NC0021555_Permit Issuance_20080610

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER :SHEET
NPDES
Permit:
NC0021555
Newport WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
June 10, 2008
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore arty
content on the reirerse side

Michael F. Easley, Governor
of !ATF9
QG
7
-71
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
June 10, 2008
Mr. Clay Dulaney
Public Works Director
Town of Newport
P. O. Box 1869
Newport, North Carolina 28570
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0021555
Town of Newport WWTP
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Dulaney:
.Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordingly, 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 October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended).
In response to your comments on the draft permit, the permit effluent limit for fecal coliform will
remain unchanged from that in the draft permit. Meetings to discuss this issue were held on October 1, 2007
and March 11, 2008 and included Town staff and engineers, and Division staff. From these meeting and
subsequent correspondence, the Division understands you are currently making improvements that will bring
the facility into compliance with the fecal coliform limit.
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
150B 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 demand is made, this decision shall be final
and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. 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, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local
governmental permit that may be required. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact
Karen Rust at telephone number [phone], extension 361.
Coleen H. Sullins
cc: Central Files
Wilmington Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section
NPDES Files
Caro ina
Aoata�rally
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center
Internet: httpJ/h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Phone: [phone] Customer Service
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax: [phone]

Permit NC0021555
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
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,the.___.- -_
Town of Newport
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Newport WwTP
Kirby Lane
Newport
Carteret County
to receiving waters designated as the Newport River in the White Oak River Basin in
accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth
in Parts I, II, III, and IV hereof.
The permit shall become effective July 1, 2008.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2012.
Signed this day June 10, 2008.
Ar"'
. Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental
Management Commission

Permit NC0021555
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are
hereby revoked, and as of this issuance, any previously issued pernut bearing this number is
no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility
arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
The Town of Newport
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.6 MGD wastewater treatment facility located at the
Newport (Kirby Lane, Newport) in Carteret County. This permitted facility
discharges via outfall 001 and 'includes the following wastewater treatment components:
• Bar screens
• Dual activated grit chambers
• Influent /waste sludge pump station with three pumps
• Oxidation ditch with dual mechanical rotors;
• Flow splitter box
• Polymer addition system
• Paralleldual clarifiers
• Aerobic digester with fine bubble aeration
• Six slude drying beds
• Rotary drum tertiary filter
• UV disinfection (dual rack in series) in conjunction with chlorination and
dechlorinatiolm
• Post-aertion chamber
• Effluent flow meter with recorder
2. Upon receiving an Authorization to Construct from the Division, construct and operate
facilities with a design capacity of 0.75 MGD, and
3. Discharge from said treatment works into Newport River, currently a class C stream in
the White Oak River Basin, at the location specified on the attached map.

Quad: Newport
Latitude: 34°46'50.3"
Longitude: 76° 51' 51.7"
Stream Class: C
Subbasin: 30503
Receiving Stream: Newport River
NC0021555
Town of Newport
Newport WWTP
SCALE 1:24000

Permit NC0021555
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (0.6 MGD)
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expansion above 0.6 MGD,
but lasting no later than expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated
wastewater from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the
Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location'
Flow
0.6 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C 2
(April 1 - October 31)
9.2 mg/L
13.8 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C 2
(November 1 - March 31)
18.3 mg/L
27.5 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
NH3 as N ----- --
(April 1 -October 31)
1.2 ing/L
3.6 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
-Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1 - March 31)
3.0 mg/L
9.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Effluent
Temperature
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
pl-I3
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen 4
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
Total Residual Chlorine 5
24 µg/L
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
14/100 mL
28/100 mL
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
Total Nitrogen
(NO2-N+ NO3-N+ TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Oil and Grease
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Notes:
1. U: upstream at Highway 70 Bypass bridge. D: downstream at Highway 70-A bridge. Instream samples shall
be collected 3/week during the months of June through September and once per week during the remaining
months of the year.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and TSS concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent
value (85% removal).
3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4. The daily average effluent dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
5. Total residual chlorine shall be monitored/limited if chlorine is used as a disinfectant or elsewhere in the
treatment process. The facility shall report all effluent TRC values reported by a NC certified laboratory
including field certified. However, effluent values below 50 ug/1 will be treated as zero for compliance
purposes.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NC0021555
A. (2) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (0.75 MGD)
Beginning upon expansion above 0.6 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated wastewater from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS .
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum .
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location'
Flow
0.75 MGD
Continuous
Recordin g
Influent or
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C 2
(April 1 - October 31)
7.0 mg/L
10.5 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C 2
(November - March 31)
14.0 mg/L
21.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent and
Effluent
NH3 as N-
(April 1 -October 31)
1.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L -
- —. _
---3/Week - -
Composite--
_. Effluent -
NH3 as N
(November 1 - March 31)
2.4 mg/L
7.2 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Effluent
Temperature
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
pH 3
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen 4
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
Total Residual Chlorine 5
23 µg/L
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Corm
(geometric mean)
14/100 mL
28/100 mL
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
See Note 1
Grab
U, D
Total Nitrogen
(NO2-N+ NO3 N+ TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Oil and Grease
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Notes:
1. U: upstream at Highway 70 Bypass bridge. D: downstream at Highway 70-A bridge. Instream samples shall
be collected 3/week during the months of June through September and once per week during the remaining
months of the year.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and TSS concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent
value (85% removal).
3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4. The daily average effluent dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L.
5. Total residual chlorine shall be monitored/limited if chlorine is used as a disinfectant or elsewhere in the
treatment process. The facility shall report all effluent TRC values reported by a NC certified laboratory
including field certified. However, effluent values below 50 ug/I will be treated as zero for compliance
purposes.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NCOO21555
A. (3) Notification of Release
The permittee shall notify the Shellfish Sanitation and Recreational Water Quality Section of any release of
partially treated wastewater or untreated wastewater into the Newport River. The notification shall be made
within three hours of the spill to the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries communication center at
252-726-7021. This notification does not relieve the permittee of other spill notifications procedures as
required by other agencies.

TOWN OF NEWPORT
P. O. BOX 1869, 200 Howard Blvd. Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
Newport, NC 28570
April 22, 2008
Ms. Ma Teen Crawford
NPDES Compliance Group, NCDWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Newport Compliance Issues
/ID c�ud�ri�
APR 2 4 2008
DENR • WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Dear Ms. Crawford;
Recently a meeting was held at the Newport Wastewater Plant that included Town Staff,
Engineers from Hobbs & Upchurch, Mr. Paul Rawls and NCDWQ Raleigh staff, and Mr.
Ed Beck and WIRO staff. At the meeting the issues with our UV system and the failure
of the pl nt to meet Coliform standards were discussed along with general plant
operations and maintenance.
Mr. Rawls suggested that the Town of Newport's engineers come up with a plan to meet
the coliform limits and that we conduct experiments and a pilot study of chlorination /
dechlorination to determine the best course of action to come into compliance.
Unfortunately, our engineer has not yet responded with the plan that Mr. Rawls
requested. However, this has not deterred the Town of Newport from taking action to
come into compliance. We have received valuable assistance from Tom Tharington
[WIRO] and Steve Reid [Training and Technical Assistance] along with assistance from
Tony Hgneycutt [NC Rural Water Association] in determining the problems with our UV
system and suggesting possible solutions.
It appears that retuming to chlorination of our effluent is the most economical means of
bringing the coliform levels into compliance. We have on hand a bleach pump that is
capable of paced operation from our effluent flow meter. We have made a temporary
hook-up for this pump and are feeding low levels of bleach that have brought our
coliform'l counts into compliance. We are currently experimenting with the feed rates to
minimize the chlorine addition to only what is required to kill the bacteria, and to
minimize the excess residual chlorine.
We will have to design and build a permanent feed facility for the bleach equipment,
along with a permanent feed facility for dechlorination equipment. We will also have to
obtain lab equipment that is capable of measuring the low 24pg/L chlorine limit that is in
our perriit. We have budgeted for the lab equipment and for the installation of the
chlorination / dechlorination facilities in our new budget that starts in July 2008. l am
attaching a sketch plan that shows the locations of the proposed chlorination and
dechlorination equipment and feed points.
We sha I submit a fast track dechlorination application in the near future so that we will
be prop rly permitted for that chemical feed application. I will be meeting with our
DFNR FORM RSSF /5/20031

chemical suppliers and another engineering firm in May to further refine our options and
plans.
In summary, the Town of Newport is committed to complying with our wastewater permit.
Unfortunately, there were design errors in our recent plant expansion that have caused
compliance problems that were beyond the plant operator's control. We are determined
to correct the problems and come into full compliance with all permit limits just as soon
as we can construct the necessary facilities.
We appreciate the efforts that NCDWQ staff have made to assist us with our problems.
Sincerely,
Clay Dulaney
Public Utilities Director
One sketch plan attached
CC: Ed Beck, WIRO-
Richard Casey, Town Manager

) 18•
vtL E
G
•
EXISTING WOODS
EXISTING
CONCRETE
SLAB
a sayaaa.--az'3a/aL aa.....3a
reaaaasasa�a '"
.........-
EXISTING GRIT
CHAMBER
Po. 4-, e'vst-
tl
44. -
cee
11
II
II
u
t1
tl
II
II
11
11
tt
fl
EXISTINGPUMPING FACILITY
CHLORINATION AND
EXISTING
J`
FLTER
CHAMBER
EXISTING
AERATION
PROPOSED
MANHOLE
ROAD
�4
❑ a4
4a
a9
a
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1.420'
6chy
4'J
LAY DOWN
AREA
EXIS[ntG
DIRT ROAD
J
.
i
If V I
I pk
Q om
IA
a?f,S 1 I 1
El gig
is
ri a
a r-
z�QQ
Tz
66h-
8
15'.1
DUE
DECEMBER•2003
c
RB
CRUM
DIU
s/e•-1 •—o•
Oaf
5
Of:�

NUV-2-2UU r 1.}?
08:34 AM NCDENR
FAX NO. 9103502004 P. 01/01
TOWN OF NEWPORT
P. O. BOX 1869, 200 Howard Blvd.
Newport, NC 28570
Phone [phone]
October 9, 2007
RE: NOV Letter NOV-2007-LV-0354
Mr. Ed Beck. Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
NCDWQ, WIRO
127 Cardinal Dr. Extn.
Wilmington, NC 28405
Dear Ed;
Fax [phone]
Post -It' Fax Note 7671
°ate ii /. io '11Plarosil i
:
TOM•reen (<<4..►Ctic'
Fran kW; G1
�� 5 -t i t° t-
Co.roept. N 1 7 C S U n ,. i
'co. rT„� ; g c7
-
Phone n
Phone N
Fax �try......q
Fax N c l ''i 3 0 l
3 ��
The Townof Newport has asked NCDWQ to review the discharge limits for our
it appears to us that they were erroneously set for Class SA waters when our plant plant, as
discharges into Class SC waters. We were made aware of this issue last
WIRO stair, and immediately began the process of protestingtheDecemberppby
We meet with Mr. Gil Vinzani on October 1, 2007, and you participatedwronglyapplied limits.
teleconference. We are awaiting the results of the agreement that N
ask EPA for guidance with this issue. CDWQ staff was to
The Town of Newport has received several violation notices about this issue
responded that we are protesting the limits and appealing the violation. We are alsd o
requesting that you not issue any further NOV's for this problem until o issue resolved. This is not a case of willful disregard for our permit buter ther a series can get the
errors by the Town of Newport, engineers Hobbs & Upchurch, and NCDWQ which haveof
resulted in our having equipment submitted, approved,
meet our old limits but not the new limits which were in fporce when' and installed that will
submittals were made. the equipment
The Town of Newport is committed to meeting the requirements of the Department
all of our permit requirements. We are simply asking for forbearance while thisr led
is resolved to everyone's satisfaction. problem
Thank you for your attention to these issues.
Sincerely,
0,17
Clay Dulaney
Public Utilities Director
CC: Dick asey, Town Manager
OC' 2.007

TOWN OF NEWPORT
P. O. BOX 1869, 200 Howard Blvd.
Newport, NC 28570
September 19, 2007
RE: LV — 2007 - 0285
Point Source Compliance Unit
NCDWQ
1617 Mail Svc. Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
Li
2 :, 2J01
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Compliance Officer;
The Town of Newport has erroneously received discharge limits for Class SA waters
when our plant discharges into Class SC waters. We were made aware of this issue last
December by WIRO staff, and immediately began the process of protesting the wrongly
applied limits. This process is hopefully going to be resolved when we meet with Mr. Gil
Vinzani on October 1, 2007.
The Town of Newport has received several violation notices about this issue, and has
responded that we are protesting the limits and appealing the violation. I have been on
extremely limited duty since I had major surgery in June, and have only been able to
check the mail on a limited basis. Apparently the NOV above was "lost in the shuffle",
and did not get responded to in the appropriate time frame. I apologize for that
oversight.
The Town of Newport is protesting this NOV along with the others, and does not intend
to pay any coliform violations until the permit limits issue has been resolved.
Thank you for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
Clay Dulaney
Public Utilities Director
CC: Richard Casey, Town Manager

Terrain Navigator Pro - Coastal, Kitty HawkjCape Fear (NC) - [CORE CREEK 34076-G6-TF-024J
- _e•.M Find Dols Lajas EPS MIA 1_tr4dvq help
L3 J ig116 do00 .4g 0\ 24,aao 1:2 T 1,21; 34•4515rs,+i 07r4.5 53":Pi•
Approx. Segment Boundaries
Newport River
Segments 21-(17)a - h (except d) are impaired
for fecal coliform in the 2006 IR
MET, 10-1-07
H4
••�• taiwa4P
•••
♦••
ton. brit
SW,
14-_n. Rod
NEwpQf�T
� J
C
•
•
•
•
•
•
♦
•
•
•

NJ
July 19, 2007
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
300 S.W. Broad Street • Southern Pines, NC 28388
N.C. Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Attn: Karen ust, Eastern NPDES Program
Re: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit NC0021555
Town of Newport WWTP
Carteret County
Dear Ms. Rust,
Per our conversation on Wednesday, July 18, 2007, the Town of Newport would like to submit
the following comments on the above referenced draft permit:
1. On December 6, 2004, ATC No. 012555A01 was issued for the installation of a UV
disinfection system for the Town of Newport. At this time, the Town was under an 18
month compliance schedule to reduce the total residual chlorine limit under their current
NPDES permit. The ATC application for an increase in the capacity of the WWTP from
0.5 MGD to .75MGD had already been submitted in December of 2003, to the Division
of Water Quality (DWQ), but had not yet been approved. There was some questioning
about the amount of increase in capacity that DWQ would allow without requiring
additional construction. The Town of Newport had received a grant for the UV System
that limited the time frame for the availability of the funding. Therefore, an ATV for the
UV System only was issued. In the application for the ATC, the UV System
specifications included effluent standards to be achieved of 200 mpn/ 100m1 for fecal
coliform. DWQ was aware at this time that the Town was applying for a capacity
increase of .25 MGD at the WWTP.
2. An ATC for an increase in capacity at the WWTP was issued by DWQ in April 2005.
This ATC only allowed an increase to 0.6 MGD and not the requested 0.75 MGD. At
this time, the Town was told they would have to submit an additional application to
Construction Grants and Loans for the 0.75 MGD to review the additional increase. A
revised NPDES permit was issued on June 3, 2005 with limits at 0.5 MGD, 0.6 MGD,
and at 0.75 MGD. The Town elected to go ahead and bid the 0.6 MGD and begin the
proje t because they were currently under an SOC and in need of the additional capacity.
It wa not until this project was completed and the upgrades put into operation that the
Tow realized that the limits for fecal coliform had extremely changed.
Southern Pines, NC • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • email: [e-mail]
Myrtle Beach • Nags Head • Raleigh • Charlotte • Beaufort

Mr. John Halbig, P.E.
September 10, 1999
Page 2
3. Also during this time period, on July 27, 2005, HUA requested speculative limits for a
new WWTP and NPDES permit at 2.0 MGD, 3.0 MGD, and 4.0 MGD. More than a year
later, on August 25, 2006, speculative limits were received for 1.5 MGD. These limits
also are the same for fecal coliform as they are at 0.6 MGD and 0.75 MGD.
4. After discussion and e-mails with Mike Templeton, HUA was told that the permit could
possi11y be revised during the comment period for the renewal in the summer of 2007.
5. The 'Down has currently submitted an ATC for the 0.75MGD upgrade to CG&L for
review. This project is being funded by a loan by USDA with a limit amount of available
funds for the construction of the upgrade.
Therefore, based on the above information, the Town of Newport is requesting that the fecal
limits on the NPDES permit be reduced to a more reasonable level for the small increases
that are being requested. We realize that there are impaired waters downstream from the
Newport River, but as the Newport WWTP is the only discharge into this river, we feel that
the small increases in the discharge will not make a significant difference to these waters or
the environment. We understand that at twice the current capacity (1.5 MGD) there will be a
need for more stringent limits, and the Town hopes to have a new plant under operation that
will meet these limits.
I am including copies of permits, correspondence, and e-mails that are mentioned above.
Should you need any additional information, please feel free to call me at [phone],
Sincerely,
Ellen Huntley, PE
cc: Dick Casey, Manager, Town of Newport
Clay Dulaney, Public Works Director, Town of Newport
Rick Bounds, HUA
Cecil Madden, Jr., PE, CG&L
c:ldocuments and settingslaulmy documenalnewpartlnpdes draft comments.doc

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
June 20, 2007
Gina Brooks
NC DENR / DEI-I / Shellfish Sanitation
Karen Rust 1 \ 11`
Eastern NPDES Program
Review of Draft NPDES Permit NC0021555
Town of Newport WWTP
Carteret County
e��
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JUN'2'2007
SHELLFISH SANITATION
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the draft permit and return this form by July 27, 2007.
If you have any questions on the draft permit, please contact me at the telephone number or e-mail address listed at
the bottom of this page.
RESPONSE: (Check one)
H,"" Concur with the issuance of this permit provided the facility is operated and maintained properly, the stated effluent limits
are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not contravene the designated water quality standards.
Concurs with issuance of the above permit, provided the following conditions are met:
Signed
Opposes the issuance of the above permit, based on reasons stated below, or attached:
rod,
Date: -7/ 3 / 0 7
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919 733-5083, extension 361 (fax) 919 733-0719
VISIT US ON THE INTERNE @ http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/NPDES Karen.Rust@ ncmail.net

f
CARTERET COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a notary public of said County and State, duly commis-
sioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths, personally appeared
Patti J. Lyerly who being
Clerk
first duly sworn, deposes and says that he (she) is
(Owner, partner, publisher or other officer or employee
authorized to make this affidavit)
of THE CARTERET PUBLISHING CO., INC., engaged in the publication of a
newspaper known as CARTERET COUNTY NEWS -TIMES, published, issued,
and entered as second class mail in the Town of Morehead City, 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 here-
to, was published in CARTERET COUNTY NEWS -TIMES on the following
dates: 06/22/2007
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or legal adver-
tisement was published was, at the time of each and every such publication, a news-
paper meeting all of the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the
General Statutes of North aarolina and was a qualified newspaper within the mean-
ing of Section 1-597 of they General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 22nd day of June, 2007
(Simaking affidavit)
Sworn and subscribed to before me, this:
22nd day of June, 2007
My commission expires
. Aniutrwo
Notary Public
July 16, 2011
Public Notice
State of North Carolina
Environmental Management
Commission NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notification of Intent
to Issue a NPDES
Wastewater Permit
On the basis of thorough staff review and application of NC
General Statute 143.21, Public law 92-500 and other lawful
standards and regulations, the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission proposes to issue
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) wastewater discharge permit to the person(s)
listed below effective 45 days from the publish date of this
notice.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit will be
accepted until 30 days after the publish date of this notice.
All comments received prior to that date are considered in
the final determinations regarding the proposed permit. The
Director of the NC Division of Water Quality may decide to
hold a public meeting for the proposed permit should the
Division receive a significant degree of public interest
Copies of the draft permit and other supporting information
on the used to determine conditions present in the draft
permit are available upon request and payment of the costs
of reproduction. Mail comments and/or requests for
information to the NC Division of Water Quality at the above
address or call Ms. Frances Candelaria [phone],
extension 520 at the Point Source Branch. Please include
the NPDES permit number (attached) in any
communication. Interested persons may also visit the
Division of Water Quality at 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604-1148 between the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. to review information on file.
The Town of Newport (PO Sox 1869. Newport, NC 28570)
has applied for renewal of NPDES permit NC0021555 for
the Newport WWTP in Carteret County. This permitted
facility discharges 0.6 MGD treated wastewater to the
Newport River in the White Oak River Basin. Currently,
BOD, ammonia -nitrogen, fecal coliform, and total residual
chlorine are water quality limited. This discharge may affect
future allocations In this portion of the White Oak River
Basin.
Town of Atlantic Beach (PO Box 10, Atlantic Beach, NC
28512), has applied for renewal of NPDES permit
NC0044806 for the Atlantic Beach WTP in Carteret County.
This permitted facility discharges treated wastewater to
Bogue Sound in the White Oak River Basin. Currently, total
suspended solids, and total residual chlorine are water
quality limited. This discharge may affect future
allocations in this portion of the White Oak River Basin.
The Town of Beaufort (PO Box 390, Beaufort, NC 28516)
has applied for renewal of NPDES permit NC0072702 for
the Glenda Drive WTP in Carteret County. This permitted
facility discharges treated wastewater to an unnamed
tributary to Turner Creek in the White Oak River Basin.
Currently, total suspended solids, and total residual chlorine
are water quality iirnited. This discharge inay at1e .t tutuic
allocations in this portion of the White Oak Riven3p62343
13549368

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES Permit NC0021555
Newport WWTP
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility
Name:
Town of Newport / Newport WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 1869, Newport, NC 28570
Facility Address:
Kirby Lane, Newport, NC 28570
Permitted Flow
0.6 MGD
Type of Waste:
100% Domestic
Facility/Permit Status:
Renewal
County:
Carteret
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Newport
River
Regional Office:
WIRO
Stream Classification:
C (Tidal)
Quad
Newport
303(d) Listed?:
Yes
Permit Writer:
Karen Rust
Subbasin:
030503
Date:
June 20, 2007
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
46.8
0.4
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
0.9
Average Flow (cfs):
IWC (%):
63
74.4
SUMMARY
The Town of Newport is requesting the renewal of the existing permit. The Town recently completed improvements to
the WWTP for a re -rate to operate its treatment plant at 0.6 MGD (previously 0.5 MGD), which became effective
January 1, 2007. Annual average monthly flow is 0.4947 MGD for 2005 and 0.4817 MGD for 2006. This facility is
100% domestic with no pretreatment program. The discharge is located 7.4 miles upstream of SA waters. The SA
segment is listed on the 2004 303(d) list. The cause of impairment is fecal coliform and waters are closed for
shellfishing. A TMDL is being developed for the entire Newport River.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY: BASED ON THE PREVIOUS 2 YEARS
Per BIMS, the facility has had numerous TRC violations; however, they were in the process of installing a UV system.
When the facility went to the 0.6 MGD flow, the fecal coliform limits lowered from 200 colonies/100mL to 14
colonies/100mL for the monthly average and 400 colonies/100mL to 28 colonies/100mL for the weekly average. There
have been fecal coliform violations in January, March, and April 2007. The regional office states the UV system was
designed to meet the higher limits and not the lower limits. There were also pH and numerous DO violations in 2006.
PROPOSED CHANGES:
The WIRO questions whether the lower fecal coliform limits are appropriate. A dye study report dated June12, 2006
states a flow up to 1.5 MGD would not affect the shellfish closure area. However, in this draft permit, the limits remain
at the lower level to protect the shellfish waters. The facility description was updated to reflect the recent improvements
at the plant.
Page 1 of 2

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
Draft Permit to Public Notice: June 20, 2007 (est.)
Permit Scheduled to Issue: August 13, 2007 (est.)
STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact Karen Rust at (919)
733-5038 ext. 361.
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENT:
NAME:
KAAXriAt'v\
DATE: (c,i 1 cA[o1
Page 2 of 2

To: NPDES Permitting Unit
Surface Water Protection Section
Attention: Karen Rust
Date: May 24, 2007
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Carteret
Permit No.: NC0021555
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address:
Owner Name:
Facility Name:
Physical Address:
Mailing Address:
Town of Newport
Contact Name:
Contact Phone:
Mayor Derryl Garner
[phone]
Newport WWTP
Kirby Lane
Newport, NC 28570
P.O. Box 1869
Newport, NC 28570
2. Date of Investigation: December 14, 2006
3. Report Prepared by: Thomas F. Moore
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
Name: Clay Dulaney, ORC
Telephone: [phone]
Eq@ROWn
MAY 3 1200/ i
DtNR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SODURCE BRANCH
5. Directions to Site: The facility is located in Newport, NC. Take Market St/US-17 headed North
from Wilmington. Continue on US-17 North to Jacksonville for 38.1 miles. Exit onto NC-24 East
toward Morehead City for 35.4 miles. Turn Left at Hibbs Road and follow for approx 3 miles.
Cross Hwy 70 and continue on Hibbs Road for less than a mile. Turn right onto Robert Road and
follow for a short distance to Old Hwy 70. Turn left on Old Hwy 70 and follow for'' 'A mile. Turn
left onto Westfield Road and follow until road turns right and becomes Kirby Lane. The facility is
located immediately on the left.
6. Discharge Point (List for all discharge points):
The facility has one (1) discharge point:
• Outfall 001 — treated wastewater discharge
Latitude: 34° 46' 50" Longitude: 76° 51' 52"
U.S.G.S. Quad No: 0-61 U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Newport
Page 1 of 7

7. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): The site is approximately 5 feet above mean sea
level and is located on terrain that slopes slightly downward to wetlands that are located within 50
feet to the facility fence line. The area in which the facility is located is prone to flooding during
heavy flood events. The lower portion of the facility has been under water during hurricanes and
tropical storms.
8. Location of nearest dwelling: There nearest dwellings are located within 500 feet of the facility.
9. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: The facility discharges into the Newport River.
a) Classi ication: Class C
b) River asin and Subbasin No.: White Oak (03-05-02)
c) Descri e receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The river is used for
fishin and secondary recreation including wading, boating, and other uses involving human
body contact where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental
manner.
PART II - BACKGROUND AND HISTORY
This facility serves the Town of Newport and associated area. The facility was originally permitted
with a treatment system that consisted of a bar screen, dual aerated grit chamber, oxidation ditch,
two center -feed clarifiers, chlorine disinfection system, chlorine contact chamber, post aeration,
aerobic digester and six (6) drying beds.
In 2003, the facility requested a re -rate to 0.75 MGD from 0.50 MGD and proposed to upgrade the
treatment system to be able to achieve treatment at the higher flow. Based a review of the historical
flows, it was evident that the facility had a considerable amount of I&I during rain events. An
assessment of the treatment capacity of the treatment system was completed while taking into
account the amount of I&I. It was determined that the proposed treatment system would not be
sufficient at the requested flow of 0.75 MGD. The facility was granted a re -rate to 0.60 MGD upon
completion of the proposed improvements. As part of this re -rate, the Shellfish Sanitation and
Recreational Water Quality Section conducted a dye study of the facility's discharge into the
Newport River to determine any potential impacts of the expansion on the shellfish closure area that
exists downstream from the facility discharge. The Newport River is classified C waters at the
discharge point and changes to SA-HQW approximately 7 miles downstream of the discharge where
the current closure line exists. The results of the study concluded that the wastewater discharge
from Newport IWWTP would be able to discharge a maximum flow of 1.5 MGD without affecting
the current shellfish closure line.
The Division would consider additional increases in the rated capacity if further performance and
other information support it. This would require the Town of Newport to improve the hydraulic
capacity of both the collection system and treatment system in order to justify such an increase. The
Town has already approved additional improvements and is working on the application for an
Authorization to Construct that will allow the town to support an additional re -rate to 0.75 MGD.
The Town of Newport is also in the developmental phase of scoping a project to build a new
wastewater plat.
Page 2 of 7

PART III - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. Volume of wastewater to be permitted:
As per permit application:
■ Outfall 001 — 0.60 MGD
2. What is the current permitted flow limit?
■ Outfall 001 — 0.60 MGD (became effective January 1, 2007)
3. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility? The current facility has a designed treatment
capacity of 0.60 MGD.
4. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to Construct issued in the
previous two years: The Town of Newport requested an Authorization to Construct for an
upgrade of the wastewater treatment facility that would expand the facility from 0.50 MGD to 0.75
MGD. The proposed upgrade would consist of the following modifications/additions to the existing
0.50 MGD permitted treatment process:
■ Secondary biological treatment
• A new mixer unit in addition to oxidation ditch
• Replace existing 30 foot diameter clarifiers with new clarifier optimization package
equipment
• Install new tertiary filtration system in existing chlorine contact chamber
• Install Ultra -violet disinfection system in existing contact chamber (replacing chlorine gas
disinfection system)
• Replace floating aerator with blower and PVC diffuser laterals
• Renovate aerobic digester to add fine bubble aeration with new 15 HP blowers
• New effluent Re -use pumping station to be connected to separately permitted reuse water lines
installed by Town of Newport
The application for the Authorization to Construct was submitted on December 13, 2003. The ATC
request was acknowledged by the Division on December 30, 2003 and assigned ATC Number
021555A01. Due delays by the Division in the issuance of the Authorization to Construct, the
Authorization to Construct was issued in two parts in order to prevent the Town of Newport from
forfeiting grant money designated for the installation of the UV system. The Authorization to
Construct for the UV system was issued on December 6, 2004 and included the following:
• A UV disinfection system consisting of two 1.0 MDG units set in series; and
• All directly related structures, equipment, piping, controls, and other appurtenances, as
presented in the approved plans and specifications.
An amended Authorization to Construct was issued on April 11, 2005 for the remaining
improvements to the wastewater treatment facility included in the original upgrade proposed
submitted on December 13, 2003. These improvements included:
Page3of7

• Removal of the mechanical systems in the two existing clarifiers and replacement with new
center -feed peripheral -draw systems;
• Removal and replacement of the existing aeration equipment, piping and baffle walls in the
existing aerobic digester;
• Installation of a UV disinfection system in the existing chlorine contact chamber (previously
approved);
• Installation of a disk type effluent filter system in the existing chlorine contact chamber;
• Installation of a new wastewater reuse pumping system;
• Installation of a new post -aeration system;
• Installation of a new mixer in the existing oxidation ditch;
• Repla ement of existing blowers, motors, and motor starters in the blower room; and
• Const uction or installation of all related structures, equipment, piping, controls, and other
appurtenances, as presented in the approved plans and specifications.
The Division approved an increase of the rated capacity of the facility to 0.60 MGD upon
completion of these improvements. The engineer's certification was completed on September
29, 2006 with the following modifications:
• A rotary drum filter was installed instead of a disk type filter; and
• The new mixer in the existing oxidation ditch was not installed.
The final startup inspection was conducted in conjunction with this visit on December 14, 2006.
The new permit limits associated with the re -rated flow of 0.60 MGD became effective on
January 1, 2007.
5. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater treatment facilities:
The facility treats 100% domestic wastewater and has a treatment capacity of 0.60 MGD. The
facility has one (1) discharge point. The discharge of treated wastewater from the wastewater
treatment facility is discharged through Outfall 001. The discharge and associated treatment system
are as follows:
Outfall 001
The following is a description of the wastewater treatment facility with the associated capacities and
components as of the completion of the improvements included in ATC No. 021555A01:
Treatment Unit Capacity
Primary headworks 0.358 MGD
• Mechanical bar screen
• Manual grit chamber
Secondary headworks 0.170 MGD
• Manual bar screen
• Manual grit chamber
Influent pump station (w/ three pumps) 700 gpm (each)
Oxidation ditch (w/ two brush aerators) 520,000 gals
Flow splitter box
Polymer addition system
Two (2) center -feed clarifiers (operated in parallel) 0.375 MGD (each)
Aerobic dgester (w/fine bubble aeration) 150,000 gals
Six (6) slu,dge drying beds 7,500 sq ft
Page 4 of 7

Rotary drum tertiary filter
Ultraviolet disinfection system (dual rack in series) 2.0 MGD
Post -aeration chamber 11,000 gals
Effluent flow meter with recorder
The final effluent exits the discharge pipe approximately 0.25 miles from the facility and discharges
directly into the receiving stream.
6. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: The facility plans
to submit an additional request for an Authorization to Construct for further improvements and
upgrades to the facility.
7. Possible t
xic impacts to surface waters: None
8. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only) : N/A
9. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: The facility maintains it's own residuals
management permit, Permit No. WQ0008349. Residuals are pumped to an aerobic digestor or
drying beds for pathogen reduction. The residuals are removed and transported off -site for land
application/soil incorporation. This facility utilizes a residuals contractor, Craven AG Service,
for residuals management.
10. Compliance history for this facility within the past permit cycle is as follows: The facility has
not been in compliance with the permit limits during the past permit cycle. Please see the
attached summary of compliance for the facility.
Many of the violations are related to flow exceedances experienced duringexcessive rain or
P
storm events. A review of past flow data indicate that facility has considerable issues with I&I
that contributes to the high flows.. This information was provided in the A to C issued April 11.
2005. The facility also experienced violations for Total Residual Chlorine in August 2005 and
September 2005 for which they were issued two penalty assessments. These violations were due
to the delays in the issuance of the A to C that would have allowed to facility to install the UV
system in order to comply with the compliance schedule for the new low level TRC limit by
August 1, 2005. Because the facility was unable to comply with this schedule because the A to
C was not issued to allow the facility ample time to install the UV system, the penalty
assessments issued in August 2005 (Case # LV-2006-0066) and September 2005 (Case # LV-
2006-0078) were rescinded. Except for flow, additional enforcement actions were not taken
from this period until the completion of the improvements as per the A to C in December 2006
due to the construction activities that required portions of the treatment process to be by-passed
or taken out of service in order to complete improvements.
The facility continues to be operated and maintained very well. The facility continues to deal
with flow violations during excessive rain events and continues to assess I&I issues by
identifying and repairing I&I problems.
Page 5 of 7

11. Treatment plant classification:
The facility has been classified a WW-III since the renewal of the previous permit. This was
based a permitted flow of 0.75 MGD. The increased flow of 0.75 MGD was never approved
due to the treatment capacity concerns. The facility has only been permitted for 0.50 MGD until
the recent re -rate to 0.60 MGD. With this re -rate to 0.60 MGD, the facility will be classified a
WW-III and therefore, the current classification remains.
Current Classification:
Type:
Class:
WW (Biological Wastewater)
III
A rating sheet is included for documentation of the classification of the facility at the re -rated
flow.
12. SIC Code(s): 4952
PART IV - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
(municipals only) involved? N/A
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: If fecal Coliform limits associated
with class SA waters are imposed to further protect impaired water located downstream of
discharge, Enterococci monitoring requirement should also be considered in accordance with
Enterococci permitting strategy.
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: N/A
5. Other Special Items: None
PART V - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This facility is located in the White Oak Basin and has a permitted flow of 0.60 MGD, which discharges
into Class C waters. The facility classification will remain a WW-III. Monitoring requirements should
be remain in the permit that is consistent with the requirements for a Biological Wastewater Class III
facility.
The current permit was issued on January 12, 2004, which included two sets of limits for flows up to
0.50 MGD and flows above 0.50 MGD. The permits limits associated with flows above 0.50 MGD
included limits for Fecal Coliform at 14 (Monthly Average) and 28 (Daily Maximum). This changed
from the 200/400 limits for the flows up to 0.50 MGD. As part of the last upgrade to the facility, the
facility installed a UV disinfection system. According to the consulting engineers who worked on the
upgrade, the UV system was designed based on the 200/400 Fecal Coliform limits, which was approved
in the Authorization to Construct. After talking to Jim Bushardt from our region who did the staff
report for the to C, he indicated that a recommendation for the 14/28 fecal limit was made to address
the reuse elem nt originally included in the project. These limits would have been included in the reuse
permit. However, the reuse element was never completed.
Page 6 of 7

Additionally, there were concerns regarding impacts of the discharge to SA waters (shellfish closure
area) that are located 7 miles downstream from the Newport discharge point. According to the 1997
Whiteoak Basin Plan, there are 1,606 acres of the Newport River that are impaired SA waters for Fecal
Coliform. A dye study conducted by Shellfish Sanitation showed that no potential impacts to the
shellfish closure line from the Newport discharge would occur below 1.5 MGD. Given the fact that the
currents flows are well below 1.5 MGD and the SA waters are 7 miles downstream, it didn't appear
these lower limits would have been imposed on this discharge. There are other facilities that discharge
to surface waters that eventually turn into SA waters and they do not have the tighter fecal limits. Based
on the current water quality standards, results of the dye study and no reuse component exists, it appears
the limits of 200/400 for fecal Coliform would have been applicable. However, it appears that these
lower limits associated with SA waters were imposed to further protect the downstream -impaired
waters. The permit writer is requested to verify that the inclusion of these limits is appropriate for this
discharge prior to issuing the draft permit. This is necessary in order for the facility to determine if
further modification or replacement of the UV system is required. Should these limits remain in the
renewed permit, the regional office request that consideration be given to including a compliance
schedule that will allow the facility to make the necessary changes in the UV system that will allow
them to meet the lower limit. Also, since the Fecal Coliform limits for SA waters would be imposed on
C waters, it is also requested to evaluate whether the new Enterococci monitoring requirements would
be applicable in accordance with the Enterococci permitting strategy.
The Wilmington Regional Office recommends reissuance of the permit in accordance with the White
Oak Basinwide permitting strategy, and provided no significant adverse public comment is received.
The Wilmington Regional Office also requests that the recommendations provided herein are
considered in the reissuance of this permit.
r /1.0-1P--C - S 5 D 17
SignaturReport Preparer Date
S126/°7
Water Quality Regional Supervisor Date
cc: WiRO NPDES Permit File
DWQ/ Central Files — NPDES
Page 7 of 7

Re: lFwd: NC0021555]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: NC0021555]
From: "Tom F. Moore" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:13:58 -0400
To: Karen Rust <[e-mail]>
Hi Karen,
Just wanted to follow up in regards to the Newport renewal and the issue with the low fecal limits. I
talked with the ORC at Newport and he indicated that the UV supplier indicated that in order to meet the
limits of 14/28, the entire system would have to be replaced. This would require a complete redesign
and modification of the contact chamber structure in order to accommodate a new system (larger). He
indicated they plan to build a brand new WWTP within the next 3-5 years and requiring this replacement
at this stage after the ATC was delayed for so long would not be beneficial. He indicated that they
would take the issue to the EMC if necessary during the renewal of the permit.
Let's discuss further when you get a chance. Thanks!
Karen Rust wrote:
Hi Tom,
I reviewed the historical file, and the facility was changed to a Class III facility in 1997. During that
time, the division used a points system to determine the grade of a facility. In a staff report prepared
by Ed Beck and. dated April 10. 1097. Td .• ""I ;1,, ;' 11 a class TT in
but the new sludge facilities have added su:::;. lit poitlt.- to cause tiler ...Il` to increase to
III." So, that's how the facility became a Class III at the 0.5 flow.
The A to C for the UV system approves a system consisting of two 1.0 MGD units set in series.
The system should have been designed for the 0.75 MGD flow and therefore the 14/28 limits.
Additionally, the Newport River is listed as impaired for fecal coliform. The TMDL unit is working
on a fecal TMDL for the entire Newport River, which should be completed in late 2008 or early
2009. So, I think the 14/28 fecal limits are appropriate for the 0.6 MGD flow. I hope this
information helps. Please let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,
Karen
Mike Templeton wrote:
Charles -
Karen is the primary reviewer on this permit. She is already reviewing the files and is getting up
to speed with Tom on it. I don't know why the monitoring at 0.5 MGD reflects a Class III. I
hardly looked at that page when I modified the permit in 2005, and don't recall the Town saying
anything about it. The historical file may shed some light on why we required the higher
frequencies.
1 oft 9/5/2007 3:22 PM

Re: IFwd: NC0021555]
Subject:
NC0021555
From:
"Tom F. Moore" <[e-mail]>
Date:
Mon, 21 May 2007 17:05:45 -0400
To:
arles Weaver <[e-mail]>
To:
Charles Weaver <[e-mail]>
CC:
Karen Rust <[e-mail]>, Linda Willis <[e-mail]>
Hi Charles,
I have a quick question in regards to a permit that you are listed as the application
processor in BIMS. Newport WWTP, No. NC0021555, has a permitted flow in BIMS of
0.75MGD. The facility has never been approved for the re -rate from 0.50 MGD to 0.75
MGD. Given the facility has only been approved and permitted to discharge at 0.50 MGD,
should they have been classified as a Class III? The proposed flow of 0.75 was never
rcccntiy Avas re -rated to 0.00 ',titer tl1 )"v: tLlL ttoth ''.1'1/4:1-'.
J l v
they would be classed a Grade III. I was just curious to whether there was another reason
why they were classed a Grade III rather than Grade II for the permitted flow of 0.5 MGD.
The current permit information in BIMS needs to be updated to reflect what the plant was
designed and permitted to treat and discharge. As I am also writing the staff report for the
current renewal, I wanted to check with you to make sure I'm not off base on this. The
renewed permit will reflect the approved re -rate of 0.60 MGD.
Thanks!
Karen Rust
Environmental Specialist
NC DENR, Division of Water Quality
Surface Water Protection Section, Point Source Branch
Eastern NPDES Permitting and Compliance Program
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Phone: [phone] ext. 361
Fax: [phone]
3 of 4 9/5/2007 3:22 PM

Re: 1Fwd: Nc0021555]
Karen, Tom,
Charles -
After talking with Karen about the fecal limits and then reading this email thread, I think I need
to recap howl the Town's re -rating proposal played out in 2004 and 2005, to get everybody on
the same page:
In December 2003, the Town requested an ATC for improvements that they hoped would
increase the plant's capacity to 0.75 MGD; and they asked us to re -rate the improved plant to
0.75 MGD. The review was complicated by III issues, I was busy, and it took a while to
complete. I i sued a partial ATC for just the UV system in December 2004 so they wouldn't
lose funding for it. In the end, I concluded that the upgraded plant could probably only handle
about 0.6 MGD. On April 11, 2005, DWQ issued the ATC for the full project and approved
re -rating the iplant to 0.6 MGD, conditioned on completion of all of the improvements in the
ATC. On June 3, 2005, we issued the modified permit to include a new effluent sheet for 0.6
MGD (the permit should have come before the re -rate, but it didn't happen that way). I haven't
followed their progress since the permit was issued, so don't know whether they completed the
work or mo')ed up to the 0.6 MGD effluent limits page yct. (They were in quite the hurry two
years ago, so I hope they've made some progress on it.)
As I was wrapping up the permit mod, Rick Bounds stepped in as Hobbs Upchurch's project
manager. I told him that the Town would need another clarifier and a flow equalization basin to
get to 0.75 ?v GD capacity (also that they would need a second treatment train to go beyond 0.75
as they had suggested). He agreed and seemed set to propose the clarifier and FEB to the Town.
:A��ain, don't 'i:nu'.`, ii� tine}''v, : :ft:: al�� i;, ,;Li�� aj ii.
I understand the Town is now saying the lower fecal limits are too stringent to meet at 0.6 MGD
and we should relax the limits. For what it's worth, all of the improvements in the 2005 ATC
were designed for at least 0.75 MGD, because that was the capacity they had aimed for. We
never discussed the 0.6 figure until the ATC and re -rate were nearly ready to sign. If the UV
system has been installed and cannot meet the fecal limits even at present flows, it appears the
problem is on their end. It would be worth checking the file to see what the design documents,
ATC, and engineering certification say.
Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
-MikeT
Charles We ver wrote:
Mike - can you enlighten me [and Tom] about the status of things re: Newport? Their last
permit [which you prepared] had expansion pages for 0.6 and 0.75 MGD. Tom is uncertain
about the monitoring frequencies in the permit.
CHW
2 of 4 9/5/2007 3:22 PM

Re: Newport WWTP Renewal
Subject: Re: Newport WWTP Renewal
From: "Tom F.1V oore" <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 10:11:31 -0400
To: Karen Rust <[e-mail]>
CC: Linda Willis <[e-mail]>, Ed Beck <[e-mail]>
According to the consulting engineers who worked on the upgrade, the UV system was
designed for the 200/400 fecal coliform limits. The SA waters (shellfish closure
area) is located 7 miles downstream from the Newport discharge point. The dye study
conducted by Shellfish Sanitation showed no potential affects to the closure line
from the Newport discharge would occur below 1.5 MGD. Given the fact that the
currents flows �re well below 1.5 MGD and the SA waters are 7 miles downstream, it
didn't appear t ese limits should be imposed. We have many other facilities that
discharge to su face waters that eventually turn into SA waters but they do not have
tighter fecal 1'mits. Based on the water quality standards and the results of the
dye study, it appears the facility should have received the 200/400 fecal limits.
A permit modification was issued June 3, 2005 which included limits for the 0.6 MGD
flow. The cover letter stated the permit included new limits for BOD, NH3-N, and
Total Residual Chlorine, and also stated the limits for other parameters are the same
as those set for other flows. However, the fecal limits did change from 0.5 to 0.6
MGD. There were a number of issues with this modification involving the issuance of
the A to C, which delayed the project by about 18 months. The dye study was supposed
to be completed before the permit was issued but this did not occur due to DWQ's
delay in issuing the A to C. After talking to Jim Bushardt from our region who did
the staff report for the A to C, he indicated that the 14/28 fecal limit was included
in the permit because there was a reuse element originally included in the project,
which not completed. The reuse element was driving the recommendation to include the
14/28 limits to meet reuse requirements.
limits for fecal at the 0.6 •:GD aiid should hevE U' t i. vc it LhE? 200/400 limits.
Hope this clarifies things. Thanks!
Karen Rust wrote:
Hi Tom,
I am just starting to work on this permit renewal. Our next public notice day is
next Wednesday, May 23. However, I do not know if I will be able to complete the
draft by that time. If I do not make that public notice date, the next one is two
weeks after that, June 6. So, my goal is to complete the draft within the next
few weeks.
I believe the fecal coliform limit of 14/28 is correct for the 0.6 MGD flow. That
limit was imposed at the 0.75 MGD flow to protect the shellfish waters and when
the permit was modified to include the 0.6 MGD flow, the permit writer imposed the
same limit as at the 0.75 MGD flow to be conservative and protect the shellfish
waters. I can speak to some of the more experienced permit writers and see what
they think the limit should be. What was the current UV system designed to
handle? I hope this information helps answer your question. I look forward to
receiving the staff report. Please let me know if you have any other questions or
would like to discuss this issue further.
Thanks,
Karen
Tom F. Moore
Hi Karen,
wrote:
Just checking to see when you will be sending the Newport WWTP, NC0021555,
draft out. I'm working on the staff report and was wondering what your timing
1 of 2 9/5/2007 3:21 PM

Re: Newport,WWTP Renewal
is for that permit.
I also have a question about the existing permit as it will also be an issue
with the n9w permit. The facility discharges to the Newport:River which is a
Class C stream. The current permit has a limit of 14/28 for the permitted flow
of 0.6 MGD and had a limit of 200/400 for 0.5 MGD. Is this correct or should
this have been 200/400? The facility installed a UV designed for 200/400 but
the new limits of 14/28 took effect in Jan 07 and they are not able to meet
this limit with the current UV design. The tighter limit is imposed for Class
SA waters. The Newport River changes to Class SA approximately 7 miles
downstream of the discharge. A dye study conducted by Shellfish sanitation in
2006 concluded that the maximum discharge the plant could have without
affecting the closure area would be 1.5 MGD as per speculative limits dated
August 25, 2006. The current permitted flow is well under this maximum flow.
Was the tighter limits included in the current permit for the higher flow of
0.6 MGD based on information prior to the dye study?
Thanks!
Thomas Moore <[e-mail]>
Environmental Chemist I1
Surface Water Protection Section
Division of Water Quality
2 of 2 9/5/2007 3:21 PM

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
FORM
2A NPDES FORM 2A APPLICATION OVERVIEW
NPDES
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
APPLICATION OVERVIEW
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
Form 2A has been developed in a modular format and consists of a "Basic Application Information" packet
and a "Supplemental Application Information" packet. The Basic Application Information packet is divided
into two parts. All applicants must complete Parts A and C. Applicants with a design flow greater than or
equal to 0.1 mgd must also complete Part B. Some applicants must also complete the Supplemental
Application Information packet. The following items explain which parts of Form 2A you must complete.
BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION:
A. Basic Application Information for all Applicants. All applicants must complete questions A.1 through A.8. A treatment works
that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States must also answer questions A.9 through A.12.
B. Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow >_ 0.1 mgd. All treatment works that have design flows
greater than or equal to 0.1 million gallons per day must complete questions B.1 through B.6.
C. Certification. All applicants must complete Part C (Certification).
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION:
D. Expanded Effluent Testing Data. A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States and meets
one or more of the following criteria must complete Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data):
1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd,
2. Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in place), or
3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to provide the information.
E. Toxicity Testing Data. A treatment works that meets one or more of the following criteria must complete Part E (Toxicity Testing
Data):
1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mgd,
2. Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in place), or
3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to submit results of toxicity testing.
F. Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes. A treatment works that accepts process wastewater from any
significant industrial users (SIUs) or receives RCRA or CERCLA wastes must complete Part F (Industrial User Discharges
and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes). SlUs are defined as:
1. All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 403.6 and
40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N (see instructions); and
2. Any other industrial user that:
a. Discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the treatment works (with certain
exclusions); or
b. Contributes a process wastestream that makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic
capacity of the treatment plant; or
c. Is designated as an SIU by the control authority.
G. Combined Sewer Systems. A treatment works that has a combined sewer system must complete Part G (Combined Sewer
Systems).
ALL APPLICANTS MUST COMPLETE PART C (CERTIFICATION)
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of, Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
i
BASIC APPLIC�►'
y,.
'-. : .. .
.i / #n,1Y�.l�4✓`-S.<Y:'.x ,1� \C� �L..S �. , Z.. .�} Y "� } y\ - -4 Z� �'. tiYa ,`J t• �.�- �\
IO; INFkQRl1lIAION . 3 f . 3 x
'�,' _:v::.� ;.. u - .n .3, .� �` ::i t f 3. { , w.. v , F� • .. ). 7 ry '� t. 1:. T.:
r.: (.. .•..1 V�� i Y.• .z...S. •f aR;-.-Jt4-S:.\ •. . '' � l '.l �).:C1 h 3 .-.J n
. C .. .. -. .. .. .. ��F�J'.... tom .... .. % ..._.
Y
PART A BASIC_ APPLICATION INFORM I N FOR ALL4A`PPUC - NTSt .�', t }
All treatment works must complete questions A.1 through A.8 of this Basic Application Information Packet.
A.1. Facility Information.
Facility Name
Mailing Address
Contact Person
Title
Telephone Number
Facility Address
(not P.O. Box)
A.2. Applicant Information.
Applicant Name
Mailing Address
Contact Person
Title
Telephone Number
Is the applicant the owner
® owner
Indicate whether correspondence
0 facility
A.3. Existing Environmental
(include state -issued
NPDES
-
Town of Newport Wastewater Treatment Plant
P.O. Box 1869, 200 Howard Blvd.
Clay Dulaney
Public Works Director
[phone]
Kirby Lane
Newport, NC 28570
If the applicant is different from the above, provide the following:
Same as above -
•
•
( )
or operator (or both) of the treatment works?
® operator
regarding this permit should be directed
to the facility or the applicant.
environmental permits that have been issued to the treatment works
PSD •
►5 applicant
Permits. Provide the permit number of any existing
permits).
NC0021555
UIC Other
RCRA Other WQCS00177
A.4. Collection System Information. Provide information on municipalities and areas served by the facility. Provide the name and population of each
entity and, if known, provide information on the type of collection system (combined vs. separate) and its ownership (municipal, private, etc.).
Name Population Served Type of Collection System Ownership
Town of Newport 3677 Separate - Sewer Town of Newport
Newport Correctional Facility 300 Separate -Sewer NCDOC
Total population
served 3977
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
A.5. Indian Country.
a. Is the treatment works located in Indian Country?
❑ Yes ® No
b. Does the treatment works discharge to a receiving water that is either in Indian Country or that is upstream from (and eventually flows
through) Indian Country?
❑ Yes CO No
A.6. Flow. Indicate the design flow rate of the treatment plant (i.e., the wastewater flow rate that the plant was built to handle). Also provide the
average daily flow Oe and maximum daily flow rate for each of the last three years. Each year's data must•be based on a 12-month time period
with the 12th month of "this year occurring no more than three months prior to this application submittal.
a. Design flow ra
e 0.600 mgd
Iwo Years Ago
b. Annual average daily flow rate CY2004 0.4535 MGD
c. Maximum daily flow rate 0.6152 MGD
Last Year This Year
CY2005 0.4741 MGD 1/06-11/06 0.4715 MGD
1.0332 MGD 1.1885 MGD
A.7. Collection System. Indicate the type(s) of collection system(s) used by the treatment plant. Check all that apply. Also estimate the percent
contribution (by miles) of each.
® Separate sanitary sewer 100
O Combned storm and sanitary sewer 0 %
A.8. Discharges and Other Disposal Methods.
a. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to waters of the U.S.? ® Yes 0 No
If yes, list how
many of each of the following types of discharge points the treatment works uses:
i. Discharges of treated effluent
ti. Discharges of untreated or partially treated effluent N/A
01 NC0021555 Newport River
iii. Combined sewer overflow points
iv. Constructed emergency overflows (prior to the headworks)
v. Other
b. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to basins, ponds, or other surface impoundments
that do not hale outlets for discharge to waters of the U.S.? 0 Yes
If yes, provide the following for each surface impoundment:
Location: N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
® No
Annual average daily volume discharge to surface impoundment(s)
Is discharge 0 continuous or 0 intermittent?
c. Does the treatment works land -apply treated wastewater?
If yes, provide, the following for each land application site:
Location:
N/A
N/A
O Yes
mgd
® No
Number of acres: N/A
Annual average daily volume applied to site:
NIA mgd
Is land application 0 continuous or 0 intermittent?
d. Does the treatment works discharge or transport treated or untreated wastewater to another
treatment works?
❑ Yes ® No
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
If yes, describe the mean(s) by which the wastewater from the treatment works is discharged or transported to the other treatment works
(e.g., tank truck, pipe).
N/A
If transport is y a party other than the applicant, provide:
Transporter Name N/A
Mailing Address N/A
N/A
Contact Pers s n N/A
Title N/A
Telephone Number + N/A)
For each treatment works that receives this discharge, provide the following:
Name
N/A
Mailing Address NIA
NIA
Contact Person N/A
Title N/A
Telephone Number ( N/A )
If known, provide the NPDES permit number of the treatment works that receives this discharge N/A
Provide the average daily flow rate from the treatment works into the receiving facility. N/A mgd
e. Does the treatment works discharge or dispose of its wastewater in a manner not included
in A.8. through A.8.d above (e.g., underground percolation, well injection): ❑ Yes 0 No
If yes, provide the following for each disposal method:
Description of method (including location and size of site(s) if applicable):
N/A
Annual daily vgtume disposed by this method: NIA
Is disposal through this method ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
WASTEWATER DISCHARGES:
If you answered "Yes" to question A.8.a, complete questions A.9 through A.12 once for each outfall (including bypass points) through
which effluent is discharged. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows in this section. If you answered "No" to question
A.8.a, go to Part B, "Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow Greater than or Equal to 0.1 mgd."
A.9. Description of Dutfall.
a. Outfall numbe 01, NC0021555
b. Location Newport 28570
(City or town, if applicable)
Carteret
(Zip Code)
NC
(County)
(State)
34 den 46' 50.3" 76 den 51' 51.7"
(Latitude) (Longitude)
c. Distance from shore (if applicable) N/A ft.
d. Depth below sirface (if applicable) N/A ft.
e. Average daily flow rate 0.4672 mgd
f. Does this outfall have either an intermittent or a
9•
If yes, provide
the following information:
Number of times per year discharge occurs:
Average durat
on of each discharge:
periodic discharge?
0 Yes
® No (go to A.9.g.)
Average flow per discharge: mgd
Months in which discharge occurs:
Is outfall equipped with a diffuser?
A.10. Description of Receiving Waters.
a. Name of receiving water
b. Name of watershed (if known)
❑ Yes IS No
Newport River
White Oak River Basin 03-05-03
United States Soil Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code (if known):
c. Name of State Management/River Basin (if known): White Oak
United States Geological Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit code (if known): 03020106
d. Critical low flow of receiving stream (if applicable)
acute 15.6
cfs
chronic cfs
e. Total hardness of receiving stream at critical.Iow flow (if applicable): mg/I of CaCO3
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
A.11. Description of Treatment
a. What level of treatment
❑ Primary
❑ Advanced
b. Indicate the following
Design BOD5
Design SS
Design P
Design N
Other
c. What type of disinfection
Ultraviolet — installed
are provided? Check all that apply.
© Secondary
0 Other. Describe:
removal rates (as applicable):
removal or Design CBOD5 removal
removal
removal
removal
outfall? If disinfection
varies
98
98 %
50
50
% .
is used for the effluent from this
May 2006
by season, please describe:
If disinfection is by chlorination is dechlorination used for this outfall? 0 Yes ❑ No
Does the treatment plant have post aeration? ® Yes ❑ No
A.12. Effluent Testing Information.
parameters. Provide
discharged. Do not include
All Applicants
the indicated effluent testing
information on combined
conducted using
other appropriate QA/QC
data must be based
that discharge to waters of the US must provide
required by the permitting authority
sewer overflows in this section.
40 CFR Part 136 methods. In addition, this
requirements for standard methods for analytes
on at least three samples and must be no
effluent testing data for the following
for each outfall through which effluent is
All information reported must be based on data
data must comply with QA/QC requirements of
not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a
more than four and one-half years apart.
collected through analysis
40 CFR Part 136 and
minimum, effluent testing
Outfall number: 01
PARAMETER
MAXIMUM DAILY VALUE
AVERAGE DAILY VALUE
Value
Units
Value
Units
Number of Samples
pH (Minimum)
6.9
s.u.
pH (Maximum)
7.7
s.u.
Flow Rate
1.1885
MOD
.4715 •
MGD
334
Temperature (Winter)
19.9
C
14.1
C
151
Temperature (Summer)
28.5
C
22.7
C
214
" For pH please report a minimum and a maximum daily value
POLLUTANT
MAXIMUM DAILY
DISCHARGE
AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE
ANALYTICAL
METHOD
ML/MDL
Conc.
Units
Conc.
Units
Number of
Samples
CONVENTIONAL AND NON CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND (Report one)
BOD5
23.0
mg/I
2.6
mg/I
156
composite
CBOD5
FECAL COLIFORM
300
/100 ml
26.9
/100 ml
156
grab
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS (TSS)
114
mg/I
4.8
rn_g/I
156
composite
END OF PART A.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PErtMIT
Town of
NUMBER:
Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
,A
s -.^... .>, .:1
.:.... .-.+. : �,,'... >,;
v >�s
,� ► i
>�' ::
AS AP ..ICATI.Q
. ,. 4-- i,s r: _ , r.
�Z '. F, i `v(.<`: `i�,p
r t s
'� �,...,- ...,�..Jw.<.-,.,..}
� �P.• , ♦ 1 .... i ✓'• l•` ... k'•X J%. n i+, . , �{ � . � ..r.
u• i.- .F .:`G. as :Y, Y Y i, .
. ,g .Tess. ,�$, � g ..� :�3" •'s, k ' 4 y .� A
h ........�. �e. >. . -� e•. .^.` .,r ...ls^^' .s _ . ' {i c.3f_
Z ' : . �.,z�:.. r ��-{ , r�As'�, ��-{.-:.Kx%\, 'fi'c. `" ?,wwi`;'"', S z. :
l t�. �. t, ,...ca>�, ,- �,,. �,_ _ ,.a*; �... ,. ,� �. a .: ��;... , �: x.,�.
4 , , -+;x� Gy":,T. 'r v .C' x ..u:Ks. - 3 k• Y , ,�"5
'w'.«. J���I>..:.�p�i .. ;'IY3 {i �.Y '< 'lY t:•',�Y a� t", >,a` toi t t .1
�fl et, � .. , �.. .� �. M .� � - �,��,(� fit'
�. . `� �!Tl .. .a..Ci/• '•" .1 . 1�'.. r. � �x<]Y i.R'-� x,Y. �.`Z v., .N'R+
d. :. a'Q. �s`k'-'➢.i<. t,-�.e... ,,y .,,3F Jy>". .. „,„ r "�+
�'"�. Tb.:..t'' 7.%' �. -K'. r x[:C:' ..x. Lyt va=.,3 ,'f: <'.b`r'"^%?.. .f r
m < 44 a r #w�„ s8 . z r 1� t �. :
�P•s<�`,"'.t�� w�'a ��... sr.t..:.�z<ties•:•'#...,..,,��r�'i�'s��� �i��r.._..........
1y J fi. �':l' � ./.f. -,`:C
n .xn � +`� ��
w hec C :
�. #, �: k-'' 3: .:�:
tiU. xa. ,�x+y„,t i a+„c,• ;.tip- �' � '>+7 � >.w'.'Yz�.�s
...x a y+'i7�'�s'S"ik'y�a.. J ,�.�L.
r .. t'. 7 5..*..:Sk `.k
�` £% ,�Y '� ���r,.= M:. � �'z 1 r' �.- zY�.
.. �, r��
ii .f �i: �b'C:r. :x:
<i �" SRi. ,'f*.: .dk"t. .:.?.;
„"` 8! may- C <.3
vi," x 7 ,.t
�:.:�t:��i,to-�a��.��� ,3'lt��.'A•3i ....
: ,, . ,;'.�-^"w: -'7., ',....,
-.,.. .. ., ,,..>. <.. .. > .,.5
•' - ..
;'PART 8 3 �,AD©iT , >.
'
•� 3 �-_
.its_`. .u.: yam^.^... r;,,..
.:.s. ``se.,..,.: ?4° .. ..
.., ,.,. r, .... ._,.... 3F _ ..
i% -'FC,, ..,:., -�:: ..: :: i. 1.4.+ .YQ.,, . s.„,, f - ... h ,.vv.Y: G,r . Y . .Y:�:
.. ..- �. ;.., ... ..._.. . 1_.':, 1, ..rv: `t....:a£:... �. e ..., , k r1. �C�a :W:.t¢°' +7 •�^• � '?'S.^s ` se x. .�v'r.. "`r �3..<.:t-.�.. .--'.P.:< ,w A,.;" c .Sz... �< ;.'t'.�F,.. iu :;
� > .:. ' � • :.... :„ .r ., 3'-:' � . , `-^^' , i ,.,a r,; Q. . _r � .<n;'t 'ft '"Pkt' • -, �i'i•` „x,
A AP l»1CATi{Ni • ; <F .. p ;' , ;
afi�iON , QRA. PLICAiTS.11Yi flESiG W. F q°iV R
ram, *F
F.-�" 2L'A:,. ',�*'i7" r;i `i- ` .+:. cXr'.�"" .:w^ir'a ,t ;> ..J •'t4�.'r i ?, ..` h : • [. � 5�: ,ii '4
4 �b .F. -. �,; �M j s, ,�.i,, cY IFS... �.�". ,•�• z y t�. ,� ,.�.. M . ba 00 al / s ; t' a, �. >, r s ,
>: ':d ✓rt, { �^r^.,..'•>x. � �!.,..� r. '�iic. `` ,�w� 2.�.. a�.."•..r..>,` . s. :e - ��. ` +s ."tta&
:. '�„l ��i t '0E r a�A.-w:-:K "'� ., ?sn + .�r=s�fk�<�3d:� «� '.�' ~�,$>� �'� �g :�$7 GS > > a �
... .... • ... >s �#' v7?,� � s?2Y z'h'k»>.s'� '� �• _'`�h"_ >vtSv'?at'iR� e»,x'� �. . �$2°Qi s �' i4'
All applicants with a design
flow rate >_ 0.1 mgd must answer questions B.1 through 8.6. All others go to Part C (Certification).
B.1. Inflow and Infiltration.
100.000
Estimate the average number of gallons per day
gpd
that flow into the treatment works from inflow and/or infiltration.
Money is budgeted each fiscal year for line inspections and
Briefly explain any steps
The Town of Newport
underway or planned to minimize inflow and infiltration.
has an ongoing I/1 reduction program.
repairs. This
includes cleaning, camera inspection, point repairs, smoke testing, line replacrment. and manhole
repairs.
B.2. Topographic Map.
map must show the outline
a. The area surrouiding
b. The major pipes
treated wastewater
c. Each well where
d. Wells, springs, other
works, and 2) tined
e. Any areas wher
f. If the treatment
, or special pipe, show
B.3. Process Flow Diagram
backup power sources
chlorination and dechlorination).
rates between treatment
B.4. Operation/Maintenance
Are any operational
contractor?
If yes, list the name,
pages if necessary).
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Responsibilities of C?ntractor:
B.S. Scheduled Improvements
uncompleted plans for
treatment works has
for each. (If none, go
a. List the outfall
' 01
Attach to this application a topographic map of the area extending at least one mile beyond facility property boundaries. This
of the facility and the following information. (You may submit more than one map if one map does not show the entire area.)
the treatment plant, including all unit processes.
or other structures through which wastewater enters the treatment works and the pipes or other structures through which
is discharged from the treatment plant. Include outfatls from bypass piping, if applicable.
wastewater from the treatment plant is injected underground.
surface water bodies, and drinking water wells that are: 1) within % mile of the property boundaries of the treatment
in public record or otherwise known to the applicant.
the
the sewage sludge produced by the treatment works is stored, treated, or disposed.
receives waste that is classified as hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) by truck, rail,
on the map where the hazardous waste enters the treatment works and where it is treated, stored, and/or disposed.
or Schematic. Provide a diagram showing the processes of the treatment plant, including all bypass piping and all
or redunancy in the system. Also provide a water balance showing all treatment units, including disinfection (e.g.,
The water balance must show daily average flow rates at influent and discharge points and approximate daily flow
units. Include a brief narrative description of the diagram.
Performed by Contractor(s).
r maintenance aspects (related to wastewater treatment and effluent quality) of the treatment works the responsibility of a
0 Yes ® No
address, telephone number, and status of each contractor and describe the contractor's responsibilities (attach additional
N/A
N/A
N/A
IN/A)
N/A
and Schedules of Implementation. Provide information on any uncompleted implementation schedule or
improvements that will affect the wastewater treatment, effluent quality, or design capacity of the treatment works. If the
several different implementation schedules or is planning several improvements, submit separate responses to question 6.5
to question B.6.)
number (assigned in question A.9) for each outfall that is covered by this implementation schedule.
b. Indicate whether
® Yes
the planned improvements or implementation schedule are required by local, State, or Federal agencies.
❑ No
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport, NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
c. If the answerto B.5.b is "Yes," briefly describe, including new maximum daily inflow rate (if applicable).
Under NCDENR capacity rules. Newport's current flow is at 80% of the WWTP capacity of 0.6 MGD. Plans for an upgrade to 0.75
MGD are being completed for submittal and approval to NC Construction Grants and Loans.
•
d. Provide date imposed by any compliance schedule or any actual dates of completion for the implementation steps listed below, as
applicable. For improvements planned independently of local, State, or Federal agencies, indicate planned or actual completion dates, as
applicable. Indicate dates as accurately as possible.
Schedule Actual Completion
Implementation Stage MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYYY
- Begin C
nstruction 06/01/2007 / /
- End Construction
06/01/2008 / /
- Begin Discharge
06/01/2008 / /
- Attain Oi
erational Level 06/01/2008 / /
e. Have appropriate
Describe briefly:
permits/clearances concerning other Federal/State requirements been obtained? 0 Yes ® No
US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Permit has been acquired. Less than 1 acre will be disturbed with the clarifier
addition; therefore an erosion control permit will not be required. An Environmental Assessment has been completed and
a FONSI issued and published. Currently In the process of submitting the Authorization to Construct Permit application
to the North Carolina Department of Construction Grants and Loans. Bidding and construction will begin as soon as
approval is received. This NPDES renewal is for 0.75 MGD. which previously has been permitted.
B.6. EFFLUENT TESTING
Applicants that discharge
effluent testing r
DATA (GREATER THAN 0.1 MGD ONLY).
to waters of the US must provide effluent testing data for the following parameters. Provide the indicated
quired by the permitting authority for each outfall through which effluent is discharged. Do not include information
on combine sewer
using 40 CFR Part
, QA/QC requirements
based on at least
Outfall Number:
overflows in this section. All information reported must be based on data collected through analysis conducted
136 methods. In addition, this data must comply with QA/QC requirements of 40 CFR Part 136 and other appropriate
for standard methods for analytes not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136. At a minimum effluent testing data must be
three pollutant scans and must be no more than four and on -half years old.
01 Note: Ultraviolet disinfection was installed in the 0.6 MGD upgrade in May 2006
POLLUTANT .
::;
MAXIMUMDAILY
-DISCHARGE
E i- ..
AVRAGE.DAILY DISCHARG
,,
METHOD
M Li _-
.
.
Conc .
Units.
Conc
-
Units ..
Number f°
Samples
CONVENTIONAL AND NON
CONVENTIONAL COMPOUNDS
AMMONIA (as N)
3.74
mg/I
0.30
mg/I
156
composite
CHLORINE (TOTAL
RESIDUAL, TRC)
7320
ug/I
1226
ug/l
128
grab
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
14.7
mg/I
7.0
mg/I
365
grab
TOTAL KJELDAHL
NITROGEN (TKN)
1.4
mg/I
1.1
mg/I
7
composite
NITRATE PLUS NITRITE :
NITROGEN
22.0
mgll
17.5
mgll
7
composite
OIL and GREASE
35.0
mgll
9.6
mg/I
7
composite
PHOSPHORUS (Total)
3.8
mg/I
2.4
mg/I
7
composite
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
(TDS)
•
OTHER
REFE.R..TO.T
. �. Sy,
{.,,.
` .<
:7 .}.
a
x�
.y t s �.-� oafs• f_5c
!. ,XL> •
`; �5. .. ( U• t- 5 \� -�� / '.+1��.
µ.",C. ''v .�` ��'
} -s. ? Xi .Si -.J :'
t r
I _ :^.e��� ..�.�.
Uz .s
F. P § 1 k::q : a,,
: �-.0 � TI;O
'.- n r ,-3.:� .st•., �i:. 'S
x � OF FORM
>7 '-.�♦!C. y .{ y:: < 'N y� i. i `' ,,ti.t ) s .may• r,]r .;"
>�.: .t`.: .�;. W M._ C. .e. et. k., Wit :•
�. 5l i. �' ::� +(y•./7 y� y1�. �.• q,.,�,,, .Gl .3.:-� '�. `C.:~
''r:'. '� t ��s V '<''r • ;.4 }S��° �d:#���!�L `��_�":k;: f�j'l'Lr'A��.��i:- i" �}+�-�"i�:
N ::O.�'-'' 9 i 4:r.. .. 1. i '2':Y ♦e .r•T 'S' •y ' �+`hr.:+.l. t.. yy'. ± .,:�,.F
T , ,.PART '1.4' , . :y rr,F ,
s�cr. �,:2'�.�.r ,. ♦.%s: �;.. :aaas:,:it��•X-. ' � -4„ . •�. ��':
S G.h h1 �:: a rF l
I•Px AaG�� TO . �' R``y'' ;, C`M.,..
' •: ' T::*!'k'-Ia � ■ � r , ,.r'.,5,;,r
'•N . � j.. Terwn^�Yvr�3' �<'<:M 7a..�i `N .
2A YOU M STD CO I 3 � : g Y : ,
LATE qy
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Newport. NC0021555
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
White Oak 03-05-03
BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART C. CERTIFICATION
All applicants must complete the Certification Section. Refer to instructions to determine who is an officer for the purposes of this
certification. All applicants must complete all applicable sections of Form 2A, as explained in the Application Overview. Indicate below which
parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting. By signing this certification statement, applicants confirm that they have reviewed
Form 2A and have completed all sections that apply to the facility for which this application is submitted.
Indicate which parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting:
Ei Basic Application Information packet Supplemental Application Information packet:
❑ Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data)
❑ Part E (Toxicity Testing: Biomonitoring Data)
0 Part F (Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes)
❑ Part G (Combined Sewer Systems)
ALL APPLICANTS MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING CERTIFICATION.
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who
manage the system or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,
accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information. including the possibility of fine and imprisonment
for knowing violations.
Name and official title Derry! Garner, Mayor
Signature
Telephone number [phone]
Date signed
Upon request of the permitting authority, you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment
works or identify appropriate permitting requirements.
SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO:
NCDENR/ DWQ
Attn: NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
NPDES FORM 2A Additional Information

4
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: N i�',j (:, L` � jC)
i .
1 vvJ n v ` `� �' L„('� Gt-\
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
i
l� ��11J�r�f �:1
RIVER BASIN: •r
\f•1 VW 0 L.\i
i� ` - V c? ._ e- 5
-`. BASIC APPLICATI
N INFORMATION
PART C. CERTIFICATION
All applicants must complete the Certification Section. Refer to instructions to determine who is an officer for the purposes of this
certification. All applicants must complete all applicable sections of Form 2A, as explained in the Application Overview. Indicate below which
I parts of Form 2A you hav completed and are submitting. By signing this certification statement, applicants confirm that they have reviewed
Form 2A and have comp! ted all sections that apply to the facility for which this application is submitted.
Indicate which
A
A] Basic Application
\
i
parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting:
Information packet Supplemental Application Information packet:
❑ Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data)
❑ Part E (Toxicity Testing: Biomonitoring Data)
❑ Part F (Industrial User Discharges and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes)
❑ Part G (Combined Sewer Systems)
ALL APPLICANTS MUST COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING CERTIFICATION. .
t certify under penalty of law
designed to assure that qualified
manage the system or tho
accurate, and complete. I dam
for knowing violations.
Name and offici
Signature
•
• Telephone number
Date signed
Upon request of the permitting
• works or identify appropriate
that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who
a persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true,
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment
I title -�. Q:2. ;— ce.t 1 I ku,\\0(
(2.5 2 - ' .7) J - AI 24 Ck
1 - 1) r./ ... 01
authority, you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment
permitting requirements.
SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO:
NCDENR/ DWQ
Attn: NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617

0
REMOTE
P.S.
0.17MGD
BAR SCREEN/
GRIT CHAMBER
520,000 GAL
(2) 40 HP ROTORS
0.358MGD
INFLUENT P.S.
(3) PUMPS
700 GPM EA.
MECHANICAL BAR SCREEN/
MECHANICAL GRIT CHAMBER
WASTE
SLUDGE PUMP
80 GPM
0-
0-
0-
0.6001460
0.600MGD
10' FORCE MAIN
DIGESTED SLUDGE
0.040MGD
I I
SLUDGE DRYING
BEDS
7500 SQ,FT
III
18'
RAS / VAS SLUDGE
0.375MGD
0.012MGD
VAS SLUDGE
150,000 GAL
AEROBOIC DIGESTER
V/ FINE BUBBLE
AERATION
TOWN OF NEWPORT
0.600 MGD WWTP
214GD ULTRAVIOLET
DISINFECTION/
POST AERATION CHAMBER
BLOWER BUILDING
REPLACE (3) 255 SCFM BLOWERS
V/ NEV BLOWERS
12'
0.750MGD
�❑ 1
Ell _
\ rn 0.750MGD
l 12' EFFLUENT LINE
DUEL 30' 0 12'SVD
CLARIFIERS V/ EDI
INLET, STAMFORD
BAFFLES AND
SPIRAL RAKE
1.5MGD
ROTARY DRUM FILTER
N
NEWPORT RIVER
CLASS C
2HP BLOWER
V/ PVC DIFFUSER
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
SOUTHERN PINES. NC — CHARLOTTE NC
NAGS HEAD, NC — RALEIGH, NC
MYRTLE BEACH. SC — BEAUFORT. SC
300 S.W. Brood Street. Southern Pint*. North Coro6no 28387
Phone [phone] — Fax: [phone]

ATTACHMENT A - Approved Residual Source -Generating Facilities
Permit No. WQ0008349
Town of Newport
Town of Newport Residuals Land Application Program
Owner
Facility Name
County
Permit
Number
Issued
—By
Is 503?
Maximum
Monitoring
Monitoring
Approved
Mineralization
Rate
Dry, Tons
Per Year
Frequency for
Condition III.2.
Frequency for
Condition III.3. and
Condition III. 4.
Town of Newport
Newport WWTP
Carteret
NC0021555
DWQ
503
200.00
Annually
Annually
0.30
Total
200.00
Within 90 calendar days of this permit's issuance, the results of reactivity, ignitability and corrosovity analyses as specified in Condition III. 2. shall be submitted to and
acknowledged by the Division. Submit two copies of these analytical results to the Land Application Unit, 1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636.
Permit No. WQ0008349
Page 1 of 1 Certification Date: August 26, 2005

0
ATTACHMENT B - Approved Land Application Sites
Permit No. WQ0008349
Town of Newport
Town of Newport Residuals Land Application Program
Site/Field ID
Landowner
Lessee/Operator
County
Latitude
Longitude
Net Acreage
Applicable
Restriction in
Condition IV. 1.
CRN04-02'
Quinn, David;_ Quinn,_ Eugene;-Quinn,-P-hillip; Quinn, -William
- Dunham, John W
—Carteret
34°42122"
76°56'42"
--- --- 2.00
GW-B
CRN04-04'
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'25"
76°56'55"
11.80
GW-B
CRN04-05'
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'27"
76°56'50"
4.00
GW-B
CRN04-06a
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'28"
76°56'42"
6.10
GW-A
CRN04-07a.b
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'35"
76°59'40"
7.00
GW-B
CRN04-08a
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'38"
76°56'50"
4.10
GW-B
CRN04-09a
Quinn, David; Quinn, Eugene; Quinn, Phillip; Quinn, William
Dunham, John W
Carteret
34°48'35"
76°56'50"
3.20
GW-B
Total For County
Carteret
Carteret
38.20
Total
38.20
•
°Within 60 calendar days of this permit's issuance, an updated buffer map(s) of this land application site, prepared in accordance with current Division guidance, shall be prepared and
submitted to the Division for review. Mail two copies of the buffer map(s) to the NCDENR-DWQ, Aquifer Protection, Land Application Unit, c/o Residuals Program Coordinator,1636
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636.
bA reduced buffer from a residence under separate ownership has been approved for this land application site. Residuals may be land applied to within 100 feet of the residences owned
•
by Danny Millis of 123 Virgin Road, Newport, NC 28750; Sam Jones of of 135 Virgin Road, Newport, NC; William E. Quinn, Jr. of of 108 Virgin Road, Newport, NC, regardless of
whether a surface or a subsurface application method is used.
Permit No. WQ0008349
Page 1 of 1 • Certification Date: August 26, 2005

C'!`'a�,1� '."�" � c i�.?y`��.--... k.ter-.'
t. tea. .�., 0s,.. •� •~L -•.. f: ;ems . --%
""7- !'`"� ". 'ter' ". .. cil 'k,,,� t--- ram" .e3^ '
!-.�..�e: .- .. - a >
. ter �- _ 'F' Si ti-_ ..-
at
:�'- =`?rat • _ t � 'A ��: -_:: • ..' I -: ''' .; .4 • ; _-- 4
rt. i�
f �- ' -.
.Z
SITE MAP
1' =660`
PHILLIP QUINN
CRN4 (1-9) -

• i
'••
fir.. ,• , r- ; w`� -- ~••s,,_w' \ y_ ,
+ 1 +• f r -; '_'' ;� .., .. .1...•� I'`,•.,, ' • +, ; _—r-- -- "iL_ •-i '`i' _ • / ; is
_1.;1,J• 1 1 1 f'1 1 . ' ?. :i', I :•� ,..�' r 1 •/'_ -.
i
'L 1. L 1 ' —' + -'1' " ? �': \ '? i S t ++ I'_•.- 1
: •: -Ap3i,-:i 2.--...•.;.-..,.-..,,:,.‘.-,.6. i.,. ,,,• 4, iit; ..4,'..-
.-10.:.•:
• _ l• ---~ 1 1- bR_T-C,R .1 •.-mac,. , • •'y'G .., ..-. _ ' , , •• t-•i-..-i.'....i•.'.l.::' ,t--,.i,
' ‘..c;:0 i1.•.-
. .,i :0-11
6 , '•' •" !'S •,+• k� r 1 ~mil- • i �^,�_•_-_ :
..•...-.1.i_-
-i•-
..•/..-.,•.-
t::.. :. -...t1'...\-.....-.-..-.-:_"--):17,!I_1
+. ,, i ' 1 S .I r. _.•S-, y,�___ ,,5 \:ffww,, ; lY: `1• '‘'\• \/��• •„ i. -\ _ _—_—:141i:rt.:1.
, 1 _
r _ ; T_— , ; . REST, Ste'' -'�. -:�j : 1tt�---- � 5\\r • 5 \ \
mil r r _c;,i;,,:sr•
r 1 1 Ir •�i 1_ _ _-_--`S ' 1 ! 1•'-:r--' 4 �..
•
! ,. 1 ---1-`i.- f_I li "' -r1' ."••.--,: •-L.,-;,-i _` S>t' ; 7
-1..•i ► ••,';
1 II
:' ,•
`ti 4 i _:.i.--
1 l 1 �r '.
Erb
1 1 _1r :-, -•'. • . t,
•• L.11�.. .._ r `r.
•
' i 1-- r- .�-.. - _ ".'�••'-..•
I.
t •_. -. _VYESTftELO_{RD- �- -'.:
f i `• /_4
1Z---1! 1 11 -
r
it
A
f }
• ti
- '' '
It
1
;1
,t
VI ti;
i 1 5
?
•
--_. _ .. 't ROBERTS`RD ' •••1. /
' 1 J
•
/,I -1 /
1•14I ' 1•
1 _J
I i •� 1 .
•rr. 11 1
/` : _� -I
11
i ; 1
ti +1 I
r
1 1^-....
IS ; l
r• 11
,i ,( •�-_� �-'r_. .'.'���--,_ I I-; 1 1
ti
ti \.
_ ,i r
S••

,JQ
S FACT SHEET FOR EXPEDITED PERMIT RENEWALS
Basic Information to determine potential for expedited permit renewal
Reviewer/Date
•: ; 0-, M € 1.CQ� ,� - 6. 2.0O
Permit Number
iC po-1 551
Facility Name
N e,.v pore r,t 0-r/
Basin Name/Sub-basin number
W h; to 0 a K o 3- v S- v,
Receiving Stream
a e ee,pet € A;ve:^
Stream Classification in Permit
C
Does permit need NH3 limits?
A l r e-A, el/ d a
Does permit need TRC limits?
,41 r e a J, 1/05
Does permit have toxicity testing?
N 0
Does permit have Special Conditions?
Ai 0
Does pern it have instream monitoring?
la 5
Is the stream impaired (on 303(d) list)?
Y e ,
Any obvious compliance concerns? •
nI o
Any permit mods since last permit?
A10
Existing expiration date
7/3 i/Zoo
New expiration date
1-13 f /,Z B i t
New permit effective date
Miscellaneous Comments
YES_
YES
NO
• Ma"or Facility (municipal/industrial)
Mir Municipals with pretreatment program m•• Minor Industrials subject to Fed Effluent Guidelines (lb/day limits for BOD, TSS,
( Y
etc)
• Limits based on reasonable potential analysis (metals, GW remediation organics)
• Permitted flow > 0.5 MGD (requires full Fact Sheet)
• Permits determined by Basin Coordinator to be outside expedited process
This is a SIMPLE EXPEDITED permit renewal (administrative
renewal with no changes, or only minor changes such as TRC, NH3,
name/ownership changes). Include conventional WTPs in this group.
This is a MORE COMPLEX EXPEDITED permit renewal (includes
Special Conditions (such as EAA, Wastewater Management Plan), 303(d)
listed, toxicity testing, instream monitoring, compliance concerns, phased
limits). Basin Coordinator to make case -by -case decision.
This permit CANNOT BE EXPEDITED for one of the following reasons:
TB Version 8/18/2006 (NPDES Server/Current Versions/Expedited Fact Sheet)