROBasin:YAD027Q10:3.9IWC:50SOC_JOC:PF:2.5JFMAMJJASOND2016 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2017 Pass >100(P)‐‐Pass >100(P)‐‐Pass >100(P)‐‐Pass >100(P)‐‐2018 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2019 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2020 Pass‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐Yanceyville WTP, TownNC0007323/001Cerio7PF Monit: 90%Ceri7dPFBegin:10/1/2017Freq:QJan Apr Jul OctNonComp:County:CaswellRegion:WSROBasin:ROA047Q10:IWC:SOC_JOC:PF:JFMAMJJASOND2016‐‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2017 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐2018 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Fail‐‐Pass‐‐2019 Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Pass‐‐Page 108 of 109Legend:  P= Fathead minnow (Pimphales promelas), H=No Flow (facility is active), s = Split test between Certified Labs
EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 N 52 NC0020567 19/06/05 C S31112171819 20
21 66
Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ----------------------Reserved-------------------
N67707172 73 74 75 80
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
500 NC Hwy 268 W
Elkin NC 28621
Entry Time/Date Permit Effective Date
Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
09:00AM 19/06/05 14/09/01
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
Hal W Transou/ORC/910-835-9817/
Other Facility Data
12:00PM 19/06/05 19/01/31
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Hal Transou, //336-835-9817/Contacted
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Self-Monitoring Program Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s)Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Gary Hudson DWR/Division of Water Quality/336-776-9694/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#1
NPDES yr/mo/day
19/06/05
Inspection Type
C3111218
1
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
NC0020567 17
Page#2
Permit:NC0020567
Inspection Date:06/05/2019
Owner - Facility:
Inspection Type:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Compliance Evaluation
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
.Comment:
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Is the chain-of-custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator
on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
.Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
Page#3
Permit:NC0020567
Inspection Date:06/05/2019
Owner - Facility:
Inspection Type:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
Is the unit in good condition?
.Comment:
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
.Comment:
Oxidation Ditches Yes No NA NE
Are the aerators operational?
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin’s surface?
Is the DO level acceptable?
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/l)
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/l in 30 minutes)
.Comment:
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Page#4
Permit:NC0020567
Inspection Date:06/05/2019
Owner - Facility:
Inspection Type:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Compliance Evaluation
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately ¼ of the sidewall depth)
.Comment:
Disinfection-Gas Yes No NA NE
Are cylinders secured adequately?
Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight?
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination?
Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 lbs of Chlorine (CAS No. 7782-50-5)?
If yes, then is there a Risk Management Plan on site?
If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000-____-____)
If yes, then when was the RMP last updated?
.Comment:
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ?Gas
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)?
Is storage appropriate for cylinders?
# Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers?
.Comment:
Are the tablets the proper size and type?
Are tablet de-chlorinators operational?
Number of tubes in use?
.Comment:
Permit Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
Page#5
Permit:NC0020567
Inspection Date:06/05/2019
Owner - Facility:
Inspection Type:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Compliance Evaluation
Permit Yes No NA NE
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
.Comment:
Page#6