NC0020567_Fact Sheet_20240311

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO020567
Permit Writer / e-mail Contact: Gary Perlmutter, [e-mail]
Date: March 11, 2024
Division / Branch: NC Division of Water Resources / NPDES Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
® Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant / Facility Name:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority Wastewater Treatment Plant
(YVSA WWTP)
Applicant Address:
500 NC Hwy 268 West, Elkin, NC 28621
Facility Address:
211 Marion Rd, Elkin, NC 28621
Permitted Flow:
1.8 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
MAJOR Municipal; 88% domestic, 12% industrial 1
Facility Class:
Grade III
Treatment Units:
Mechanical bar screen, grit chamber, influent flume, continuous
recording flow measurement, primary clarifiers, trickling filter, aeration
basin, dual secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact chamber,
dechlorination, automatic sampler, aerobic digester, sludge holding
tanks, sludge drying beds
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Yes
County:
Surry
Region
Winston-Salem
Footnote.
1. From permitted industrial flow of 0.21 MGD.
Page 1 of 12

Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority (YVSA) has applied for an NPDES permit renewal for its Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
on July 11, 2023, received by DWR on July 14, 2023. The application was found incomplete, lacking the
sludge management plan; this was received by request from the Permittee on 11/30/2023. The application
did include:
• a Chemical Addendum, reporting no additional pollutants had been monitored by the Permittee; a
topographical map; a process narrative with flow chart;
• sets of effluent data for reduced monitoring evaluation per DWQ Guidance Regarding the
Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing Facilities;
• three effluent pollutant scan reports (June 2021, September 2022, March 2023);
• four second species (Fathead Minnow) toxicity test reports (March, July, September, December
2022), quarterly Ceriodaphnia dubia toxicity test reports; and
• the Industrial User Permit (IUP) for the significant industrial user Pittsburgh Glass Works.
This 1.8 MGD facility serves a population of —6800 residents in the municipalities of Elkin (-4060), Ronda
(-440) and Jonesville (-2300). The WWTP treats a combination of domestic and industrial wastewater
with a pretreatment program involving one significant industrial user (SIU): Pittsburgh Glass Works
(PGW), LLC. In the application cover letter, the YVSA reports no changes have been made to the facility
since August 2020. The facility is contract -operated and maintained by Veolia North America.
Inflow & Infiltration (I&I). The City reports an average daily I&I volume of 0.112 gpd in the application.
Steps taken to minimize I&I include: "one sewer improvement project is in progress, another sewer
improvement project will start by the end of 2023, another is in the design phase and is expected to start
before the end of 2024, there are currently two Asset Inventory & Assessment grant projects in progress to
identify defective assets that contribute to III. "
Sludge Management. The sludge at the YVSA WWTP is hauled by contract haulers to land application sites
under permit WQ0007349.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 — Yadkin River
Stream Segment:
12-(53)
Stream Classification:
C
Drainage Area (mi):
878
Summer 7Q 10 (cfs)
317
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
454
30Q2 (cfs):
NA
Average Flow (cfs):
1400
IWC (% effluent):
0.87
2022 303(d) listed/parameter:
None
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
State-wide Mercury TMDL
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC:
Yadkin -Pee Dee / Yadkin River Headwater 03040101
USGS Topo Quad:
Elkin South, NC
Page 2 of 12

The receiving stream, Yadkin River, was assessed in the Final 2022 Integrated Report with an overall
assessment of Data Inconclusive, based on assessment ratings for Fecal Coliform and Mirex, a banned
insecticide. All other parameters met criteria, including both conventional parameters and a large suite of
toxicants (including metals and organics) from random sampling events in 2017-2018, collected at Ambient
Monitoring Station Q081000, located - 1.0 mile upstream of the outfall. The most recent benthos assessment
was made at the same location in 2006 with a bioclassification of Good. The nearest downstream WS-IV
boundary is -22.1 miles from the outfall.
3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized in Table 1 for the period of May 2019 through October 2023.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Permit Limit'
Flow
MGD
0.897
3.755
0.338
MA = 1.8
BOD;
mg/L
2.6
8.7
< 2
WA = 30.0
MA = 45.0
BOD; removal
%
98.4
99.6
85.5
> 85
TSS
mg/L
3.5
16
< 2.5
WA = 45.0
MA = 30.0
TSS removal
%
95.4
99.5
68.8
> 85
Ammonia (NH3-N)
mg/L
0.60
15.6
< 0.04
Monitor &
Report
(geo ean)
(geometric)
Fecal Coliform
#/100 mL
6000
< 1
WA = 400
6
MA = 200
pH
S.U.
6.4
6.9
6.0
6.0 - 9.0
Total Residual Chlorine
µg/L
20.3
49.0
14.0
DM = 28 2
(TRC)
Temperature
°C
19.4
26
10
Monitor &
Report
Total Nitrogen
mg/L
5.93
26.59
1.76
Monitor &
Report
Total Phosphorus
mg/L
0.30
2.59
0.05
Monitor &
Report
Total Hardness
mg/L
33.7
46
20
Monitor &
Report
1 MA = Monthly Average, WA = Weekly Average, DM = Daily Maximum.
2 Values < 50 µg/L considered compliant.
The highest annual average flow was 0.976 MGD or 54% of the permitted flow in CY2020.
Page 3 of 12

The facility's discharge is effluent -limited. The Permittee is not required to monitor for dissolved oxygen
(DO) and the permit has no DO limits. Throughout the facility's history, this has always been the case. In
2007, the Permittee requested speculative limits for an expansion to 2.5 MGD. At that time, the Division
conducted a Level B model with secondary limits and found that the secondary limits were protective of
the 5 mg/L DO standard in the stream. While the facility never expanded, the model demonstrated that the
DO standard was protected in the stream, and no DO or ammonia limits were proposed at an even higher
flow tier. No changes were made for DO.
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/1 of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also Monitoring Coalitions
established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case instream
monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (YIN): NO.
Name of Monitoring Coalition: NA.
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will beproposedfor this permit
action: The current permit has no instream monitoring requirements except for upstream Hardness,
required for calculation of allowable concentrations of hardness -dependent dissolved metals (see Section
6.4. Reasonable Potential Analysis below). The permit does not require instream monitoring of any other
parameters as the discharge accounts for 1 % of the receiving river under low -flow conditions. This is further
justified as the DO standard was found protected through modeling, thus not requiring DO or ammonia
limits in the permit, and BOD limits are technology -based (TBEL), not water -quality based (WQBEL). No
changes to instream monitoring were made. Because of the low effluent flow relative to receiving river
flow, instream hardness monitoring was removed from the permit.
Instream data are available from Division Ambient Monitoring Station Q0810000, located —1.0 mile
upstream of the outfall, and Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association station Q1350000, located —21.5
miles downstream of the outfall and —0.5 miles upstream of the nearest water supply boundary with 8
NPDES permitted minor facilities discharging < 1 MGD each in between. Instream data from 2019 — 2022
are summarized below.
Table 2. Instream Data Summary: averages of year-round data with ranges in parentheses.
Parameter, units
AMS Q0810000
YPDRBA Q1350000
Standard
(upstream)
(downstream)
DO, mg/L
Avg = 9.66
Avg = 9.3
5.0
(6.97 — 12.52)
(6.4 — 14.7)
Temperature, °C
Avg = 15.3
Avg = 17.3
32.0
(1.6 — 25.3)
(3.9 — 26.3)
Specific Conductance, µS/cm
Avg = 53
(40 — 68)
Avg = 56
(50 — 143)
NA
Fecal Coliform, cfu/100 mL
Geomean = 272
Geomean = 189
200/400
(9 — 2600)
(10 — 9500)
Page 4 of 12

Ammonia, mg/L
Avg = 0.05
Avg = 0.10
(<0.02-0.15)
(<0.02-0.55)
pH, SU
Avg = 7.2
Avg = 6.8
(6.5 - 7.9)
(5.5 - 7.8)
NO2+NO3, mg/L
Avg = 0.70
Avg = 0.68
(0.43 - 1.20)
(0.44 - 0.92)
TKN, mg/L
Avg = 0.41
Avg = - 0.62
(0.2 -1.8)
(0.18 -1.96)
Phosphorus, mg/L
Avg = 0.09
Avg = 0.12
(0.03 - 0.65)
(< 0.02 - 0.78)
TSS, mg/L
Avg = 21.3
Avg = 39.9
(6.2 - 65.0)
(2.5 - 359)
Turbidity, NTU
Avg = 15.5
Avg = 41.2
50
(2.9 - 130)
(3.3 290)
Overall, instream parameters appear similar at both locations, with slight increases in temperature, specific
conductance and phosphorus on average. Stronger average downstream increases were found in TKN, TSS
and Turbidity. Due to the distance of the downstream station from the outfall, it cannot be determined
whether the observed differences are due to the WWTP's discharge. Based on this information and the
plant's low IWC, no changes were made.
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): From November 2018 through
October 2023 no violations were reported.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 19 of 19 quarterly chronic toxicity tests from March 2019 through September
2023, as well as all 4 second species chronic toxicity tests, run in March, July, September and December
2022 plus an additional test run in March 2023.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The most recent facility inspection,
conducted on 8/30/2023 and included a bioassay inspection, reported that the facility appeared well -
maintained and operated. No concerns, deficiencies, or violations were noted.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
6.1. Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
6.2. Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
Page 5 of 12

(e.g., BOD = 30 mg/L for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: The current permit
limits for BOD are secondary TBEL limits based on 40 CFR 133.102. No changes were made.
6.3. Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/L (summer) and 1.8 mg/L (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 µg/L) and capped at 28 µg/L (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 µg/L are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The current permit
does not set limits for ammonia. This decision has been reviewed in the attached WLA form. Since the
calculated allowable discharge concentration for ammonia in both the summer and winter was greater than
35 mg/L, no limit has been added to the permit. Monitoring has been maintained.
The facility uses chlorination as its primary disinfection. The current permit limits TRC at 28 µg/L as a
daily maximum. Though several reported TRC values exceeded the 28 µg/L daily maximum limit, the
facility is considered compliant with its permit since all reported values were less than 50 µg/L. The TRC
limit has been reviewed in the attached WLA and has been found to be protective. No changes were made
for TRC.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of %2 detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
The current permit requires effluent and upstream hardness monitoring. Reviewed data found averages to
be 33.7 mg/L effluent and 19.1 mg/L upstream, the latter below the default of 25 mg/L. While the data were
entered into the RPA, the program used the default values in the analysis. Due to the low hardness values
and the high dilution in the receiving Yadkin River (i.e., IWC = 0.87%), effluent and upstream Hardness
monitoring is no longer required and was removed from the permit.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between May 2019
through October 2023. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated
water quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for
this permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria: None
Page 6 of 12

Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria, but
the maximum predicted concentration was > 50% of the allowable concentration: None
No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria
and the maximum predicted concentration was < 50% of the allowable concentration: Arsenic,
Barium, Beryllium, Cadmium, Total Phenols, Total Chromium, Total Copper, Cyanide, Total
Lead, Molybdenum, Total Nickel, Total Selenium, Total Silver, Total Zinc, Thallium.
POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans, sampled in June 2021,
September 2022 and March 2023 were evaluated for additional pollutants of concern.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a water quality -based effluent limit (WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set, two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration: None.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a monitor -only requirement, since as part of a
limited data set, one sample exceeded the allowable discharge concentration: Bis(2-
ethy1hexyl) phthalate.
If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.
Toxici , Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This facility is a Major POTW with a chronic WET limit at
0.87% effluent, monitored at quarterly frequency. No changes were made.
Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year), and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (^-2% of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (> 1 ng/L) will receive
an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case -by -case basis, depending if mercury is a pollutant
of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed the WQBEL
value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/L) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value of 47 ng/L.
The current permit lacks an MMP requirement since the facility is < 2.0 MGD; and requires low level
mercury monitoring as part of the three effluent pollutant scans. Annual data from 2019 — 2023 were
reviewed below.
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since no annual average mercury
concentration exceeded the WQBEL and no individual mercury sample exceeded the TBEL (Table 3), no
mercury limit is required. Because the facility is < 2 MGD, no mercury minimization plan (MMP) special
condition will be added to the permit. No changes were made.
Page 7 of 12

Table 3. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
# of Samples
1
1
1
1
1
Annual Average Conc. ng/L
4.0
6.6
0.5
6.1
7.0
Maximum Conc., ng/L
4.04
6.55
0.50
6.10
7.00
TBEL, ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
6033.5
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation within
this permit: The current permit has monthly nutrient (TN and TP) monitoring requirements plus a nutrient
re -opener special condition for High Rock Lake. To better understand TN, monthly NO2+NO3 and TKN
monitoring have been added to the permit.
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: A chemical addendum
was submitted with the permit renewal application, noting that no additional pollutants was anticipated in
the effluent.
The emerging contaminants 1,4-Dioxane and PFAS chemical group were considered for potential
requirements. Neither was included in the submitted chemical addendum. The nearest downstream WS-IV
boundary is —22.1 miles from the outfall. Since the one SIU in the pretreatment program, a glass
manufacturer, is not a likely source for 1,4-Dioxane, no requirements for this parameter were added to the
permit at this time. Due to the pervasiveness of PFAS in the environment and that there is a downstream
water supply below the outfall, quarterly monitoring for PFAS has been added to the permit with a delayed
implementation. See details in Section 10. Monitoring Requirements below.
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody: NA.
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H 0107(c) (2) (B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: NA.
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA.
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg1L
BOD51TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg1L for BOD51TSS for Weekly Average). YES. Both BOD and
TSS limits are TBELs of 30 mg/L monthly average and 45 mg/L weekly average.
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA.
Are 85% removal requirements for BOD51TSS included in the permit? YES. Over the effluent data review
period from May 2019 through October 2023, no BOD removal rates less than 85% were found; nine (9)
TSS removal rates less than 85% were found.
Page 8 of 12

If NO, provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA.
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge)
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 211.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: NA.
9. Antibacksliding Review
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit (YES/NO): NO.
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: NA.
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 213.0500; 2) NPDES
Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance, Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti -backsliding
prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
The current permit has reduced monitoring for BOD, TSS and Fecal Coliform based on evaluation of the
above -mentioned NPDES guidance (Ammonia is monitored weekly without limits; thus is not considered).
YVSA included data for reduced monitoring evaluation of the three parameters in the renewal application.
In a letter dated January 16, 2024, the Permittee requested monitoring reduction frequencies for BOD, TSS
and Ammonia (NH3-N). In the eligibility criteria review over the past three years (from 11/1/2020 —
10/31/2023), the facility has had no exceedences of any of the target parameters. Further, the facility has
had no SOCs, and neither the Permittee nor any of its employees have been convicted of criminal violations
of the Clean Water Act.
Review of effluent data spanning the same time period as above found BOD and TSS to meet numerical
criteria of the 3-yr average < 50% of the monthly average limit and no more than 15 data points exceeded
200% of the monthly average limit. Similarly, Fecal Coliform data was found to meet the criterion of < 20
Page 9 of 12

samples > 200% of the weekly average. As a result, reduced monitoring for all above parameters has been
maintained at 2/week.
PFAS monitoring has been added to the permit at a quarterly frequency, to be effective six (6) months after
EPA Method 1633, finalized in January 2024, is published in the Federal Register under 40 CFR 136. The
six-month delay in implementation is to allow time for laboratories to become certified in the new method.
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective December
21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
electronically. Effective December 21, 2020, NPDES regulated facilities will be required to submit
additional NPDES reports electronically. This permit contains the requirements for electronic reporting,
consistent with Federal requirements.
12. Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions
Table 4. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes.
Parameter
Current Permit'
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 1.8 MGD
No change
15A NCAC 213.0505
MA = 30.0 mg/L
TBEL. Secondary treatment standards
BOD5
WA = 45.0 mg/L
No change
/ 40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC 2B .0406.
Monitor 2/week
Reduced Monitoring Frequency
criteria were met.
MA = 30.0 mg/L
TBEL. Secondary treatment standards
TSS
WA = 45.0 mg/L
No change
/ 40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC 2B .0406.
Monitor 2/week
Reduced Monitoring Frequency
criteria were met.
NH3-N
Monitor weekly
No change
WQBEL. Allowable concentrations >
35 mg/L cap in WLA calculations.
MA = 200 /100 mL
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
Fecal Coliform
WA = 400 /100 mL
No change
NCAC 2B .0200. Reduced
Monitor 2/week
Monitoring Frequency criteria were
met.
pH
6 — 9 SU
No change
WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 2B .0200.
Total Residual
WQBEL. Limit cap to meet State WQ
Chlorine (TRC)
DM = 28 µg/L
No change
standard, 15A NCAC 2B .0200 via
WLA calculation.
Temperature
Monitor daily
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 213.0500.
Page 10 of 12

Parameter
Current Permit'
Proposed Change
Basis for Condition/Change
Total Nitrogen
Monitor monthly
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 213.0500.
Nitrate + Nitrite
No requirement
Add monthly
To better understand effluent total
(NO3+NO2)
monitoring
nitrogen.
Total Kjeldahl
No requirement
Add monthly
To better understand effluent total
Nitrogen (TKN)
monitoring
nitrogen.
Total Phosphorus
Monitor monthly
No change
State WQ reporting requirements 15A
NCAC 213.0500.
Monitor quarterly
Upstream average below default
Total Hardness
effluent and
Remove from permit
value; effluent negligible compared to
receiving stream to be considered
upstream
impactful.
Add quarterly
monitoring with
EPA recommendations (guidance
PFAS
No requirement
delayed
memo, 12/5/2022). Delay for labs to
implementation
become certified in method.
Chronic
Ceriodaphnia du0bia
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic amounts.
Toxicity Test
Pass/Fail at 0.87 /0
No change
15A NCAC 2B.0200 and 15A NCAC
effluent
213.0500.
Effluent Pollutant
Three times per
Update sample years
40 CFR 122
Scan
permit cycle
to 2026, 2027, 2028
Electronic Reporting
Special Condition
Update Special
In accordance with EPA Electronic
Condition
Reporting Rule 2015.
1MGD = Million gallons per day, MA = Monthly Average, WA = Weekly Average, DM = Daily Maximum,
DA = Daily Average.
13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 01/25/2024
Per 15A NCAC 21-1.0109 & .0111, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the Director
within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the reasons
why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact
If you have any questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Gary Perlmutter at [phone] or via email at gary.perlmutter(kdeq.nc.gov.
Page 11 of 12

15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed (Yes/No): Copies of the draft
permit were sent to the EPA, Permittee, and various internal DWR contacts. The Permittee commented
requesting the removal of the trickling filters from the system component list; DWR Operator Certification
Program contact responded, noting that the current certification status of the facility is in agreement with
the that designated in the draft permit. No other parties commented.
If Yes, list changes and their basis below: The Trickling Filter was removed from the component list on the
Supplement to Cover Sheet at the City's request.
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• Sludge Removal Plan
• Pretreatment POC review form
• Final 2022 Integrated Report, pp 1181-1182
• Monitoring Report (MR) Violations page
• WET testing and Self -Monitoring Summary, page 113
• Compliance inspection report, 8/30/2023
• NH3/TRC WLA Calculations sheet
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• Dissolved Metals Implementation — Freshwater
• Mercury WQBEL/TBEL Evaluation data and summary table
• Letter from Permittee requesting Monitoring Frequency Reduction
Page 12 of 12

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO020567
Permit Writer / e-mail Contact: Gary Perlmutter, [e-mail]
Date: February 27, 2024
Division / Branch: NC Division of Water Resources / NPDES Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
N Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant / Facility Name:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority Wastewater Treatment Plant
(YVSA WWTP)
Applicant Address:
500 NC Hwy 268 West, Elkin, NC 28621
Facility Address:
211 Marion Rd, Elkin, NC 28621
Permitted Flow:
1.8 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
MAJOR Municipal; 88% domestic, 12% industrial 1
Facility Class:
Grade III
Treatment Units:
Mechanical bar screen, grit chamber, influent flume, continuous
recording flow measurement, primary clarifiers, trickling filter, aeration
basin, dual secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact chamber,
dechlorination, automatic sampler, aerobic digester, sludge holding
tanks, sludge drying beds
Pretreatment Program (Y/N)
Yes
County:
Surry
Region
Winston-Salem
Footnote.
1. From permitted industrial flow of 0.21 MGD.
Page I of 12

Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority (YVSA) has applied for an NPDES permit renewal for its Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
on July 11, 2023, received by DWR on July 14, 2023. The application was found incomplete, lacking the
sludge management plan; this was received by request from the Permittee on 11/30/2023. The application
did include:
• a Chemical Addendum, reporting no additional pollutants had been monitored by the Permittee; a
topographical map; a process narrative with flow chart;
• sets of effluent data for reduced monitoring evaluation per DWQ Guidance Regarding the
Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing Facilities;
• three effluent pollutant scan reports (June 2021, September 2022, March 2023);
• four second species (Fathead Minnow) toxicity test reports (March, July, September, December
2022), quarterly Ceriodaphnia dubia toxicity test reports; and
• the Industrial User Permit (IUP) for the significant industrial user Pittsburgh Glass Works.
This 1.8 MGD facility serves a population of —6800 residents in the municipalities of Elkin (-4060), Ronda
(-440) and Jonesville (-2300). The WWTP treats a combination of domestic and industrial wastewater
with a pretreatment program involving one significant industrial user (SIU): Pittsburgh Glass Works
(PGW), LLC. In the application cover letter, the YVSA reports no changes have been made to the facility
since August 2020. The facility is contract -operated and maintained by Veolia North America.
Inflow & Infiltration (I&I). The City reports an average daily I&I volume of 0.112 gpd in the application.
Steps taken to minimize I&I include: "one sewer improvement project is in progress, another sewer
improvement project will start by the end of 2023, another is in the design phase and is expected to start
before the end of 2024, there are currently two Asset Inventory & Assessment grant projects in progress to
identify defective assets that contribute to III. "
Sludge Management. The sludge at the YVSA WWTP is hauled by contract haulers to land application sites
under permit WQ0007349.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 — Yadkin River
Stream Segment:
12-(53)
Stream Classification:
C
Drainage Area (mi):
878
Summer 7Q 10 (cfs)
317
Winter 7Q 10 (cfs):
454
30Q2 (cfs):
NA
Average Flow (cfs):
1400
IWC (% effluent):
0.87
2022 303(d) listed/parameter:
None
Subject to TMDL/parameter:
State-wide Mercury TMDL
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC:
Yadkin -Pee Dee / Yadkin River Headwater 03040101
USGS Topo Quad:
Elkin South, NC
Page 2 of 12

The receiving stream, Yadkin River, was assessed in the Final 2022 Integrated Report with an overall
assessment of Data Inconclusive, based on assessment ratings for Fecal Coliform and Mirex, a banned
insecticide. All other parameters met criteria, including both conventional parameters and a large suite of
toxicants (including metals and organics) from random sampling events in 2017-2018, collected at Ambient
Monitoring Station Q081000, located - 1.0 mile upstream of the outfall. The most recent benthos assessment
was made at the same location in 2006 with a bioclassification of Good. The nearest downstream WS-IV
boundary is -22.1 miles from the outfall.
3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized in Table I for the period of May 2019 through October 2023.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Permit Limit 1
Flow
MGD
0.897
3.755
0.338
MA = 1.8
BOD5
mg/L
2.6
8.7
< 2
WA = 30.0
MA = 45.0
BOD5 removal
%
98.4
99.6
85.5
> 85
TSS
mg/L
3.5
16
< 2.5
WA = 45.0
MA = 30.0
TSS removal
%
95.4
99.5
68.8
> 85
Ammonia (NH3-N)
mg/L
0.60
15.6
< 0.04
Monitor &
Report
(geomean)
(geometric)
Fecal Coliform
#/100 mL
6
6000
< 1
WA = 400
MA = 200
pH
S.U.
U.-t
6.9
6.0
6.0 - 9.0
Total Residual Chlorine
µg/L
20.3
49.0
14.0
DM = 28 2
(TRC)
Temperature
°C
19.4
26
10
Monitor &
Report
Total Nitrogen
mg/L
5.93
26.59
1.76
Monitor &
Report
Total Phosphorus
mg/L
0.30
2.59
0.05
Monitor &
Report
Total Hardness
mg/L
33.7
46
20
Monitor &
Report
1 MA = Monthly Average, WA = Weekly Average, DM = Daily Maximum.
2 Values < 50 µg/L considered compliant.
The highest annual average flow was 0.976 MGD or 54% of the permitted flow in CY2020.
The facility's discharge is effluent -limited. The Permittee is not required to monitor for dissolved oxygen
(DO) and the permit has no DO limits. Throughout the facility's history, this has always been the case. In
Page 3 of 12

2007, the Permittee requested speculative limits for an expansion to 2.5 MGD. At that time, the Division
conducted a Level B model with secondary limits and found that the secondary limits were protective of
the 5 mg/L DO standard in the stream. While the facility never expanded, the model demonstrated that the
DO standard was protected in the stream, and no DO or ammonia limits were proposed at an even higher
flow tier. No changes were made for DO.
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/l of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also Monitoring Coalitions
established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case instream
monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring (YIN): NO.
Name of Monitoring Coalition: NA.
If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action: The current permit has no instream monitoring requirements except for upstream Hardness,
required for calculation of allowable concentrations of hardness -dependent dissolved metals (see Section
6.4. Reasonable Potential Analysis below). The permit does not require instream monitoring of any other
parameters as the discharge accounts for 1 % of the receiving river under low -flow conditions. This is further
justified as the DO standard was found protected through modeling, thus not requiring DO or ammonia
limits in the permit, and BOD limits are technology -based (TBEL), not water -quality based (WQBEL). No
changes to instream monitoring were made. Because of the low effluent flow relative to receiving river
flow, instream hardness monitoring was removed from the permit.
Instream data are available from Division Ambient Monitoring Station Q0810000, located —1.0 mile
upstream of the outfall, and Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association station Q1350000, located —21.5
miles downstream of the outfall and —0.5 miles upstream of the nearest water supply boundary with 8
NPDES permitted minor facilities discharging < 1 MGD each in between. Instream data from 2019 — 2022
are summarized below.
Table 2. Instream Data Summary: averages of year-round data with ranges in parentheses.
Parameter, units
AMS Q0810000
YPDRBA Q1350000
Standard
(upstream)
(downstream)
DO, mg/L
Avg = 9.66
Avg = 9.3
5.0
(6.97—12.52)
(6.4 —14.7)
Temperature, °C
Avg = 15.3
Avg = 17.3
32.0
(1.6 — 25.3)
(3.9 — 26.3)
Specific Conductance, µS/cm
Avg = 53
Avg = 56
NA
(40 — 68)
(50 — 143)
Fecal Coliform, cfu/100 mL
Geomean = 272
Geomean = 189
200/400
(9 — 2600)
(10 — 9500)
Ammonia, mg/L
Avg = 0.05
Avg = 0.10
(< 0.02 — 0.15)
(< 0.02 — 0.55)
Page 4 of 12

pH, SU
Avg = 7.2
Avg = 6.8
(6.5 - 7.9)
(5.5 - 7.8)
NO2+NO3, mg/L
Avg = 0.70
Avg = 0.68
(0.43 - 1.20)
(0.44 - 0.92)
TKN, mg/L
Avg = 0.41
Avg = - 0.62
(0.2 - 1.8)
(0.18 - 1.96)
Phosphorus, mg/L
Avg = 0.09
Avg = 0.12
(0.03 - 0.65)
(< 0.02 - 0.78)
TSS, mg/L
Avg = 21.3
Avg = 39.9
(6.2 - 65.0)
(2.5 - 359)
Turbidity, NTU
Avg = 15.5
Avg = 41.2
50
(2.9 - 130)
(3.3 - 290)
Overall, instream parameters appear similar at both locations, with slight increases in temperature, specific
conductance and phosphorus on average. Stronger average downstream increases were found in TKN, TSS
and Turbidity. Due to the distance of the downstream station from the outfall, it cannot be determined
whether the observed differences are due to the WWTP's discharge. Based on this information and the
plant's low IWC, no changes were made.
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): From November 2018 through
October 2023 no violations were reported.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 19 of 19 quarterly chronic toxicity tests from March 2019 through September
2023, as well as all 4 second species chronic toxicity tests, run in March, July, September and December
2022 plus an additional test run in March 2023.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The most recent facility inspection,
conducted on 8/30/2023 and included a bioassay inspection, reported that the facility appeared well -
maintained and operated. No concerns, deficiencies, or violations were noted.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
6.1. Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1 Q 10 streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q 10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
6.2. Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD = 30 mg/L for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Page 5 of 12

If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: The current permit
limits for BOD are secondary TBEL limits based on 40 CFR 133.102. No changes were made.
6.3. Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/L (summer) and 1.8 mg/L (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 µg/L) and capped at 28 µg/L (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 µg/L are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The current permit
does not set limits for ammonia. This decision has been reviewed in the attached WLA form. Since the
calculated allowable discharge concentration for ammonia in both the summer and winter was greater than
35 mg/L, no limit has been added to the permit. Monitoring has been maintained.
The facility uses chlorination as its primary disinfection. The current permit limits TRC at 28 µg/L as a
daily maximum. Though several reported TRC values exceeded the 28 µg/L daily maximum limit, the
facility is considered compliant with its permit since all reported values were less than 50 µg/L. The TRC
limit has been reviewed in the attached WLA and has been found to be protective. No changes were made
for TRC.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of % detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
The current permit requires effluent and upstream hardness monitoring. Reviewed data found averages to
be 33.7 mg/L effluent and 19.1 mg/L upstream, the latter below the default of 25 mg/L. While the data were
entered into the RPA, the program used the default values in the analysis. Due to the low hardness values
and the high dilution in the receiving Yadkin River (i.e., IWC = 0.87%), effluent and upstream Hardness
monitoring is no longer required and was removed from the permit.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between May 2019
through October 2023. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated
water quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for
this permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoriniz. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria: None
• Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria, but
the maximum predicted concentration was > 50% of the allowable concentration: None
Page 6 of 12

Sludge Removal Plan
The sludge at the YVSA WWTP is hauled by sludge haulers to land application sites. The Land
Application Permit number is WQ0007349.

A 13 C D I E F I G I H I J K L M N O 1 P
NPDES/PT POC Review Form Version: 2022.06.22
2
1. Facility's General Information
3
Data of (draft) Review
11/30/2023
C. POC review due to:
e. Contact Information
4
Data of(flnel) Review
Municipal NPDES renewal
❑
Regional Office(RO) Winston-Salem
5
NPDES Permit Writer (pw)
Gary Permutter
HWA-AT/LTMP Review
ElRO
PT Staff Jenny Gr rl RO NPDES Staff Lon Snider
6
Permitlee-Facility Name
YVSA W WTP
New Industries
❑
Facility PT Staff, email Benjamin Thomas <bthomas(dwest-consultanls.com>
7
NPDES Permit Number
NCO020567
WWTP,ansion
❑
f. Receiving Stream
8
NPDES Permit Effective Date
Stream reclasedadjustment
❑
Outfall
9
Chemical Addendum Submittal Data
Omfell relocafronladjustmeat
❑
Receiving Stream:
Yadkin River
CA, cfs:
1400
10
NPDES Permit Public Notice Date
7Q10 update
❑
Stream Class
C
7Q10 (S), cfs:
317
11
eDMR data evaluated from:
to
Other POC review trigger, explain:
Oufall Lat.
+34.14.51
Cull Long.
-80.49.55
12
3
a. W WTP Capacity Summary
Outfall 11
Current Permitted Floa, mgd
1.8 Degagned Flow' 1.8
Receiving Stream:
CA, cfa:
14
Permitted SIU Flaw, mgd
0.21
d. IU Summary
Stream Class
7Q10, crs:
RP
15
b. PT Docs. Summary
#IUs
oufall Lat.
Curtail Long.
16
IWS approval date
4/24/2023
#SIUs
1
Is there a PWS downstream of the Facility's Outfalls? ❑' YES ❑ NO
17
.0 USTMP approval date:
2/12/2020
# CIUs
0
Comments:
18
19
.E
d H W A approval dare
m
0
11 /6/2020
# NSCIUs
The nearest d—tream W S-IV boundary is 22.1 miles from the autfall.
#IUs w/Local
Permits or Other
Types
20
Z 2. Industrial Users' Information.
21
#
Industrial User (IU) Name
IU Activity
IU Non Conventional Pollutans & Toxic Pollutant IUP Effective Date
22
1
Pittsburgh Glass Works (PGW ), LLC
Glass
fabimatlon
Flow, pH, Gdt, Oil & Grease 12131i2022
23
2
24
s
25
4
26
s
31
comment:
32
3. Status of Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
33
Status of Pretreatment Program check all that apply)
34
❑
1) facility has no SIUs, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program that
is INACTIVE
35
❑
2) facility has no SIUs, does not have Division approved Pretreatment Program
36
❑
3) facility has SIUs and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program
37
❑
3a) Full Program with LTMP
38
O
31b) Modified Program with STMP
39
❑
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment
attached
or listed
below
4o
❑
5) facility's sludge is being land applied or composted
41
❑
6) facility's sludge is incinerated (add Beryllium and Mercury sampling according
to § 503.43)
42
❑
7) facility's sludge is taken to a landfill, if yes which landfill:
43
118)
other
44
45
46
Sludge Disposal Plan:
47
Sludge Permit No: W00003417
Page 1 20567 POC Review Form 2023

A 6 I C D I E F G H I J K I L I M N O P
48
4. LTMP/STMP and HWA Review
49
PW: Find L/STMP document, HWA spreadsheet, Dl previous and new NPDES permit for next section.
50
51
a
�Comment
N�
U
n
Parameter of Concern
POC Check List
New
NPDES
POC
Previous
NPDES
POC
Required by
EPA PT 1
POC due to
Sludge 2
POC due to
SIU 3
POTW
POC 4
L/STMP
Effluent Freq
NPDES
Effluent Freq
PQLs review
%
Removal
Rate
PQL from
L/STMP, ug/I
Required PQL
per NPDES
permit
Recomm.
PQL, ug/I
52
0
Flow
❑
El
❑
❑
53
❑
BQD
Li
❑'
❑
❑
2.0 ni
54
❑'
TSS
❑
0
❑
❑
2.5 mg/L
55
❑
NH3
❑
❑
❑
❑
56
❑'
Arsenic
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
2.0
2.0
57
❑
Barium
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
58
❑
Beryllium(5)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
59
0
Cadmiumi
❑
❑
O
p
❑
❑
0.5
0.5
60
0
Chromium(1)
❑
❑
0
I
M 0
10.0
61
0
copper(1)
❑
❑
El
p
❑
❑
2.0
2.0
62
❑
Cyanide
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
63
❑
Letil
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
2.0
2.0
64
❑'
Mercury(5)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
0.001
10.001
65
0
Molybdenum
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
m.0
10.0
66
❑'
Nickel(1)
❑
❑
❑
❑+
❑
❑
1
10.0
5.0
Should lower to recommended PQL
67
0
Selenium
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
68
❑
I Silver
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
1.0
69
❑
Ziri
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
to
10.0
70
0
Sludge Flow to Disposal
❑
❑
❑
71
O
% Solids to Disposal
❑
❑
❑
72
7
Oil S Grease
0
❑
5 ni
73
❑
TN
❑
❑
❑
❑
74
❑
TP
❑
❑
❑
❑
75
❑'
Grit
❑
❑
❑i
❑
2.5 mg/L
76
0
IpH
❑
I ❑
I ❑+
❑
77
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
78
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
79
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
8077-
❑
❑
❑
❑
81
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
82
Footnotes:
83
(1) Always in the LTMP/STMP due to
EPA -PT requirement
84
(2) Only in LTMP/STMP 0listed in sludge permit
85
(3) Only in LTMP/STMP while SIU still discharges to POTW
86
(4) Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
87
(5) In LTMP/STMP, 9 sewage sludge is incinerated
88
Please use blue ford for the info updated by P.
89
Please use red font for POC that need to be added/modeled In USTMP
sampling
plan
90
91
Blue shaded cell (D60:H82): Parameters usually included under that POC list
92
93
Facility Summary/background information/NPDES-PT regulatory action:
POC to be added/modified In USTMP:
94
95
gg
97
ORC's comments on IUfPOC:
POC submitted through Chemical
Addendum or Supplemental Chemical
Datasheet:
Additional pollutants added to USTMP due
to POTWs concerns:
NPDES pw's comments on IUIPOC.
g8
6. Pretreatment updates in response
to NPDES permit renewal
gg
NPDES Permit Effective Data 180 days al effective (date): Permit writer, please add list of required/recommended PT updates in NPDES permit cover letter.
Page 2 20567 POC Review Form 2023

NORTH CAROLINA 2022 INTEGRATED REPORT
Upper Yadkin Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
AU Name AU Number Classification AU LengthArea AU Units
AU ID Description
YADKIN RIVER 12-(53)�Fc 24.7 FW Miles
1334 From a point 0.3 mile upstream of the mouth to Elkin Creek (River) to a point 0.3 mile upstream of
Ararat River
2022 Water Quality Assessments
PARAMETER
IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
Water Temperature (292C, AL, MT&UP)
1
Meeting Criteria
Dissolved Oxygen (4 mg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
pH (6 su, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
pH (9.0, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Turbidity (50 NTU, AL, FW miles)
1
Meeting Criteria
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Fecal Coliform (GM 200/400, REC, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Fecal Coliform (GM 200/400, REC, FW)
3a
Data Inconclusive
Chlordane (0.0008 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Cyanide (5 mg/L, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
DDT 4,4 (0.0002 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Demeton (0.1 µg/l, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Dieldrin (0.00005 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Endosulfan (0.05 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Endrin (0.002 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Heptachlor (0.00008 µg/l, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Hexachlorobutadiene (18 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Lindane (0.01 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Methoxychlor (0.03 µg/l, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Mirex (0.001 µg/I, AL, FW)
3a
Data Inconclusive
Parathion (0.013Sul µg/I, AL, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- (4 µg/I, HH, FW)
1
Meeting Criteria
6/7/2022 NC 2022 INTEGRATED REPORT -Category 5 Approved by EPA 4/30/2022 Page 1181 of 1346

Upper Yadkin
AU Name
AU ID Description
NORTH CAROLINA 2022 INTEGRATED REPORT
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
AU Number Classification
Tetrachloroethylene (3.3 jig/I, HH, FW) 1
Toluene (11 µg/I, AL, FW) 1
Toxaphene (0.0002 µg/I, AL, FW) 1
Trichloroethylene (30 µg/I, AL, FW) 1
Vinyl Chloride (2.4 µg/I, AL, FW) 1
Chloride (230 mg/I, AL, FW) 1
Beryllium Dissolved Chronic (6.5, AL, FW) 1
Chromium Dissolved Chronic (Calcuated, AL, FW)
Arsenic Dissolved Chronic (36 µg/I, AL, SW)
Cadmium Dissolved Chronic (8.8, AL, SW)
Copper Dissolved Acute (4.8 µg/I, AL, SW)
Nickel Dissolved Chronic (8.2, AL, SW)
Silver Dissolved Chronic (0.1 µg/I, AL, SW)
Zinc Dissolved Chronic (81 µg/I, AL, SW)
Lead Dissolved Chronic (8.1, AL, SW)
Flouride (1.8 mg/I, AL, FW)
Aldrin (0.00005 µg/l, AL, FW)
Benzene (51 µg/I, AL, FW)
Carbon Tetrachloride (1.6 µg/I, AL, FW)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
AU LengthArea AU Units
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
(Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
Meeting Criteria
6/7/2022 NC 2022 INTEGRATED REPORT -Category 5 Approved by EPA 4/30/2022 Page 1182 of 1346

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Report Date:
03/07/24 Page
1 of 7
Permit:
NCO020567
MRS Betweel11
- 2018 and10 - 2023
Region:
%
Violation Category:%
Program Category:
Facility Name: %
Param Nam(%
County:
%
Subbasin: %
Violation Action: %
Major Minor:
%
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Authority WWTP
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
11 -2018
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/05/18
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2018
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/28/18
3 X week
ug/I
28
44
57.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2018
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/11/18
3Xweek
ug/I
28
42
50
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2018
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/27/18
3 X week
ug/I
28
50
78.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/28/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/05/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/16/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/30/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
05-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/28/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
05-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/29/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/03/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/12/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/09/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/23/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/13/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/07/24 Page 2 of 7
Permit: NCO020567 MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Facility Name: % Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority WWTP
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
09-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/10/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/24/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2019
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/24/19
3 X week
ug/I
28
45
60.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/04/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/11/20
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
36
28.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/17/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/18/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
05-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/19/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
41
46.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/15/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
35
25
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/29/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
35
25
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/01/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/15/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/11/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
44
57.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/01/20
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/07/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/22/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
41
46.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/07/24 Page 3 of 7
Permit: NCO020567 MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Facility Name: % Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority WWTP
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/23/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
48
71.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/28/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
43
53.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12 - 2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/29/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
44
57.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2020
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/30/20
3 X week
ug/I
28
39
39.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/04/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
45
60.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/12/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
41
46.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/19/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
40
42.9
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/20/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/08/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
43
53.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/16/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
49
75
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02 - 2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/23/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/10/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/17/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
38
35.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/22/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
41
46.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/05/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/26/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/07/24 Page 4 of 7
Permit: NCO020567 MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Facility Name: % Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority WWTP
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
05-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/18/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/30/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/06/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/07/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/21/21
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
35
25
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/27/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/04/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/11/21
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
47
67.9
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/17/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/23/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
44
57.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
08 - 2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
08/30/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
38
35.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/01/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
43
53.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/06/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
45
60.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/08/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
43
53.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/28/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
35
25
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
10-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
10/11/21
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/07/24 Page 5 of 7
Permit: NCO020567 MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Facility Name: % Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority WWTP
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
10-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
10/27/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/02/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/03/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/08/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/09/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
44
57.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/17/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
42
50
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/22/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
45
60.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/29/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/07/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12-2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/21/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
12 - 2021
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
12/29/21
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/05/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
35
25
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
01 -2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
01/10/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
39
39.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/23/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/28/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/01/22
3 Xweek
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for: Report Date: 03/07/24 Page 6 of 7
Permit: NCO020567 MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023 Region: % Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Facility Name: % Param Nam(% County: % Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
Authority WWTP
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
03-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/08/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/28/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04 - 2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/06/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
36
28.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
04-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
04/19/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
37
32.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
05-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/04/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
36
28.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
05-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
05/10/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/14/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/04/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
45
60.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
07-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
07/26/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/13/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
09/21/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/29/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
11 -2022
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
11/30/22
3 X week
ug/I
28
33
17.9
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
02-2023
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
02/28/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
03-2023
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
03/14/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
32
14.3
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
06-2023
001
Effluent
Chlorine, Total Residual
06/20/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
30
7.1
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Report Date:
03/07/24 Page
7 of 7
Permit: NCO020567
MRS Betweei 11 - 2018 and10 - 2023
Region:
%
Violation Category:%
Program Category: %
Facility Name: %
Param Nam(%
County:
%
Subbasin: %
Violation Action: %
Major Minor: %
PERMIT: NCO020567
FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority -Yadkin Valley Sewer
COUNTY: Surry
REGION: Winston-Salem
Authority WWTP
Limit Violation
MONITORING
VIOLATION
UNIT OF
CALCULATED
%
REPORT OUTFALL
LOCATION PARAMETER
DATE
FREQUENCY
MEASURE
LIMIT
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
09-2023 001
Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual
09/26/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
29
3.6
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
09-2023 001
Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual
09/27/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
34
21.4
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded
10-2023 001
Effluent Chlorine, Total Residual
10/02/23
3 X week
ug/I
28
31
10.7
Daily Maximum
No Action, BPJ
Exceeded

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Woodfin Sanitary WTP (NCG590012) NCO083178/001 County: Buncombe
Ceri7dPF Begin: 7/1/2016 ANNUAL (NCG59001 NonComp: Single
J F M A M
2019 - - - - Pass
2020
2021 - - - - Pass
2022 - - - - Pass
2023 - - - - Pass
Woodlake Yacht Club (Aqua) NCO061719/001 County: Moore
Ceri7dPF Begin: 8/1/2016 2.8% (0.3 MGD), 4.6 NonComp:
J F M A M
2019 - Pass - - Pass
2020 - - Pass - Pass
2021 - Pass - - Pass
2022 - Pass - - Pass
2023 - Pass - - Pass
Region: ARO Basin: FRB02 Mar Jun Sep Dec
7Q10: 0.61 PF: .0337 IWC: 8.0 Freq: A
J J A S O
Pass
Region: FRO Basin: CPF14 Feb May Aug Nov
7Q10: 16 PF: 0.5 IWC: 8.82 Freq: Q
J J A S O
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
SOC JOC:
N D
SOC JOC:
N
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
C
Worsley Co./Dixie Boy Truck/003
NCO065307/003 County:
New Hanover
Region: WIRO
Basin:
CPF17
Jan Apr Jul Oct
SOC JOC:
Fthd24PF Begin: 8/1/2014
Ac P/F Monit: 90% Ft
NonComp:
7Q10:
26.3
PF: -
IWC: NA
Freq: Q
J
F M
A M
I
I
A
S
O
N
D
2019 Fail
- -
Pass -
-
Fail
-
-
Fail
-
-
2020 Fail
- -
Fail -
-
Fail
Pass
-
Fail
-
-
2021 Fail
- -
Fail -
-
Fail
-
-
Fail
-
-
2022 Fail
- -
Fail -
-
Fail
-
-
Fail
-
-
2023 Fail
- -
Fail -
-
Fail
-
-
Fail
-
-
Yadkin Rver Water Treatment Plant
NCO089893/001 County:
Union
Region: MRO
Basin:
Jan Apr Jul Oct
SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 7/1/2020
Monitoring only at 9
NonComp:
70.10:
PF:
IWC:
Freq: Q
J
F M
A M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
2023 -
- -
- Pass
-
Pass
-
-
Fail
-
-
Yadkin Valley Sewer Auth WWTP (Elkin)
NCO020567/001 County:
Surry
Region: WSRO
Basin:
YAD02
Mar Jun Sep Dec
SOC JOC:
Ceri7dPF Begin: 9/1/2014
chr lim: 0.87%
NonComp: Single
70,10:
317.0
PF: 1.8
IWC: 0.87
Freq: Q
J
F M
A M
J
J
A
S
O
N
D
2019 -
- Pass
- -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
2020 -
- Pass
- -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
2021 -
- Pass
- -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
2022 -
- >3.48 (P) Pass
- -
Pass
>3.48 (P)
-
Pass >3.48
-
-
>3.48 Pass
2023 -
- >3.48 Pass
- -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
-
Leeend: P= Fathead minnow (Pimohales oromelas). H=No Flow (facilitv is active). s = Solit test between Certified Labs Page 113 of 114

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 u 3 I NC0020567 111 121 23/08/30 I17 18 LC] I 19 I s I 201
21111I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I r6
Inspection
Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ---------------------- Reserved -------------------
67
I 72 I n, I 71 I 74 79 I I I I I I I80
701 I 71 I LL -1 I I
LJ
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:OOAM 23/08/30
20/08/01
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
211 Marion Rd
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Elkin NC 28621
12:OOPM 23/08/30
24/01/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Hal W Transou/ORC/336-835-9819/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Hal Transou, //336-835-9817/
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenar Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Progran 0 Sludge Handling Dispo: Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate
Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Ron Boone DWR/WSRO WQ/336-776-9690/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
NCO020567 I11 12I 23/08/30 117 18 i c i
(Cont.)
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
On August 30th, 2023, Division of Water Resources staff, Ron Boone, conducted a routine
compliance evaluation inspection at the Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority Wastewater Treatment Plant,
NPDES permit NC0020567. Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC), Hal Transou, was present during
the inspection. A review of records, data, treatment components, structures, and the outfall was
completed. This inspection reflected compliance with the subject permit.
Discharge monitoring reports, laboratory reports, chain of custodies, operator's visitation logs,
laboratory records, and operation and maintenance records were reviewed. All documentation
appears to be maintained on site at the plant as required by the permit. No discrepancies or
transcription errors, or other documentation errors were noted.
The plant appears to be well maintained and operated. The bar screen and grit removal processes
appear to be in good condition and operating effectively. There appears to be little organic matter in
the grit. Both the screenings and grit are landfilled.
The mixed liquor in the aeration basin appears very healthy and imparts a pungent earthy odor. Air is
very well diffused throughout the basin. The structure itself appears to be in very good condition.
The clarifiers appear to be operating well. There is very little floating scum/solids and weir carryover.
The weirs appear level and the sludge blanket is only about 2.5' deep. The structures themselves
appear to be in very good condition.
The plant uses chlorine gas for disinfection and sulfur dioxide gas for dechlorination. Both gases are
stored in the same building. The plant uses 150-pound bottles of both chemicals, and they are all
properly stored by anchoring them to the wall. Chlorine is injected near the beginning of the contact
chamber and sulfur dioxide near the end.
The flow meter, which was last calibrated in March 2023, is installed at the end of the contact
chamber, after dechlorination. The effluent sampler pulls flow proportional composite samples at this
point.
Sludge is digested in an aerobic digester, and the plant has two sludge holding tanks from which it is
drawn and trucked off to be land applied. The plant does have sludge drying beds that are only used
for depositing loads of wastewater from the collection system or other sources. Filtrate from the beds
flows back to the head of the plant.
The plant's generator operates the entire plant and is run for exercise weekly.
The plant is well secured, clean, and no hazards were detected during the inspection.
No concerns, deficiencies, or violations were noted during the inspection.
Page#

Permit: NCO020567 Owner -Facility: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Yes
No
NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new ❑
❑
❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? ❑
0
❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit? ❑
0
❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? 0
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? 0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: Primary clarifiers and trickling filters no longer exist and should be removed from the
plant description in the permit. The town should eliminate these units from the plant
description in the next permit renewal application to have them removed from the
permit's plant description.
Record Keeping
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility
classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Comment: None
Yes No NA NE
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 3

Permit: NCO020567 Owner -Facility: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Laboratory
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
■
❑
❑
❑
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is the facility using a contract lab?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
■
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?
❑
❑
❑
■
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
❑
❑
❑
■
Comment: None
Influent Sampling
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
❑
■
❑
❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
■
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment: None
Effluent Sampling
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
■
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
■
❑
❑
❑
representative)?
Comment: None
Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
and sampling location)?
Comment: None
Page# 4

Permit: NCO020567 Owner -Facility: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
❑
❑
❑
Comment: None
Grit Removal
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: None
Aeration Basins
Yes No
NA
NE
Mode of operation
Ext. Air
Type of aeration system
Diffused
Is the basin free of dead spots?
0 ❑
❑
❑
Are surface aerators and mixers operational?
❑ ❑
■
❑
Are the diffusers operational?
0 ❑
❑
❑
Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
0 ❑
❑
❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?
❑ ❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: Basin has lots of foam, probably 80 to 90 percent coverage. Efforts to reduce foam by
adding chemicals upstream of plant have so far been unfruitful. Mixed liquor looks very
healthy and the foam does not appear to be affecting
the rest of the process. Effluent
appears excellent quality.
Secondary Clarifier
Yes No NA NE
Page# 5

Permit: NCO020567 Owner -Facility: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Secondary Clarifier
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are weirs level?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of weir blockage?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is scum removal adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the drive unit operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/4 of the sidewall depth)
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment: Sludge blanket was about 2.5'.
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are pumps in place?
■
❑
❑
❑
Are pumps operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: None
Disinfection -Gas
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are cylinders secured adequately?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
❑
❑
❑
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is there chlorine residual prior to de -chlorination?
❑
❑
❑
Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 Ibs of Chlorine (CAS No.
❑
❑
❑
7782-50-5)?
If yes, then is there a Risk Management Plan on site?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000-
If yes, then when was the RMP last updated?
Comment: None
Page# 6

Permit: NCO020567 Owner -Facility:
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023 Inspection Type:
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Compliance Evaluation
De -chlorination
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of system ?
Gas
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)?
❑
0
❑
❑
Is storage appropriate for cylinders?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is de -chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are the tablets the proper size and type?
❑
❑
0
❑
Comment: Sulfur dioxide used for dechlorination.
Are tablet de -chlorinators operational?
❑
❑
0
❑
Number of tubes in use?
Comment: None
Flow Measurement - Effluent
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: Last calibrated in March 2023.
Effluent Pipe
Yes
No
NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
M
❑
❑
❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
❑
❑
0
❑
Comment: The permittee could cut back vegetation around the outfall into the Yadkin River a bit
more to make it more accessible and visible from the shore.
Aerobic Digester
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is the capacity adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the mixing adequate?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive foaming in the tank?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is the odor acceptable?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is tankage available for properly waste sludge?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: None
Drying Beds Yes No NA NE
Page# 7

Permit: NCO020567
Inspection Date: 08/30/2023
Drying Beds
Is there adequate drying bed space?
Is the sludge distribution on drying beds appropriate?
Owner -Facility: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Are the drying beds free of vegetation?
# Is the site free of dry sludge remaining in beds?
Is the site free of stockpiled sludge?
Is the filtrate from sludge drying beds returned to the front of the plant?
# Is the sludge disposed of through county landfill?
# Is the sludge land applied?
(Vacuum filters) Is polymer mixing adequate?
Comment: Drying beds are no longer used for drying sludge.
Yes
No
NA
NE
■
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
■
■
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment: pH, DO, temperature, sludge judge, MLSS, settleable solids, etc
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Comment: None
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 8

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
PermitNo. NC0020567
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 1.8
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 317
Enter w7Q10 (cfs): 454
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/l)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/l)
s7Q10 (CFS) 317
s7Q10 (CFS)
317
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 1.8
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1.8
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 2.79
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
2.79
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/l) 0
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%) 0.87
IWC (%)
0.87
Allowable Conc. (ug/l) 1949
Allowable Conc. (mg/l)
89.6
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/l)
Fecal Coliform
w7Q10 (CFS)
454
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100ml
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1.8
(If DF>331; Monitor)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
2.79
(If DF<331; Limit)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
Dilution Factor (DF) 114.62
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
0.61
Allowable Conc. (mg/l)
258.9
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/l to protect for acute
toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals);
capped at 35 mg/l
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis);
capped at 35 mg/l
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information
❑ CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Facility Name Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
WWTP/WTP Class
NPDES Permit
Outfall
Flow, Qw (MGD)
Receiving Stream
HUC Number
Stream Class
❑ Apply WS Hardness WQC
7Q10s (cfs)
7Q10w (cfs)
Grade IV
NCO020567
001
1.800
Yadkin River
03040101
C
317.00
30Q2 (cfs)
0.00
QA (cfs)
1400.00
1Q10s (cfs)
256.67
Hardness
33.74 mg/L (Avg)
_Effluent
Upstream Hardness
19.12 mg/L (Avg)
Combined Hardness Chronic I
------- 25 mg/L—
Combined Hardness Acute I
25 mg/L
Data Source(s)
— — — — —
ermittm ee-subitM ted DRs and PPAs.
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Par05
Par06111111
Par07
Par08
Par09
Par10
Par11
Par12
Par13
Par14
Par15
Par16
Par17
Parts
Par19
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Name w4s Type Chronic ModIer Acute PQL Units
Arsenic
Aquactic Life
C
150
FW
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Human Health
Water Supply
C
10
HH/WS
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Life
NC
6.5
FW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Life
NC
0.5899
FW
3.2396
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
FW
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Water Supply
NC
1
A
ug/L
Total Phenolic Compounds
Aquatic Life
NC
300
A
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Life
NC
117.7325
FW
905.0818
ug/L
Chromium VI
Aquatic Life
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aquatic Life
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
7.8806
FW
10.4720
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Aquatic Life
NC
1,800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
2.9416
FW
75.4871
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic Life
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
37.2313
FW
335.2087
pg/L
Nickel
Water Supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Life
NC
5
FW
56
ug/L
Silver
Aquatic Life
NC
0.06
FW
0.2964
ug/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
126.7335
FW
125.7052
ug/L
Thallium
Human Health
NC
2
HH
pg/L
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Human Health
C
0.37
HH
pg/L
Chloroform
Human Health
NC
2000
HH
pg/L
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, input
3/7/2024

H1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H2
Use "PASTE SPECIAL Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Effluent Hardness Values" then "COPY• Upstream Hardness Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data . Maximum data
points = 58 points = 58
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
5/6/2019
36
36
6/3/2019
36
36
7/8/2019
31
31
8/5/2019
31
31
9/9/2019
39
39
10/7/2019
33
33
11/4/2019
39
39
12/2/2019
33
33
1/6/2020
34
34
2/3/2020
36
36
3/2/2020
36
36
4/6/2020
36
36
5/4/2020
34
34
6/1/2020
34
34
7/6/2020
42
42
8/3/2020
30
30
9/8/2020
32
32
10/5/2020
30
30
11/2/2020
36
36
12/2/2020
38
38
1/4/2021
32
32
4/5/2021
28
28
6/8/2021
28
28
7/6/2021
34
34
10/4/2021
30
30
1/3/2022
46
46
4/4/2022
36
36
7/5/2022
44
44
10/3/2022
34
34
1/3/2023
32
32
3/6/2023
28
28
4/3/2023
20
20
7/3/2023
27
27
10/2/2023
32
32
Results
Std Dev.
5.0351
Mean
33.7353
C.V.
0.1493
n
34
10th Per value
28.00 mg/L
Average Value
33.74 mg/L
Max. Value
46.00 mg/L
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1 8/3/2020
20
20
Std Dev.
9.2593
2 9/8/2020
16
16
Mean
19.1176
3 10/5/2020
14
14
C.V.
0.4843
4 11 /2/2020
14
14
n
17
5 12/2/2020
14
14
10th Per value
13.20 mg/L
6 1/4/2021
16
16
Average Value
19.12 mg/L
7 4/5/2021
14
14
Max. Value
49.00 mg/L
8 7/6/2021
16
16
9 10/4/2021
16
16
10 1 /3/2022
18
18
11 4/4/2022
18
18
12 7/5/2022
24
24
13 10/3/2022
22
22
14 1 /3/2023
12
12
15 4/3/2023
10
10
16 7/3/2023
49
49
17 10/2/2023
32
32
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-2- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01 & Par02
Par03
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Arsenic
Values" then "COPY"
Beryllium
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
10/18/2019 < 10 5
Std Dev.
2.4664
1 6/8/2021
< 1 0.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
2
2/21/2020 < 1 0.5
Mean
2.1667
2 3/6/2023
< 1 0.5
Mean
0.5000
3
6/8/2021 < 2 1
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
n
3
4
n
2
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
3.00
6
Mult Factor =
3.79
7
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
0.50 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
15.0 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
1.90 ug/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-3- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par04
Cadmium
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
ParO5
. Maximum data
points = 58
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
10/18/2019 <
1 0.5
Std Dev.
0.1443
1
2
2/21/2020 <
1 0.5
Mean
0.4167
2
3
6/8/2021 <
0.5 0.25
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
4
n
3
4
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
3.00
6
7
Max. Value
0.500 ug/L
7
8
Max. Fred Cw
1.500 ug/L
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30 I
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
Chlorides
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Use "PASTE SPECIAL -
Values" then "COPY".
Maximum data points =
58
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A mg/L
N/A mg/L
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-4- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par06
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
valves" imthenum •copydata
. Max
Par07
Total Phenolic Compounds
points = 58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
1 6/8/2021
< 10 5 Std Dev.
2
Mean
NO DATA
2 3/6/2023
< 20 10 Mean
3
C.V.
NO DATA
3
C.V. (default)
4
n
0
4
n
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
6
Mult Factor =
7
Max. Value
N/A ug/L
7
Max. Value
8
Max. Fred Cw
N/A ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
points = 58
7.5000
0.6000
2
3.79
10.0 ug/L
37.9 ug/L
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-5- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par08
Chromium III
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1
Std Dev.
2
Mean
3
C.V.
4
n
5
6
Mult Factor =
7
Max. Value
8
Max. Fred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Pdr09
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY"
Chromium VI
. Maximum data
points = 58
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
NO DATA
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
2
Mean
NO DATA
3
C.V.
0
4
n
5
N/A
6
Mult Factor =
N/A Ng/L
7
Max. Value
N/A Ng/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY'
. Maximum data
points = 58
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
N/A
N/A Ng/L
N/A Ng/L
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-6- 3/7/2024

Par10
Date Data
1 10/18/2019 <
2 2/21/2020 <
3 6/8/2021 <
4 3/6/2023 <
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Pall
Use "PASTE SPECIAL Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Chromium, Total Values" then "COPY" Copper Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data . Maximum data
points = 58 points = 58
BDL=1/2DL
Results
5 2.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
5 2.5
Mean
2.5000
5 2.5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
5 2.5
n
4
Mult Factor =
2.59
Max. Value
2.5 Ng/L
Max. Pred Cw
6.5 Ng/L
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
10/18/2019
11.8
11.8
Std Dev.
3.1107
2
2/21/2020
4.8
4.8
Mean
6.6571
3
11/9/2020
10
10
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
11/16/2020
7
7
n
7
5
11/23/2020
5
5
6
6/8/2021
4
4
Mult Factor =
2.01
7
3/6/2023
4
4
Max. Value
11.80 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
23.72 ug/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
-7-
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par12
Par13
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Cyanide
Values" then "COPY•
Fluoride
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
1
10/18/2019
<
8
5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
2
2/21/2020
<
8
5
Mean
5.00
2
Mean
NO DATA
3
6/8/2021
<
5
5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V.
NO DATA
4
3/6/2023
<
5
5
n
4
4
n
0
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
2.59
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
7
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
N/A ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
13.0 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
N/A ug/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-8- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par14
Pdr15
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Lead
Values" then "COPY"
MerCUr y
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
1
10/18/2019
< 5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.6268
1
Std Dev.
NO DATA
2
2/21/2020
< 1
0.5
Mean
1.1429
2
Mean
NO DATA
3
11/9/2020
< 2
1
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V.
NO DATA
4
11/16/2020
< 2
1
n
7
4
n
0
5
11/23/2020
< 2
1
5
6
6/8/2021
< 2
1
Mult Factor =
2.01
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
7
3/6/2023
< 2
1
Max. Value
2.500 ug/L
7
Max. Value
N/A ng/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
5.025 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
N/A ng/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-9- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par16
Par17 & Par18
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Molybdenum
Values" then "COPY"
Nickel
Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1 10/18/2019 <
5 2.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
10/18/2019 <
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.2500
2 2/21/2020 <
5 2.5
Mean
2.5000
2
2/21/2020 <
5
2.5
Mean
2.6250
3
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
6/8/2021
3
3
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
n
2
4
3/6/2023 <
5
2.5
n
4
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
3.79
6
Mult Factor =
2.59
7
Max. Value
2.5 ug/L
7
Max. Value
3.0 Ng/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
9.5 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
7.8 Ng/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-10- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par19
Date Data
1 10/18/2019 <
2 2/21/2020 <
3 6/8/2021 <
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Selenium
BDL=1/2DL
Results
10 5
Std Dev.
1 0.5
Mean
1 0.5
C.V. (default)
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Par20
Use "PASTE SPECIAL Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Values" then "COPY" Silver Values" then "COPY"
. Maximum data . Maximum data
points = 58 points = 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
2.5981
1
2/21/2020
<
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.8746
2.0000
2
11/9/2020
<
0.25
0.125
Mean
0.7408
0.6000
3
11/16/2020
<
1
0.5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
4
11/23/2020
0.32
0.32
n
6
5
6/8/2021
<
1
0.5
3.00
6
3/6/2023
<
1
0.5
Mult Factor =
2.14
5.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
2.500 ug/L
15.0 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
5.350 ug/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par21
Par22
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Zinc
values" then "COPY"
Thalliumvalues"
then "COPY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
10/18/2019
39.1
39.1
Std Dev.
8.0251
1
6/8/2021 < 1 0.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
2
2/21/2020
38
38
Mean
43.0250
2
3/6/2023 < 1 0.5
Mean
0.5000
3
6/8/2021
55
55
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
3/6/2023
40
40
n
4
4
n
2
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
2.59
6
Mult Factor =
3.79
7
Max. Value
55.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
0.500000 Ng/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
142.5 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
1.895000 Ng/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-12- 3/7/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par23
Par24
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Values" then "COPY..
Chloroform
Values" then "CO PY"
. Maximum data
. Maximum data
points = 58
points = 58
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
3/6/2023
91.1 91.1
Std Dev.
46.8231
1
6/8/2021
5.82 5.82
Std Dev.
2.0559
2
6/8/2021
< 20 10
Mean
37.0333
2
9/6/2022
7.77 7.77
Mean
7.8400
3
9/6/2022
< 20 10
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
3/6/2023
9.93 9.93
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
n
3
4
n
3
5
5
6
Mult Factor =
3.00
6
Mult Factor =
3.00
7
Max. Value
91.100000 Ng/L
7
Max. Value
9.930000 Ng/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
273.300000 Ng/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
29.790000 pg/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, data
-13- 3/7/2024

Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
NCO020567
Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw (MGD)
= 1.8000
WWTP/WTP Class: Grade IV
1Q10S (cfs)
= 256.67
IWC% @ 1Q10S = 1.07531026
7Q10S (cfs)
= 317.00
IWC% @ 7Q10S = 0.872447544
7Q10W (cfs)
= 454.00
IWC% @ 7Q10W = 0.610783949
30Q2 (cfs)
= 0.00
IWC% @ 30Q2 = 100
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs)
= 1400.00
IW°/uC @ QA = 0.198889356
Receiving Stream:
Yadkin River HUC 03040101 Stream Class: C
Outfall 001
Qw=1.8MGD
COMBINED HARDNESS (me/L)
Acute = 25 mg/L
Chronic = 25 mg/L
PARAMETER
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
J
F
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE
a
Applied
Chronic Acute
D # Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Standard
Acute (FW): 31,618.8
Arsenic
C
150 FW(7Q10s) 340
ug/L
3 0
15.0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic (FW) 17,193.0
C.V. (default)
Max MDL = 10
Arsenic
C
10 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
Note: n < 9
NO DETECTS
_ _
Chronic (FIII): 5,027.9
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 6,044.77
Beryllium
NC
6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65
ug/L
2 0
1.90
--Chronic:----745.03 --
--------------------------
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 1
Acute: 301.272
Cadmium
NC
0.5899 FW(7Q10s) 3.2396
ug/L
3 0
1.500
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _
--Chronic:----67.612 --
--------------------------
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 1
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides
NC
230 FW(7Q10s)
mg/L
0 0
N/A
_ _
--Chronic: — 26,362.6—
— —-----------
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
1 A(30Q2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
_
—onic: ------
1 0—_—-------------------------------
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
300 A(30Q2)
ug/L
2 0
37.9
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _
--Chronic: ---- 300.0 --
--------------------------
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 20
Acute: 84,169.4
Chromium III
NC
117.7325 FW(7Q10s) 905.0818
µg/L
0 0
N/A
--C_ hroni_ c: — 13,494.5—
-------------
Acute: 1,487.9
Chromium VI
NC
11 FW(7Q10s) 16
µg/L
0 0
N/A
--Chronic:----1,260.8--
--------------------------
Chromium, Total
NC
µg/L
4 0
6.5
Max reported value = 2.5
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 5
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, rpa
Page 14 of 15 3/7/2024

Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP
N00020567 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw=1.8MGD
Acute: 973.86
Copper
NC
7.8806 FW(7Q10s) 10.4720
ug/L
7 7
23.72
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 903.28
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: 2,045.9
Cyanide
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 22
10
ug/L
4 0
13.0
--Chronic: ---- --
--------------------------
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
573.1
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 10
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride
NC
1800 FW(7Q10s)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
_ _
--Chrnioc:—
Acute: 7,020.030
Lead
NC
2.9416 FW(7Q10s) 75.4871
ug/L
7 0
5.025
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 337.169
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
=
Max MDL 5
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury
NC
12 FW(7Q10s)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
N/A
— _ _ _ _
----1,375.4
— — —
Chronic:
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum
NC
2000 HH(7Q10s)
ug/L
2 0
9.5
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ 22_
Chronic: 9,240.1
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
Max MDL = 5
Acute (FW): 31,173.2
Nickel
NC
37.2313 FW(7Q10s) 335.2087
µg/L
4 1
7.8
_ _ _ _ __ _
Chronic (FW) 4,267.5
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw - No
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
No value >_Allow_able_Cw
Monitoring required
Nickel
NC
25.0000 WS(7Q10s)
µg/L
Limited data set
Chronic (WS)_2,865.5
No value > Allowable Cw
Acute: 5,207.8
Selenium
NC
5 FW(7Q10s) 56
ug/L
3 0
15.0
Note: n <9
C.V. (default)
_
--Chronic: ---- 573.1 --
--------------------------
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
=
Max MDL 10
Acute: 27.564
Silver
NC
0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.2964
ug/L
6 1
5.350
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _
Chronic: 6.877
All results < 1 ug/L except one nondetect at < 5 ug/L
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
in Feb 2020 - no monitoring or limits required
Acute: 11,690.1
Zinc
NC
126.7335 FW(7Q10s) 125.7052
ug/L
4 4
142.5
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 14,526.2
No RP, Predicted Max < 50 % of Allowable Cw -No
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Thallium
NC
2 HH(7Q10s)
µg/L
2 0
1.89500
_ _ _ — — — --
-------------�
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 229.24014
No detects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DETECTS
=
Max MDL 1
Acute: NO WQS
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
C
0.37 HH(Qavg)
µg/L
3 1
273.30000
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
Chronic: 186.03308
RP for Limited Dataset (n<3 samples) - apply
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
Quarterly Monitoring
Acute: NO WQS
Chloroform
NC
2000 HH(7Q10s)
µg/L
3 3
29.79000
Note: n < 9
C.V. (default)
_ _ _
Chronic: 229240 14337
_ _
No RP for limited dataset (N < 3 samples) - no
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
monitoring or limits required
Acute:
0 0
N/A
_ _
--Chronic: - — - — - — - — - —
— — — — — — — — — — — — —
20567 Freshwater RPA 2023, rpa
Page 15 of 15 3/7/2024

FACILITY: Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP Outfall 00'
NPDES PERMIT: NCO020567 Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator
In accordance with Federal Regulations, permit limitations must be written as Total Metals per 40 CFR 122.45(c)
PARAMETER
Cadmium (d)
Cd -Trout stre,
Chromium III (d)(
Chromium VI (d)
Chromium. Total
Nickel(d)(h)
Ni - WS streams
Silver (d)(h,acut
Zinc (d)(h)
Receiving
Receiving
Rec. Stream
NPDES
Total Suspended
Combined
Combined
Instream Instream
Effluent
Stream
Stream
Solids
Hardness
Hardness
Wastewater Wastewater
Upstream
Hardness
1Q10
Flow Limit
Hardness
summer
summer 7Q10
-Fixed Value-
chronic
Acute
Concentration Concentration
Average (mg L)
Average
7Q10 (CFS)
(MGD)
[MGD]
[MGD]
mg/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(Chronic) (Acute)
(mg/L)
317.0000
204.5161
165.5935
1.8000
10
25.000
25.000
0.8724 1.0753
19.117647
33.7353
Upstream Hard Avg (mg/L) = 19.1176
EFF Hard Avg (mg/L) = 33.7353
Dissolved Metals Criteria
US EPA
Total Metal Criteria
Total Metal =
COMMENTS (identify parameters to PERCS Branch to maintain in facility's LTMP/STMP):
after applying hardness
Translators -using
Dissolved Metal
+Translator
equation
Default Partition
Chronic
Acute
Coefficients
Chronic
Acute
u /I
u /I
streams
u /I
u /I
0.151
0.82
0.252
0.591
3.24
24
1831
0.202
117.73
905.08
11
16
1.000
11.00
16.00
N/A
N/A
2.7
3.6
0.348
7.88
10.47
0.54
14
0.184
2.94
75.49
16
145
0.432
37.23
335.21
25 N/A
0.06
0.301
1.0001
0.061 0.30
36
361
0.2881
126.73 125.71
IBeryllium 1.0001 JW6.51 -
Arsenic (d) 1.0001 Vr 150
(d) = dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
(h) = hardness -dependent dissolved metal standard. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
(t) = based upon measurement of total recoveable metal. See 15A NCAC 02B .0211 for more information.
The Human Health standard for Nickel in Water Supply Streams is 25 mg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.
The Human Health standard for Arsenic is 10 µg/L which is Total Recoverable metal standard.

Permit No. NC0020567
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard (WQS) Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6, 2016, with some exceptions. Therefore, metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6, 2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards - as
approved.
Table 1. NC Dissolved Metals Water Q ality Standards/A uatic Life Protection
Parameter
Acute FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Acute SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Arsenic
340
150
69
36
Beryllium
65
6.5
---
---
Cadmium
Calculation
Calculation
40
8.8
Chromium III
Calculation
Calculation
---
---
Chromium VI
16
11
1100
50
Copper
Calculation
Calculation
4.8
3.1
Lead
Calculation
Calculation
210
8.1
Nickel
Calculation
Calculation
74
8.2
Silver
Calculation
0.06
1.9
0.1
Zinc
Calculation
Calculation
90
81
Table 1 Notes:
1. FW= Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
2. Calculation = Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
213.0200 (e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/1 for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2. Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness -Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph (11)(d)
Metal
NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium, Acute
WER*{1.136672-[1n hardness] (0. 04183 8)) • e^{0.9151 [In hardness]-3.1485)
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER*{1.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} • e^{0.9151[ln hardness] -3.623 6)
Cadmium, Chronic
WER*{1.101672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} • e^{0.7998[ln hardness]-4A45l)
Chromium III, Acute
WER*0.316 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}
Chromium III, Chronic
WER*0.860 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}
Copper, Acute
WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.700)
Copper, Chronic
WER*0.960 e^{0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702)
Lead, Acute
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)) • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-1.460)
Lead, Chronic
WER*{1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)) • e^{1.273[ln hardness]-4.705)
Nickel, Acute
WER*0.998 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+2.255)
Nickel, Chronic
WER*0.997 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584)
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO020567
Silver, Acute
WER*0.85 • eA0.72[ln hardness]-6.59}
Silver, Chronic
Not applicable
Zinc, Acute
WER*0.978 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
Zinc, Chronic
WER*0.986 e^{0.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness -dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness -based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream (upstream) hardness
and so must be calculated case -by -case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge -specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal (more on that
below), but it is also possible to consider case -specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WOBELs for Hardness -Dependent Metals - Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations, based on applicable
standards and the critical low -flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value (chronic or acute), the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard, which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present (i.e. consistently below
detection level), then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness -dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q10 (the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1 Q 10 using the formula 1 Q 10 = 0.843 (s7Q 10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site -specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness -dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge, the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream) hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values, upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available, the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L (CaCO3 or (Ca + Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L, respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness -dependent metal showing reasonable
potential, the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site -specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO020567
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
_ (Permitted Flow, cfs *Avfz. Effluent Hardness, mg/L)+s7Q10, cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness, mg/L)
(Permitted Flow, cfs + s7Q 10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the 1 Q 10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal, using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients (DPCs) or site -specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the "Fraction Dissolved" converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in -stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-B-96-007, June 1996) and the
equation:
Cdiss = 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [ss('+a)] [10-6] }
Where:
ss = in -stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1], minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a = constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness -dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient (or
site -specific translator) to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases, where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist (ie. silver), the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals. For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca = (s7Q 10 + Qw) (Cwgs)(s7Q 10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca = allowable effluent concentration (µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs = NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria (µg/L or mg/L)
Cb = background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw = permitted effluent flow (cfs, match s7Q 10)
s7Q 10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
1 Q 10 = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0020567
QA = used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2 = used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application (40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations, the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit (Total allowable
concentration) is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate, permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10, 2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure, total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases, the projected maximum concentration (95th %) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness -dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter
Value
Comments (Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness, mg/L
33.74
Permittee submitted DMRs
(Total as CaCO3)
Average Upstream Hardness, mg/L
19.12
Permittee submitted DMRs
(Total as CaCO3)
7Q10 summer (cfs)
317
Reported in previous permit Fact
Sheet
1 Q 10 (cfs)
256.67
Calculated in RPA spreadsheet
Permitted Flow (MGD)
1.8
Design flow
Date: March 7, 2024
Permit Writer: Gary Perlmutter
Page 4 of 4

3/7/24 WQS =
12
ng/L MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION
V:2013-6
Facility Name
Yadkin Valley
Sewer Authority
WWTP / NC0020567
No Limit Required
/Permit No.
No MMP Required
Total Mercury 1631E PQL = 0.5
ng/L
7Q10s =
1400.000 cfs WQBEL = 6033.51 ng/L
Date Modifier
Data Entry
Value Permitted Flow =
1.800
47 ng/L
10/18/19
4.04
4.04
4.0 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2019
2/21/20
6.55
6.55
6.6 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2020
6/8/21 <
1
0.5
0.5 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2021
9/6/22
6.1
6.1
6.1 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2022
6/14/23
7
7
7.0 ng/L
- Annual Average for 2023

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Nicole Johnston
SECRETARY
Rheajean Benge
TREASURER
Wayne V. Moore
January 16, 2024
Mr. Gary Perlmutter
nVELKIN
iK�aa)_iKJIDNESVILLEri1
rRuty%
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section — NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
CHAIR
Woody Faulk
VICE -CHAIR
Anita Darnell
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Rheajean Benge
Wayne V. Moore
Robert Ball
Re: Request to modify the Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority WWTP NPDES permit, NC0020657,
for reduced monitoring of BOD, TSS, and Fecal Coliform
Dear Mr. Perlmutter,
The Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority would like to request maintaining the reduced monitoring of
1) BOD, 2) TSS, and 3) Fecal Coliform - at current twice per week frequency for the YVSA
WWTP NDPES permit renewal.
Per Section B of DWQ Guidelines Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in
NPDES Permits for Exceptionally Performing Facilities that you provided, the YVSA WWTP
facility meets all the approval criteria presented. Please see the attachment and enclosed SD card
which presents information and data to justify the request.
If you have any questions or need further information, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Nicole Johnston
Executive Director
Yadkin Valley Sewer Authority
Attachment: Criteria information and data summary
Enclosure: SD card w/ Excel file - WWTP DMR Data 3 Yrs from 11-2023.xlsx
500 NC Hwy 268 W — Elkin, NC 28621
Phone: [phone] — www.yvsa.org — Fax: [phone]

Reduction in Frequency Evalaution
Facility:
YVSA WWTP
Permit No.
NC0020567
Review period (use 3
11/2020 - 10/2023
yrs)
Approval Criteria: Y/N?
1. Not currently under SOC
Y
2. Not on EPA Quarterly noncompliance report
Y
3. Facility or employees convicted of CWA
violations
N
# of non -
Monthly
3-yr mean
#daily
#daily
Reduce
Weekly average
200%
200%
monthly
# civil penalty>
Data Review
Units
average
50% MA
(geo mean
< 50%?
samples
<15?
samples < 20?
> 2?
1?
Frequency?
limit
limit
for FC)
MA
>200%
WA
>200%
limit
asessment
(Yes/No)
violations
BOD (Weighted)
mg/L
45.00
30.00
15
1.78
Y
60.00
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
TSS
mg/L
45.00
30.00
1 15
1.28
Y
1 60.00
0
Y
0
N
0
N
Y
Ammonia (weighted)
mg/L
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
0.00
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
0
1 N
1 0
1 N
I #VALUE!
Fecal Coliform
#/100
400.00
200.00
100
7.21
Y
800 F 1 1 Y
0
1 N
1 0
1 N
I Y