NC0039578_PERMIT ISSUANCE_20021106

WDES DOCYNEMT SCANNIMS COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0039578
TWSA WWTP #1
Document Type:
Oermit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Speculative Limits
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
November 6, 2002
E
C
•
Thies document 164 printed on rewse paper -ignore any
content on tive resrerae aide

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, PE, Director
November 6, 2002
Mr. Stan Bryson, Wastewater Operations Superintendent
Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority
P.O. Box 1051
Sylva, North Carolina 28779
Dear Mr. Bryson:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NCO039578
TWSA WWTP #1
Jackson County
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the
subject permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This
permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1
and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently amended).
The following changes have been made to the draft version of your permit:
➢ The cyanide limit has been removed and cyanide monitoring has been reduced to
a frequency of twice per month. As per your request, a reasonable potential
analysis was performed using data from 2001-2002. This analysis showed no
reasonable potential to exceed North Carolina's criteria for cyanide. However, the
frequency with which cyanide was detected over the previous permit term
necessitates a minimum monitoring frequency of twice per month.
➢ A quarterly monitoring requirement for zinc has been added to the permit. The
level at which zinc was detected in your priority pollutant analysis exceeds North
Carolina's action level criterion for zinc. No limit is necessary at this time, as no
link has been demonstrated between effluent toxicity and zinc levels.
Although the Division was unable to decrease the monitoring frequency for silver and
cyanide to quarterly, you may submit 10-12 data points showing non -detects of these
toxicants and request a permit modification to reduce the monitoring frequency to quarterly.
Please also review the requirement listed in Part A. (4.) for a wastewater management
plan. This plan must be submitted to the Division within 180 days after the issuance date
of this permit and requires you to present an assessment of your facilities and a plant
optimization plan. It is anticipated that in compiling information for this plan, you will be
able to better target areas for improvement at your plant to amend some chronic problems,
particularly those concerning TSS removal.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this
permit are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1617
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
VISIT US ON THE INTERNET ® httpi/h2o.enrState.nc.us/NPDES

request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the
form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes, and flied with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be
final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division.
The Division may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This
permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required
by the Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the
Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may
be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Natalie Sierra at
telephone number [phone], extension 551.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, PE
cc: Central Files
Asheville Regional Office/Water quality Section
(NPDES-Ugiti
Technical Assistance & Certification Unit
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
US EPA Region 4
Sara Ward, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Permit NCO039578
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
TWSA WWTP #1
River Road (NCSR 1359)
South of Sylva
Jackson County
to receiving waters designated as the Tuckasegee River in the Little Tennessee River
Basin in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective December 1, 2002.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on October 31, 2007.
Signed this day November 6, 2002.
Original Signed By
David A Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water (,duality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

PeImit NC0039578
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 1.5-MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting
of the following unit processes:
• Aerated grit removal
• Flow equalization
• Activated sludge with secondary clarification
• Chlorination
• Dechlorination
The above facilities are located at the TWSA WWI? #1 on River Road (NCSR
1359), south of Sylva in Jackson County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into the Tuckasegee River, which is classified C-Trout waters in the Little
Tennessee River Basin.

Tuckaseigee Water & Sewer
TWSA WWTP #1
State Grid/Quad: FOSW/Sylva South, NC Receising Slream:Tuckasegee Ri%er
Latitude: 35' 20' 59 N Stream Class: C-Trout
Longitude: 83" 14' 21' W
Drainage Basin: Little Tennessee River Basin
Sub -Basin: 64.(".02
Facility um,
TleLocation s �E
not to scale
North NPDES Permit No. NCO039578
Jackson Count

Permit NC0039578
V
LIM
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as
specified below:
,EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
_.. .
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
.. ,
Monthly
_ Averse .
;- Weekly
Averse =•
:'= Daily '-
Maximum-
_ Meawrement
- F uenc .
',,.Sample.;
-' T e
Sample Locatlon
Flow
1.5 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day 204C '
30.0 m
45.0 m L
Dail
Composite
Effluent, Influent
Total Suspended Solids'
30.0 m
45.0 m
Dail
Composite
Effluent, Influent
NH3 as N
Daily
Composite
Effluent
'Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean
200I 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28MI
Daily
Grab
Effluent
em erature T
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily
Grab
Effluent
H2
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen NOz + NO3 + TKN
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity3
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cadmium4
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cyanide
2/Month
Grab
Effluent
Total Copper4
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc4
Quarterly
Com osite
Effluent
Total Silver
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Notes:
1. The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentrations shall not
exceed 15 percent of the respective influent value (85 percent removal).
2. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
3. Whole Effluent Toxicity shall be measured by chronic toxicity (P/F, 1.4%) during the months of
February, May, August and November. See Part A. (2.) for details.
4. Toxicant sampling should be conducted on the same date that chronic toxicity testing is
performed.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace
amounts.

Permit NCO039578
A. (2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL LBUT
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 1.4%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum,guarterlu monitoring using test procedures outlined
in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998,
or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during the months
of February, May, August and November. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at
the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV below
the permit limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of the
two following months as described in "North Carolina Phase (I Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the
highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest
concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of
"detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are
specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -
February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the
parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ
Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch no
later than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements and
all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved
designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and
reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the Permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT)
test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of
the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be
submitted to the Environmental Sciences Branch at the address cited above.
Should the Permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental
controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed
no later than the last day of the month following the month of the initial monitoring.

Permit NCO039578
A. (3.) SPECIAL CONDITION FOR SEWER LINE CONNECTIONS
Sewer lines serving more than one building, crossing property under separate ownership, or
crossing rights of way, shall not be made tributary to the collection system serving this facility unless
a permit for the construction and operation of the tributary line has been issued by the Division of
Water Quality.
A. (4.) WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
No later than 180 days after the effective date of this permit, the Permittee shall submit to the
Division a wastewater management plan. The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following
elements:
• Facilities assessment. Describe deficiencies and operational difficulties in the
existing collection and treatment systems that affect performance or permit
compliance. Identify potential improvements to correct those deficiencies. At a
minimum, evaluate the following considerations:
• inflow and infiltration,
• solids management
• clarifier operation
• equipment repairs and preventative maintenance,
• structural improvements
• Optimization plan. Develop a plan for optimization, rehabilitation, expansion and/or
replacement of the collection and treatment systems to achieve optimum
performance. Identify specific measures and key tasks, including those in the above
facilities assessment, and provide an estimated schedule for completion of each.
• Biosolids management plan. Develop an operations plan to be used (and describe
the procedures currently used) for managing septage / biomass in the treatment
system, including associated solids wasting and disposal, to promote optimum
treatment system performance. Identify operating parameters to be used and target
values or ranges of values where appropriate.
One copy should be submitted to the NPDES Unit at
NPDES Unit/Water Quality Section
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
An additional copy should be sent to the regional office at:
Asheville Regional Office/Water Quality Section
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, North Carolina 28801

Permit NCO039578
A. (5.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The permittee shall perform an annual
Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached table (in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 136).
Samples shall represent seasonal
variations. Unless otherwise indicated,
metals shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Trans-1,2dichbroethylene
Bis (2chloroethy) ether
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
1,1-dichloroelhylene
Bis (2chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen
1,2dichloropropane
Bis (2elhylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite
1,3dichbropropylene
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Kjeklahl nitrogen
Ethylbenzene
Buy benzyl phthatate
Oil and grease
Methyl bromide
2-chloronaphthalene
Phosphorus
Methyl chloride
4chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids
Methylene chloride
Chrysene
Hardness
1,1,22-tetrachloroethene
Dio-butyl phthalate
Antimony -
Tetradtloroethylene
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic
Toluene
Dbenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium -
1,1,1-tdchloroelhane
1,2dichlorobenzene
Cadmium
1,1,2-hichloroethans
1,3dichlorobenzene
Chromium
Trichbroethylene
1,4dichlorobenzene
Copper
Vinyl chloride
3,3dichlorobenzidine
Lead
Add -extractable compounds:
Diethyl phthalate
Mercury
Pchbro-mcreso
Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel
2chlorophenot
2,4dinitotoluene
Selenium
2,4dichlorophenol
2,6dinitrotoluene
Silver '
2,4dimethylphenol
1,2diphenylhydrazine
Thallium
4,6dinitroocresol
Fluoranthene
Zinc
2,4dinitrophenol
Fluorene
Cyanide
2-nNophenol
Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds
4-nitrophenol
Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile organic compounds:
Pentachlorophenol
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein
Phenol
Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrfle
2,4,6-trkhlorophenot
Indeno(1,2,3-4pyrene
Benzene
Base -neutral compounds:
Isophorone
Bromotorm
Aoenaphthene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride
Acenaphthylene
Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Anthracene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane
Benzidine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane
Benzo(a)anthracene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2chloroethytvinyl ether
Benzo(a)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Chloroform
3,4 benzoiluomnthene
Pyrene
Dichlorobromomelhane
Benzo(ghi)perylene
1,2,4-tdchlorobenzene
1,1dichloroethane
Benzo(k)ffuoranthene
1,2dichloroethane
Bis(2chloroethoxy) methane
Test results shall be reported
to the Division in DWQ Form- A MR-PPA1 or in a form approved
by the Director within 90 days of sampling. The report shall be submitted to the following
address: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.

5I P'f,
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
BUNCOMBE COUNTY
SS.
NORTH CAROLINA
FSEP 10 2002
DENR - VWER QUALITY
POMT SOURCE BRAWN
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said
County and State, duly commissioned, qualified and
authorized.by law to administer oaths, personally
appeared Darryl Rhymes who,.being first duly
sworn, deposes and says: that he is the Legal
Billing Clerk of TheAsheville Citizen -Times
Company, engaged in publication of a newspaper
known as The Asheville Citizen -Times, published,
issued, and entered as second class mail in the City
of Asheville;,,in said County. and State; that she is
authorized to make this affidavit and sworn
statement; that the notice or other legal
advertisement, a true copy of.which is attached''
hereto, was,pu,lished in TheKAsheville'Citizen-
Times'on the, fo,llowing.dates:; August ..-27,'200
And that the said newspaper, in which said notice,.
.paper, document,or legal advertisement were
published were, at the time of each and every
publication, a newspaper meeting all of the
requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of
the General Statues of North Carolina and was a
qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section
1-597 of the General Statues of North Carolina.
( Agnature of person 4ing affida t)
Sworn to and subscribed before me the 4th day of
September, 2002
(No(ary ( hhc)
My Commission expires the 20th day of June 2005.
U . 1s.

1�
�yal,Il: ND NORTH CAROLINA loll`
STATE M NORTH NAGS E
ENWRONIXEONI: MANAGEMENT
�'COMMIS$IONINBDES UNIT Jackson County
:. � 1617 MAIL SERVICE'CENTER -
RALEIGH NC 27699.1617
NOINPIDAT10NZIF. INTENTSTEWATER TO PERMIT EA AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
: NPDES,WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the ISasis d thorough �taM review
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State,
duly commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to
administer oaths, personally appeared ........... 9C1z...... dtlprl.....................
or rramr, """' " u
public meeting fortnapr6poaeg .ti lt.
ht
is first duly sworn, -deposes and says: that he -she is
should the phislan jeCat" a signrfl,,nit.who
delyyreel of publlc intorest `�i i °t 0 *
CoPies,d,the draft permit nn` other ,
- /
•,
suPPoran%informatbn oridlla used to.
I'delermlhe; WndidonsepresaMlry the .,.
draft azeravallable upon request.:
, ...............................................,. .............. •..................... ................ •
"•".........�.......P .... .........
(Owner, rtner, ublisher, or other ofllcer or em to ee authorized to make this affidavit)
permit
and payment,ol the cosGd Ihe repro•
duct Mall comment ar=Irequests
F
'
..
for Information NC;Div mss o1 .,
rInf
_ ,. of The Sylva Herald and, Rural engaged in.the•publication of a news -
'1 s
Water Oualiry et the abeve addleas or
call Ms. Chris Jeckson;a} (919) 733•,::,
known as The S Iva Herald-and,Ruralite published, issued; and
paper y
5063: estenelofi 63&` Pleaaa Include the ;
..
NPOES permit numbertatleehed) In any ;
entered as second Class,mail' in the Town of Sy Iva, in said County and,
communlcatlon.,•Interested parson; ;
may`also-visitthe..Division ofWater
ouautyy.ar3slz N sagetiury'strest,. !
State; that he -she is authorized to make this affidavit and.swom'state-:
- . RaleigL NCN476W,11aS)ibotweeo the
hours;,d;e:00 a.m. and.500 pm* to,:
+ ..
,. ment, that the notice of other legaliadvertrsement a: trot; copy.of,which--
<•
reviiw lofgrinatiun on file.: °
NPOESIVOTiit Number'NCo030576�'.
' ---' ` - _
IS attached heretO�rwaCJputilishcd-.:in TheISylJa;Herald-arid Ruralite;on, .'
Tuckaselgee`+WBS AuthJf+iant J, rp0
l 8oa fast Sviva; NC 2W79; has applied.
the following dates;
'..
for faciliry,tacated In Veekaon County
-
dischorgIng wastewater .Into Tucks-.
rsegee River: in ihe't,I 10 Tannessell
,.
9 2.00 2-
River Basin: Currently are weler quellry,!
.Z.
.............................:.. ...... ...7 ... .. ...............................................
limited. This discharge may affect
future all"atlOne In this.ponlan of the
U
receiving stream: - .
22 .
SEP 1 1 LCUL
..................................................................................................................
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or
legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every
such publication; a newspaper meeting all of the requirements and qual-
ifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina and
was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section 1-597 of the
General Statutes of North Carolina.
This................9. day of ...................... .....I .-..... Via. L.......
.......................................W�......................................................
(Signature of person making affidavit)
Sworn to and subscribed before m$, this ......................................
dayof ...................... .....'....................................:., .... .........
...........................:::� .......% ...........................................
Notary. Plic
/
MyCommission expires: .... .........��-..... .;/ ................ .........:.........

Tuckaseigee W&S Auth. (NC0039578)
Subject: Tuckaseigee W&S Auth. (NC0039578)
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:26:19 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Hi, Natalie.
Thanks for the additional info on the Tuckaseigee W&S Authority permit
renewal. You mentioned the intent of the facility to expand in the near
future (as evidenced by their request for speculative limits). Given the
sensitive resources present on the Tuckaseigee, the Service is interested
in any changes to the permit requirements of this facility. Please keep us
informed of any developments.
Thanks again and have a good weekend, Sara
Sara E. Ward
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Ext. 30; Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
I of 1 10/24/02 12:11 PM

'Soeo sr"
A UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
sm .W REGION 4
$ ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
a o2 61 FORSYTH STREET
< PROS i01
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
b 002
_ocr
Ms. Natalie S1e1Ta
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBI: Proposed Final NPDES Permit torTuck;>ci ,ce AV\VTP
Permit No. NC003957S
Dear Ms. Sierra:
D
OCT 2 8 2002
I i
L 'hr.'i t..,
i,—O�um-ITY
preiH-
POlki souhE SRAKCH
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR MOA, we have completed review of the proposed
final permit referenced above. We have no objections to the proposed permit conditions. We
request that we be afforded an additional review opp0111-nity only if further significant changes are
made to this permit prior to issuance. Otherwise, please send us one copy of the final permit
when issued.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
1N-Vval� �\ � o t
Marshall Hyatt, Environmental Scientist
Permits, Grants and Technical Assistance Branch
Walcr Nlanaecmcnt Division
Intemet Address (URL) • http://vnvw.opa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Pdnled with Vegetable 01 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30 % Poslconsumer)

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
SEP 1 7 2002
Ms. Natalie Sierra
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: NPDES Permit for Tuckaseigee W WTP
Permit No. NCO039578
Dear Ms. Sierra:
SEP 19 2002
L_
D-'iR - WATFR 01'.iLITY
POI4T SOURCE BRANCH
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR MOA, we have completed review of the permit
referenced above. We have no objections to the proposed permit conditions. We request that we
be afforded an additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made to the permit
prior to issuance, or if significant comments regarding the draft permit are received. Otherwise,
please send us one copy of the final permit when issued.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Marshall Hyatt, Environmental Scientist
Permits, Grants and Technical Assistance Branch
Water Management Division
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Racyclable • Printed with Vegelable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30 % Poslconsumer)

Re: comments on NCO039578 - Tuckasiegee W WTP
Subject: Re: comments on NCO039578 - Tuckasiegee WWTP
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 14:17:33 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: Natalie Sierra <Natalie. Sierra@ ncmail.net>
thanks for the quick reply and the clarification for how you handle WET
violations and numeric limits for action level criteria. I agree with
your rationale - just wanted to have you state it. Will send a no
comment letter for this permit. Marshall
I of 1 9/17/02 2:20 PM

comments on NCO039578 - Tuckasiegee W WTP
Subject: comments on NCO039578 - Tuckasiegee WWTP
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:36:54 -0400
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail]
just a couple of quick comments.
- the City did fail one "routine" chronic WET test in 11/01, but did
pass its subsequent tests. I'm not exactly sure what NC's policy is re
how many WET violations are needed before requiring numeric limits for
action level criteria where RP is found to exist. Was your rationale
here that since the subsequent WET tests were passed, no numeric limit
for Ag was needed here?
- cyanide should be expressed as "total cyanide", to be consistent w/ 40
CFR 122.45(c)(2).
I of 1 9/ 17/02 2:12 PM

Draft Permit-TWSA #I-NC0039578
Subject: Draft Permit-TWSA #1-NC0039578
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 15:32:52 -0400
From: Matt Matthews <matt. matthews @ ncmail. net>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: Natalie Sierra <[e-mail]>
Natalie,
I've reviewed the subject draft permit and have one minor comment.
The stream class on the outfall map (C) doesn't agree with the fact
sheet (C-Trout). Previously, we've had it listed as "C-Trout."
Thanks for the opportunity to comment,
Matt
Matt Matthews
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
v-[phone]
f-[phone]
MailTO:[e-mail]
------------------------------------------
A few observations and much reasoning lead to error;
many observations and a little reasoning to truth.
--Alexis Carrel
I of 1 9/ 17/02 2:13 PM

Sept. 18, 2002
Attn: Ms. Natalie Sierra
NC DENR
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Water & Sewer
Authority
LSEIGEE
POINT SOURCE BRANCH ___ - AUTY
L E BRANCH
Subject: Permit renewal, TWSA Plant # 1 (NC 0039578)
Dear Ms. Sierra,
A review of the data, used to tabulate the cyanide results reported on page 10 of the renewal
application, shows that all the higher levels of cyanide were reported during a six month period of
2000. The higher numbers obtained during this period resulted in the higher average reported on
the renewal application. We don't know if these higher numbers were a result of something
inherent to the influent or a result of something in the treatment process.
The analysis conducted since this time shows levels to be well below the proposed permit limit. I
have attached the analysis for your review, with the pertinent data highlited. I would like to
request that the frequency of analysis as proposed in the draft permit be revisited. Ideally the
frequency of cyanide and silver analysis would match that proposed for cadmium and copper.
Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated.
If you have questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached directly
at 828-586-9318 or e-mail at [e-mail].
Sincer ly
Stan Bryson IID
Wastewater Operations Superintendent
Tuckaseigee Water & Sewer Authority
L
1246 West Main St. Sylva, NC 28779 • [phone] • Fax: [phone]

1998
1/2C
2/1 C
3/2E
4/16
5/19
5/22
6/23
7/17
8/11
8/14
9/24
10/1
11/17
11 /20
12/2
1999
1 /28
2/16
2/19
3/30
4/28
5/18
6128
7/8
8/10
8/13
9/28
10/5
11 /9
11/12
12/20
2000
FLOW
1.027
<.002
<.01
1.026
<.002
<.01
0.936
<.002
<.01
1.083
<.002
<.01
0.681
<.002
<.01
0.726
0.007
<.01
0.939
<.01
0.733
<.01
0.526 0.004
<.01
0.799 0.004
<.01
0.894
<.01
0.935
<.01
0.814 <.002
0.902 <.002
<.01
0.792
<.01
0.901
1 <.01
0.770
0.002 <.01
1.160
<.002 <.01
0.876
<.01
0.894
<.01
0.886
0.003 <.001
0.480
<.001
0.856
<.001
0.821
<.002 <.001
0.754
0.006 <.001
0.828
<.001
1.046
<.001
0.781
0.004 <.001
0.833 <.002 <.001
0.615
<.001
METALS ANALYSIS
TWSA PLANT # 1
M COPPER SILVER Cn- Ibs Cu Ibs
0.01
<.01 <.05
0.02 <.05
0.02 <.05
0.02 <.05
0.05 <.05
0.03 <.05
0.02 <.05
0.05 <,05
0.05 <.05
0.02 <.05
0.05 <.05
0.05 <.05
0.04 <.05
0.022 <.05
,01 <.05
01
<.05
0.02 <.05
0.03 <.05
0.03 <.05
0.01 <.05
0.022 <.002
0.044 <.002
0.036 <.002
0.024 0.002
0.012 <.002
0.024 <.002
0.016 <.002
0.06 0.005
0.039 0.004
0.038 0.002
1 /26
0.899
<.001
0.033 0.003
2/22
0.931
0.002 <.001
0.012 0.002
2/25
0.931
<.002 <.001
0.007 <.002
3/16
0.898
<.001
0.016 <.002
4/26
1.106
<.001
0.028 <.002
5/16
0.860
0.072 <.001
0.032 <.002
5/19
0.711
0.002 <.001
0.053 0.002
6/14
0.692
<.001
0.049 <.002
7/20
0.637
<.001
0.029 <.002
8/22
0.788
0.1 <.001
0.02 <.002
8125
0.946
0.081 <.001
0.01 <.002
9/7
0.721
<.001
0.017 <.002
10/3
0.797
<.001
0.046 0.003
11 /14
0.732
0.051 <.001
0.029 0.004
11 /17
0.879
0.046 <.001
0.013 0.003
12/6
0.775
<.001
0.013 <.002
P ' V'e- Sr*O CO h S r C� �-CZa- r ©►�
� ��•s Q f y Soil
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.042
0.018
0.027
0.013
0.000
0.022
0.000
0.038
0.026
0.000
0.016
0.000
0.516
0.012
0.657
0.639
0.311
0.337
0.000
0.171
0.156
0.181
0.284
0.182
0.157
0.306
0.219
0.133
0.373
0.390
0.272
0.165
0.000
0.000
0.128
0.290
0.219
0.075
0.163
0.176
0.257
0.164
0.075
0.166
0.140
0.391
0.271
0.195
0.247
0.093
0.054
0.120
0.258
0.230
0.314
0.283
0.154
0.131
0.079
0.102
0.306
0.177
0.095
0.084
Ag Ibs
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.014
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.033
0.028
0.010
0.022
0.016
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.012
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.020
0.024
0.022
0.000
4-�xl S IAYIC�

METALS ANALYSIS
TWSA PLANT # 1
2001
FLOW
CYANIDE
CADMIUM
COPPER
SILVER
Cn- Ibs Cu Ibs Ag Ibs
1/4
0.624
<.001
0.048
0.007
0.250 0.036
1/23
0.977
<.001
0.012
0.002
0.098 0.016
2/20
0.919
0.003
<.001
0.017
<.002
0.023 0.130 0.000
2/23
0.958
<.002
<.001
0.014
<.002
0.000 0.112 0.000
3/21
1.035
<.001
0.015
0.002
0.129 0.017
4/11
0.951
<.001
0.018
0.002
0.143 0.016
5/15
0.642
0.004
<.001
0.026
0.005
0.021 0.139 0.027
5/18
0.631
0.008
<.001
0.025
0.004
0.042 0.132 0.021
6/27
0.896
<.001
0.014
<.002
0.105 0.000
7/11
0.684
<.001
0.014
<.002
0.080 0.000
8/21
0.836
<.002
<.001
0.013
<.002
0.000 0.091 0.000
8/24
0.855
0.004
<.001
0.013
<.002
0.029 0.093 0.000
9/25
1.044
<.002
<.001
0.017
<.002
0.000 0.148 0.000
10/30
0.877
<.001
0.020
0.003
0.146 0.022
11/13
0.753
0.002
<.001
0.034
0.005
0.013 0.214 0.031
11/16
0.787
<.002
<.001
0.009
0.002
0.000 0.059 0.013
12/7
0.881
<.001
0.011
<.002
0.081 0.000
2002
1/22
0.786
<.001
0.012
<.002
0.079 0.000
2/12
0.644
<.002
<.001
0.011
<.002
0.000 0.059 0.000
2/15
0.833
<.002
<.001
0.01
0.005
0.000 0.069 0.035
3/28
0.926
<.001
0.013
0.003
0.100 0.023
4/4
0.985
<.001
0.017
0.0041
0.140 0.034
5/7
1.102
<.002
<.001
0.015
0.0021
0.000 0.138 0.019
5/10
0.95
<.002
<.001
0.012
<.002
0.000 0.095 0.000
6/27
0.88
<.001
0.013
<.002
0.095 0.000
7/23
0.69
<.001
0.037
<.002
0.213 0.000
AVG 0.837 0.011 0.000 0.024 0.001 0.074 0.161 0.007
MAX 0.100 0.010 0.060 0.007 0.657 0.391 0.036
# of samples 38 72 72 72
Cyanide(m x) =0.1 mg/I * .788 * 8.34= 0.66 Ibs

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO039578
Facility Information
Applican&Facility Name:
Tuckasei ee Water and Sewer Authority/TWSA Plant #1
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 1051; S Iva, North Carolina 28779
Facility Address:
River Road (NCSR 1359) south of S Iva
Permitted Flow
1.5 MGD
Type of Waste:
domestic (94%) and industrial (6%) no pretreatment program
Facility/Permit Status:
Class III /Active; Renewal
Count
Jackson Count
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Tuckase ee River
Regional Office:
Asheville
Stream Classification:
C-Trout
State Grid / USGSQuad:'
F6SW, S Iva South
303(d) Listed?
no
Permit Writer:
Natalie V. Sierra
Subbasin:
04-04-02
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
286
------
Lat. 350 20' 59" N Long. 83° 14' 21 ' W
Summer 7Q1110 (cfs)
165
Winter 7Q 10 (cfs):
199
30Q2 (cfs)
297
Average Flow (cfs):
715
IWC (%):
1.4%
BACKGROUND
The Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority's (TWSA) Jackson County WWTP has a
permitted discharge of 1.5 MGD into the Tuckasegee River in the lower Little Tennessee River
Basin. Serving a population of 5318, it is one of the largest municipal dischargers in the Little
Tennessee River Basin. It is currently discharging at about 60% of its permitted capacity.
The facility has inflow and infiltration (UI) problems which create low influent TSS and
BOD levels, making it difficult to achieve the required 85% removal. The renewal application
states that TWSA has completed an III study but the results and recommendations are not yet
complete. It is anticipated that the facility's 1/I problems will be thoroughly addressed in the
near future.
TWSA's Jackson County WWTP has had numerous problems with TSS violations and
pH control. Addition of caustic lime appears to have aided the pH problem, but the TSS
violations continue. It is the Asheville Regional Office's (ARO) opinion that more than anything
else, the facility needs deeper clarifiers in order to consistently comply with the TSS limits in the
NPDES permit.
The last permit was issued on March 30, 1998 and expires October 31, 2002. The facility
completed EPA Application 2A, which was submitted April 4, 2002 and acknowledged April 14,
2002. The application lacked a complete primary pollutant analysis, and a request letter was sent
to obtain this information on May 8, 2002. The facility has requested that its metals analyses be
dropped or reduced to quarterly due to the lack of significant industrial users (SIUs) discharging
to the plant.
In addition to NPDES permit NC0039578, the TWSA also holds non -discharge permit
WQ0005763.
Fact sheet
NITES NC001957K Renewal
Pair I

Instream Monitoring and Verification of Existing Conditions and DMR Data Review
This facility discharges to the Tuckasegee River (classified C-Trout). The Tuckasegee
River, located within sub -basin 04-04-02, is not listed as an impaired stream [303 (d)-listed as of
2000]. The 2002 draft basin plan for the Little Tennessee River Basin lists the bioclassification in
the Tuckasegee River as excellent, an improvement over the previous rating of good. Ambient
monitoring of the Tuckasegee River also indicates excellent water quality.
Effluent data from January 1999-April 2002 were reviewed. Summary effluent data
appear in the table below.
Flow
Temp.
pH
D.O.
TRC
NHA
TSS
Fecal
BOD
Total
Total
(MGD)
(deg C)
(mg/L)
(ug/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
coliform
(mg/L)
Phosp.
Nitrogen
(#/100mL)
( mg/L)
(mg/L)
Ave. 0.8
17.03
5.77
7.68
16.88
3.31
25.55
150.9
15.8
20.67
2.5
Min 1.75
23.8
7.1
87.5
28
21.8
326.5
10800
110.4
44
3.5
Max 0.33
8.6
3.2
0.8
<10
0.3
3.8
2
1.6
3
1.5
Temperatures appear seasonally appropriate and within acceptable ranges. It should be
noted that the DMRs frequently stated that quality control was not met for the BOD analysis.
The frequency with which this occurred is unacceptable, and a note of it will be made in the
cover letter.
In addition, the influent BOD and TSS data were analyzed with respect to the effluent
values of these parameters to ascertain the frequency with which 85% removal was being met. It
is evident from the plot that the facility is frequently unable to meet 85% removal for TSS,
perhaps because of the often low influent values (perhaps due to I11). The influent values for
BOD are also somewhat low, but the facility appears to be able to achieve 85% removal for BOD
much of the time.
The facility has traditionally experienced problems with pH, but these have largely been
brought under control within the last year.
The Division also reviewed over three years of Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
for metals and toxicants (see Reasonable Potential Analysis).
Correspondence
The Asheville Regional Office (ARO) conducted five compliance evaluation inspections
and two compliance biomonitoring inspections during the term of the last permit. The
compliance biomonitoring inspections both resulted in a "pass" on the toxicity test. The
compliance evaluation inspections describe the plant as well operated, but state that the plant is
very much in need of an upgrade. It is particularly stressed in the most recent reports that deeper
clarifiers are the single most important upgrade the plant could make in order to achieve regular
compliance with TSS and BOD limits.
The facility has been given eleven Notices of Violation (NOVs): nine involved violations
of the TSS limit (both weekly and monthly average), three involved violations of the BOD limit
(both weekly and monthly average), and three involved pH violations. Civil penalties were
assessed for the majority of these violations. The facility also received a Notice of Deficiency
(NOD) for sampling for toxicity at the incorrect location.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
Waste Load Allocation (WLA)
The Division prepared the last WLA in 1992. The previous and current effluent limits
were based on guidelines and water quality standards. The Division has judged previous
parameters and limits to be appropriate for renewal with some exceptions (see Reasonable
Potential Analysis). The facility does not currently have an ammonia limit, only ammonia
1" aPI Sh,'el
iVPDFS NC0039518 Rene«ul
Pass- 2

monitoring. Ammonia toxicity based limits would result in a summer limit of 56.4 mg/L and.a
winter limit of 137.0 mg/L. Under current Division policy, this does not warrant a limit.
Moreover, the facility's DMR data indicate that the facility shows no potential to exceed these
limits.
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The Division conducted EPA -recommended analyses to determine the reasonable
potential for toxicants to be discharged by this facility, based on over three years of DMR data
(1999- April 2002). Calculations included cyanide, cadmium, copper and silver.
Results suggest reasonable potential for the facility to discharge cyanide and silver. No
reasonable potential exists for the discharge of cadmium and copper. Since silver is an action
level parameter, only a series of toxicity failures would trigger a limit for this parameter.
Monitoring will remain at 2/month. A limit for cyanide with weekly monitoring will be
imposed; while monitoring for copper and cadmium can be decreased to quarterly.
Priority Pollutant Analysis (PPA)
The priority pollutant analysis for this facility has not been completed at this time. This
permit was submitted well in advance of an NPDES mailing that outlined the new application
requirements for Permittees. The superintendent is awaiting the installation of an influent pump
station before taking the new samples. I spoke with him on August 9, 2002 and explained that
the permit would be drafted with the understanding that limits and/or monitoring may be added
to the permit in accordance with the results of the ppa.
Once the ppa is submitted, an updated fact sheet will be provided to EPA and the regional
office noting any resulting changes.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
In keeping with Division policies and guidance, the following will be incorporated into the
permit:
• Cyanide limit and increased monitoring
• Decreased (quarterly) monitoring for cadmium and copper
• Wastewater management plan/optimization study
• Ammonia reopener condition as per agreement with EPA
New Weekly Average and Daily Maximum limits are derived from the latest NC/EPA policies
considering'/2 FA Vs and allowable concentrations based on reasonable potential.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: August 21, 2002
Permit Scheduled to Issue: October 11, 2002
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Natalie Sierra at [phone] ext. 551.
NAME: DATE:
Fact sh"CL
NPDES NC00Q19i73 Rcnow:il
Pagr 3

Facility Name=
TWSA#1
NPDF.S # =
NCO039578
Qw(MGD)=
1.5
7Q IOs (cfs)=
165
IWC (%) =
1.39
FINAL RESULTS
Silver
Max. Pred Cw 171.10
Allowable Cw 4.32
IESULTS
itd Dev. 12.9319
dean 6.3
N. 2.0675
of data points 52
Factor
Value
50.00 pg/I
Pred Cw
171.10 pgfl
vable Cw
4.32 pg/l
Parameter = Silver
Sumdard= 0.06 pg/I
Date
n
<
Actual Data
BDL=1/2DL
1128/99
1
<
50.0
25.0
2/16/99
2
<
50.0
25A
2/19/99
3
<
50.0
25.0
3130/99
4
<
50.0
25.0
4/28/99
5
<
50.0
25.0
5/18/99
6
<
2.0
1.0
6128/99
7
<
2.0
1.0
7/8199
8
<
2.0
1.0
8/10/99
9
2.0
2.0
8112/99
10
<
2.0
1.0
9/28/99
11
<
2.0
1.0
10/5/99
12
<
2.0
1.0
11/19/99
13
2.0
2.0
12/20/99
14
2.0
2.0
1/26/00
15
3.0
3.0
2/22/00
16
2.0
2.0
2/23/00
17
<
2.0
1.0
3/16/00
18
<
2.0
LO
4/26/00
19
<
2.0
1.0
5/16/99
20
<
2.0
1.0
5/19/99
21
20
2.0
6/14/00
22
<
2.0
1.0
7/20/00
23
<
2.0
LO
8/21/00
24
<
2.0
1.0
8/22/00
25
<
2.0
1.0
9/7/00
26
<
2.0
1.0
10/3/00
27
3.0
3.0
11/14/00
28
4.0
4.0
11/17/00
29
3.0
3.0
12/6/00
30
<
2.0
1.0
I/4/01
31
7.0
7.0
1/23/01
32
2.0
2.0
2/20/01
33
<
2.0
1.0
2/23/01
34
<
2.0
1.0
3/21/01
35
2.0
2.0
4/II/01
36
2.0
2.0
5115101
37
5.0
5.0
5/19/01
38
4.0
4.0
7/2/01
39
<
2.0
1.0
7/11/01
40
<
2.0
1.0
8/21/01
41
<
2.0
LO
8/24/01
42
<
2.0
1.0
9125/01
43
<
2.0
IA
11/1/01
44
3.0
3.0
11/13/01
45
5.0
5.0
11/14/01
46
2.0
2.0
12/7/01
47
<
2.0
LO
1/22/02
48
<
2.0
1.0
2/12/02
49
<
2.0
ID
2/15/02
50
5.0
5.0
3/28102
51
3.0
3.0
4/4/02
52
4.0
4.0

Faa'Mi, No =
NpIll'sf=
[M'(AIGm
9c,/0a(,fx)=
IWC I%)=
i TWSA MI
NCINUYSJ9
1.5
10
1.39
FINM. NF_SULTS
["",inln
lo- Npl Cw
All —blc Cw
13b
2A d
HGSULTS
Sld Dc,
1.3392
Mon
ON
CV.
14201
Nunlncr
m dam Wlnb
52
Mull Fmm =
2]E
Ma. Value
5.0 "ll
M., Pal Cw
1.3 6 ygn
Ali—[cCw
a8"n
Varu-11- CaJmivm
SlaMmd= 1 UJ V,n
Dale
II
AC..l Dau
BDI`@DL
ll/
< 100
5o
V16,99
2
< 100
50
YI99
3
< toll
5,0
V3 W
4
< 100
50
,-.
5
< 100
50
,1.
6
< 10
0,5
Mww
J
< 10
0.5
1.
8
< 10
0.5
wIM1W
Y
< 1 0
05
wtw
10
< to
0.5
W!wvi
11
< 1,11
05
1W
12
< 10
05
II)1+
13
< 1 0
0,5
tw-w
14
< to
05
IRMp
15
< 1.11
05
Li1tll
16
< 10
05
M3A0
17
< 10
0.5
3110CM
18
< 1.0
0.5
4 L?MM
19
< Ill
05
511 H
20
< 10
05
5/19N9
21
< 10
05
NIJNJ
22
< 10
05
7R0.AU
23
< L0
OS
N_'IMO
24
< 1.0
0.5
MMO
25
< 10
05
90MW
26
< 10
05
IW3N0
27
< IU
05
lllti J
29
< 10
as
11117M
29
< 1.0
0.5
IVb
30
< 1.0
05
1/4NI
31
< 10
05
IR3N1
32
< 10
05
YGWI
33
< 10
05
Y23o1
33
< I
US
MIMI
35
< 10
05
LIINI
36
< 10
U5
SI15AI
37
c LU
0.5
5/18NI
39
< 10
05
7/2M1
39
< LU
US
7II1 111
40
< 10
05
MIMI
41
10
10
M4MI
J2
< 1.0
0.5
VOW
43
< 1.0
05
11/L(11
di
< 1 0
05
11/13A1
45
< 10
05
11/14NI
46
< 10
05
inMI
J]
< 10
OS
InV02
J8
< 10
U.5
N1102
JY
< 10
05
NOM2
50
< 10
US
3CM2
51
< 10
05
414M
52
< 1.0
05

Facility Name =
TWSA #1
NPDES # =
NCO039578
Qw (MGD) =
1.5
7QIOs (efs)=
165
!WC(%)=
1.39
FINAL RESULTS
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw 518.8
Allowable Cw 359.8
iULTS
Dev.
IN
of data points
Factor =
Value
Pred Cw
viable Cw
29.4407
16.8
1.7490
24
5.19
100.0 pg/I
518.8 pg/l
359.8 pg/1
Parameter= Cyanide
Standard = 1 5.0 pg/l
Date
n
<
Actual Data
BDL=1/2DL
2/16/99
1
2
2.0
2119/99
2
<
20
10.0
5/18/99
3
3
3.0
8/10/99
4
<
2
1.0
8/12/99
5
6
6.0
2/22/00
6
2
2.0
2/23/00
7
<
2
1.0
5/16/99
8
72
72.0
5/19/99
9
2
2.0
8/21100
10
100
100.0
8/22/00
11
81
81.0
11/14/00
12
51
51.0
11/17/00
13
46
46.0
2/20/01
14
3
3.0
2/23/01
15
<
2
1.0
5/15/01
16
4
4.0
5/ 18/01
17
8
8.0
8/21/01
18
<
2
1.0
8/24/01
19
4
4.0
9/25/01
20
<
2
1.0
11/13/01
21
2
2.0
11/14/01
22
<
2
LO
2/12/02
23
<
2
1.0
Feb-02
24
<
2
1.0

Fua'ilitl A'orne v
TYSA aI
,lpllf Y=
NCW3Y5]N
�e1Mcu1=
1s
115
IWC (RI=
139
1'I7
R6S111:1
[""",
MaFal C. NR.J
Alb WaCv SOJ.M
Rf: UTA S
SW Xt.
IL9512
M.
2L5
CV,
0551)
NunYv
nl Jala rynnb
52
MUII F.1-
LM
Max. Value
530 yg/I
Mae. FW Cw
86.7 ygA
A2—.1a Cu
5039 ygA
£amrloee=
LandurJ = 1 ) O y9/1
Dmc
11 1
Acmal Data
BDUInDI.
".
1 <
IU11
5.0
Y19M
3
300
30.0
Vogl
J
30.0
311.11
V2.
5
10.11
IGO
"I.
1,
22.B
22,0
MMN
]
l o
1 0
JrxN9
8
36D
3611
.t.
9
240
24,1)
Vll+vw
10
120
130
wWW
11
240
240
1.S^
12
160
160
una.
13
AD
3N0
1 S-.
IJ
380
33.0
I1m11
15
330
12.0
W-..
IM1
DO
2,0
2/21W
O
]II
MO
3/I600
IS
160
160
4n W
19
28.0
u0
5/I6NY
20
320
320
511,a Y
21
530
530
W14M
22
a90
JYO
LMW
23
29.0
2Y0
1V21.IX1
24
200
200
WY)O
25
mB
mn
9nM
2n
170
170
INSW
27
a60
460
11/1N
28
290
290
II/17d%1
29
130
130
12/MMI
30
130
130
IpAI
31
ag0
480
IR3AI
32
120
120
MW
33
120
120
WMI
34
141)
la0
MIMI
35
150
150
41IIA1
Jfi
ISO
1.0
5115MI
37
2ti0
2M1O
5/IMI
39
25.0
250
]RNI
39
140
110
7/1 DOI
b
NO
140
Y lffll
JI
13.0
130
.Y/24A1
42
130
130
9RSA1
U
ITO
17.0
1llift
11
200
20.0
II113A1
J5
340
340
IllliAl
Jfi
90
90
12/Ifl
J)
110
110
inM2
48
120
120
LI W2
49
110
III)
2/15f2
50
100
too
Mml
51
130
130
llafl
52
170
170

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary July 16, 2C
FACILITY REQUIREMENT YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY /UN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Trim' American Cnrporalino Perm cbr lim: 901G
INS -
-
-
N
-
--
Pass
-
--
Pasa
--
--
NCO086029/001 Begin 2,1/2001 Frequency:Q Jan Apr Sul Oct
+ NonComp'. Single
INS Pass
-
-
Pas.
-
--
Pass
-
-
P..a
-
-
Coury Randolph Region: WSRO Subbwm: YAD09
Most Paw
-
-
P ..
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
PF:0022 S,o]
20p1 Pass
-
-
Pass
-
--
Pass
-
--
Pass
--
--
7QI0:0 IWC(%):100 tad.+:
2002 Pass
-
-
Pairs
-
Troy WN%TP Perm chr her:)9N; ifpf L2MGD chr lint 94%
INS now
-
-
Fad
Fad.Fakt
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
--
-
NCG028916/001 Begin: 1/IR001 Frequency:Q Ian Apr Jul Oct
+ NonComp:Single
1999 Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Ci unty Montgomery Region: FRO Subbwfno YAD15
NOR III
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
PF:0.84 Srydtl
2001 ft.
-
-
Pass
-
-
new
-
-
Fal
-IN
>10)
9Q10'. 0.35 IWC(%):29 no,
2002 Pass
-
-
Pas.
-
TryoP W\17P Perm clv lim: 37%
INS -
-
Paw
-
-
P.
-
-
Pass
--
-
Paw
NC00216011001 Begin:411/1999 Frequency: Q PIF + Mar Jun Sep Doc
+ N.aC.ou,Singlc
INS --
-
Pass
--
-
Fail
Pass
-
Cut
>24
45.1
Pass
County: Polk Region: ARO Subbsin: BRD06
0d00 -
-
Paw
-
-
Paw
-
-
Pas
-
-
Fad
PF: 1.5 Special
2001 408
>74
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pas
-
-
Pass
2010:400 IWC(q,)_32,0 trade,
2002 -
-
P.ss
-
-
Turkaeigea WSA W\\TP PERMCHRLIM 14%
Y INS -
Paw
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
--
Pass
-
NCO039518/001 Begin:5/111998 Frquccut, Q PIT + Feb May Aug Nov
+ NonComry Single
INS -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
--
Pass
-
--
Pass
-
County: Jackson Region: ARO Subbaln: LT1,02
2000 --
Paw
--
-
Paa
-
--
Paw
-
-
Pas
-
PR L5 Noted
2001 -
Pea
-
-
Paw
-
-
Pas
-
-
Fail
13
2Q10: 165.0 IWC(-/e):1.38 tad,,:
2002 >3
Paw
Pass
TVCO Electronics Carp. Penn cbr Iim: 90& upon reloc. to N.
Buffalo Cr. chr Ilm 8.4%
INS H
-
-
H
-
-
H
-
-
H
-
-
NCO0858211001 Bcgin:91112001) Frtyuenry:Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
+ NonCran,singlc
INS H
-
-
H
-
-
H
-
--
H
-
-
Counry: Guilford Region: WSRO Subowin: CPF02
2000 H
-
-
H
-
--
H
-
H
H
-
-
PF:00288 Sit
Mu H
-
-
H
-
--
H
--
-
H
-
-
2Q10:0 IWC(%):IOD lad,,:
2002 M
H
Tyrell Coast (RO) Plant Perm 241hr plfac trranit 90%mysid(gunb)
INS -
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
-
-
-
-
NC0086924/)01 Bebro5g/2001 Frequrnry:Q Jan ApNul Oct
+ NonComp:
INS -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
County: Tyrell Region'. WARO Subbssin: PAS53
2000 -
-
-
-
-
--
--
--
--
-
-
-
PF:0216 5ltttim
2001 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
-
-
9010:0 IWC(-/.):I00 ceder:
2002 N
-
-
N
-
Tssom Foods lne,llarni Division Permdulim: 19%
INS 50
-
-
-72
-
-
25
-
-
>7,2
-
-
NCOW512&Nl Begln:1011/1999 Frequency:Q Ian Apr Jul Oct
+ NonComp:SinJe
1999 5.1
-
-
>72
-
--
>7.2
-
--
-72
-
-
Court, Ircdell Region: MRO Snbbain: YAD06
2000 Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
-
BR/Pass
--
-
PF: 0.5 Salad
2WI Pass
-
-
Paw
-
-
Paw
-
-
Pass
7QI0: 43 IW(Y-%):1.8 tole,:
2W2 Pass
-
-
Pass
-
UNC-Chapel Hill Power Plans Perm 241u an monit epic Rhd (Pab)
199E Fw
Pass
-
Pasa
-
--
Pas
-
--
Fail
Pas
-
NC00253051001 Beglv:9/II2001 Fe,-,: 5OWD/A
chdOomp:
INS Pass
-
-
Pasa
-
-
Pass
-
-
Fad
56.1
561
County Orange Region: HBO Subbssin: CPF06
2000 Fail
>100
>VR
NRTail
248
56.1,56.1t
Pass
--
--
Pass
--
--
PF:0,049 s"id
2001 F.,
05
>90
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
]QUY 0.0 IWC(%):I00 Orde,
200E H
H
H
H
H
Unimin Co"Mica Operno nns (001) Perm aln Iim'. 10%
1998 -
Pass
-
-
Fail
Patent)
--
Pa.
--
-
FaLP.syS)
--
NC000036liNi Begin.3/111997 Frequenry:Q PIT + Feb May Aug Nov
+ NonComp:Singk
INS -
Paa
-
-
lane
P.
-
Pas
--
-
Pa.
-
Cognate: Avery Rogion: ARO Subbssin'. FRB06
2030 -
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
--
Pas
--
--
Pass
--
PF 2.16 SPuidd
2001 -
Fal
>20s)
12.25
Paw
-
-
Fail
>20
>20
Pass
-
7QI0:30 IWC(%):10 under:
2002 -
kale
now
-
Pnss
Britain Cam. Perm cN hin 11%
Y 1998 Pas
-
-
Pas
-
-
Dow
Pas
NC00001751001 Begino3/l/1997 Freryeney: Q P1F + Jan Apr Jul Oa
+ NooComp:Single
INS Pasa
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pms
-
-
Pasa
-
-
County. Mitchell Region: ARO Subbsin FRB06
20(0 FM
28.3
>40
Pass
-
-
NRAnow
Pass
--
-
PF: 3.61 Sryeid
2031 Pass
Pas
-
-
Pass
-
-
Pas
9Q10: 45O IWC(%):lI tlydm
200E Pm
-
-
Pas
-
LEGEND:
PERM- Permit Roquiromem LET= Adminivorove Leper Target Frequency= Monitoring frequency: Q­Quvnerl, M-Mondtly, BM -Bimonthly; SA- Semiarmtully; A- Annually, OW6 Only when discharging,D- Discontinued announcing requirement
Begin = First nlonlh required IQIO = Rmci.ing dream low Bow entedon (c@) += quartedy maniWnng incr m W monthly upon failure or NR Months that taring must ocean - ex. Jan, Apr, lul, Ocl NonComp= C., precipitance Requirement
PF= Peraided BOw(MGD) IWOG=I.—wade concentration P/P-Pasuffind red AC=Action CHR- Chronic
Data Notation f- rational Min,, - - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my - Mysid shrimp; CRV - Chronic calm; P - Mortality of suted percentage at highest concentration; at - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tox Unit; In - Bad tut
Reporting Notation: ---= Data ram required: NR - Non reported Facility Activity Sectors: 1- Itemivo. N - Nmly Issnai(r. corwi ); H - Active but trot discharging; i-More data available fm month in question: • = ORC s,,aatum needed
49

NCO03557s
�15 UUJAL AW SUS rTltb-, y15102
J411LIIoa
D2o>PED OP (LE�Uc�7 Zj
PPOLiCA i I aA O&Ot-L-7>6,
� UGKAS��6� u,aTi� r
SAY rtu�-1��i�i t �j
�ACXSCry co.
Hv�DS 1-pD Nc a��5 7� wC�000 57�3
Sae v�S S 3 i8
Q 4 = 0 .7 6 "1 '1-U T& N. &To
LGl c l la iZ G -7ty)a 5 Vj
22�> AtCP� �(S1U c7UG qj,C( (YGM1 l.f P
fiLER eviczAi
-P-)rams jar l��St 3�301�� �xP i�13�\c5a
G �C2o'` i 1N �PC/.UN CT.
_,j�C{-qA26e � TI1CC.�Szbt2= 4et��. ( 1
L i 1 J
lTp/ Cl\i/ Cd Cu/4L��.Aef
gj
ro C g
Cln¢rms rrn $�� r5S/n p) NNE /�; QI
J
Gua 59 1 v
-o-I --O Z
1 W(-- I ,k-1
1:l) Lia !ol b I q.a
�.A . = Rko Qp -:-- -- II �7Qiv� Iro,
SvoZ_ a,�) --) IvsL,
PLAA�� i t9SuJ -5y Ivy
La? Pl u = l,-1`7

Coo 396 SSG
O
( 51Ell Z
put,D "A
S
31�-7 NdV
19g 2,1 TSS' /
TES
zooC�
gl� avvv yuL`f aloe 4DM,<
C2 rd . -TES
a)/b
ZoU 1
5'Ii�lc7� Nd�I

Zw
616 f g,T -
� /q C. - -/.
7A)COO7
�
V6 '12 4e
-7/9 /6 "
l
Irzil lam) w �s
7/3 N. o 1 , y/a Mn,r
glzo

100
Zc)c) Z-
P3/ ti.U_V� C'ur�O � � A /0/D/ �j/�I•�S
llay /V -0, v
TTx
a15 6_81T,
�1/5 Al.O,V ok)/)
S1� N a. U O�� Ciloa )
4W,
7-SS
sO'b
5/� l Al, a. V pia /o
3 H -yidakio
l nwov�Dre 6;Z l

c2'Cba afr),-� 0-oo3q���'
5/a9
�� � Aw

Cyanide Cadmic—
(ug/L) (ug/L
25.73333333 <t
100 <1
2 <1

NC0039578 Summary Data
Flow
(MGD)
average 0.79615523
maximum 1.753
minimum .326
Temperature
pH
DO
Chlorine
Ammonia Nitrogen
TSS
Fecal Coliform
BOD
Nitrogen Phosphorus
(deg C)
(mg/L)
(ug/L)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
(#/100 mL)
(mg/L)
(mg/L) (mg/L)
17.034084
5.776655
7.679723
16.87878788
3.308795181
25.54679565
150.9301075
15.858
20.667 2.533
23.8
7.1
87.5
28
21.8
326.5
10800
110.4
44 3.5
8.6
3.2
.8
<10
0.3
3.8
2.
1.6
3 1.5

[Fwd:IFivd: TWSA Plant#1 (not Cashiers!) II
Subject: [Fwd: [Fwd: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)]]
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:10:15 -0400
From: Kevin Barnett <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR - Asheville Regional Office
To: Natalie Sierra <Natalie.Sierra@ncmaiLnet>
CC: Roger Edwards <[e-mail]>,
Marie Doklovic <[e-mail]>
Good Morning Natalie:
TWSA #1 no longer accepts any process water from Jackson Paper.
In the last 12 months, this plant has had pH issues and violations of
TSS. Technical assistance was provided.
The operator likes to run an old sludge age which I believe is
contributing to the TSS violations. When the plant reduces its mixed
liqour concentrations, the TSS goes down (go figure). The facility
REALLY NEEDS a new (DEEP) clarifier, as the existing units don't do a
whole lot.
TWSA has submitted an application package for a holistic collection
system permit, which should go along ways toward identifying and
addressing the I&I issues.
This wwtp is old, and the existing concrete structures are showing signs
of decal. A plan should be submitted for an engineering inspection of
the existing structures and how any structural issues will be addressed.
This wwtp also accepts sludge from the two other TWSA plants and does
accept septage (in a moderate to significant quantity), which may
contribute to some of the treatment issues.
Let me know if you have further questions,
Kevin B.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)]
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 16:11:35 -0400
From: Forrest Westall <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR - Asheville Regional Office
To: Kevin Barnett <[e-mail]>
CC: Natalie Sierra <[e-mail]>
Kevin,
Please contact Natalie about these issues for the TWSA # 1
plant. The history of this facility has always included the
impacts from Jackson Paper (recycle/reprocessing paper
facility in Silva). The clarifiers have always been a
problem and at one point Jackson Paper provided polymer to
help with the sludge settling issues. Stanley Bryson can
help give some additional background. Influent BODs are
really the issue for the 85 8 removal and I and I is likely
a big factor. Forrest
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:53:10 -0400
From: Natalie Sierra <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: Roy Byrd <[e-mail]>,Shannon Langley
I or2 6/26/02 10:13 AM

(Fwd:,(Fwd: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashicrs!)f)
<[e-mail]>,Forrest Westall
<[e-mail]>
Hey all,
I've been reviewing the DMRs for TWSA Plant #1 in Jackson
County (NPDES
Permit No. NC0039578) and have noticed two disturbing
things:
1) Frequent exceedences of TSS and difficulty meeting 85%
removal. This
is pretty well documented by ARO - they have gone on record
stating that
the facility really needs new, deeper clarifiers. To my
knowledge,
we're not really looking at 85% removal just yet, but I
thought I would
mention it (esp. since they seem to be having I/I problems
on top of
everything else).
2) Very low BODs. This is very strange considering the high
TSS
numbers. However, many (probably the majority) of the data
are marked
with an asterix indicating that they did not meet QA/QC for
the BODS
test, which would likely explain the low BOD values in
conjunction with
the high TSS values.
I don't know what we can do about this.
Since I will be renewing the permit very shortly, I will be
adding a
wastewater management plan (similar to what a lot of the
Neuse permits
included) asking them to assess their treatment system and
implement
solutions. I wanted to make you all aware of that and also
see if there
is anything else I should include or be aware of.
Thanks,
Natalie
2 of 2 6/26/02 10:13 AM

Re: TVA Plant #I (not Cashiers!)
Subject: Re: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 08:09:31 -0400
From: "Larry Ansley" <[e-mail]>
To: "Natalie Sierra" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Roy.Byrd\(ncmail\)" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Natalie, the first question to ask would be about the nature of the BOD
QA/QC qualifications. We'd really have to understand what the problem(s)
with the analyses were before being able to interpret what that data may be
telling us. _
Secondly, assuming that the BOD values ARE low, I'd take a look at whether
BOD toxicity may be occurring. Matt Matthews took a look at their whole
effluent toxicity test results. They have a permit limit of no chronic
toxicity at <1%. They have failed several of these tests. That tells me that
they have a problem with toxicity in the plant and it is likely fairly
strong. I wouldn't be surprised that their biomass could be effected by
something that toxic. You might want to look at their influent streams to
see if there is a likely source of any type of bactericide or disinfectant
(including oxidizers like chlorine). If all of this is true, your read of
the incongruity of high solids and low BOD is right on the money.
Larry W. Ausley, Supervisor
Microbiology and Inorganic Chemistry Branch
NC Division of Water Quality
4405 Reedy Creek Road
1623 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1623
(t) 919.733.3908 x 222
(f) 919.733.6241
http://www.dwglab.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roy.Byrd(ncmail)" <[e-mail]>
To: "Natalie Sierra" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Larry Ausley" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 7:55 AM
Subject: Re: TWSA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)
> Hi Natalie, I think Larry Ausley is more qualified to assist you with
> this. My expertise is in metals, so I'll cc to Larry. Roy
> Natalie Sierra wrote:
> > Hey all,
> > I've been reviewing the DMRs for TWSA Plant #1 in Jackson County (NPDES
> > Permit. No. NC0039578) and have noticed two disturbing things:
> > 1) Frequent exceedences of TSS and difficulty meeting 858 removal. This
> > is pretty well documented by ARO - they have gone on record stating that
> > the facility really needs new, deeper clarifiers. To my knowledge,
> > we're not really looking at 858 removal just yet, but I thought I would
> > mention it (esp. since they seem to be having I/I problems on top of
> > everything else).
> > 2) Very low BODs. This is very strange considering the high TSS
> > numbers. However, many (probably the majority) of the data are marked
> > with an asterix indicating that they did not meet QA/QC for the BOD5
> > test, which would likely explain the low BOD values in conjunction with
> > the high TSS values.
> > I don't know what we can do about this.
> > Since I will be renewing the permit very shortly, I will be adding a
> > wastewater management plan (similar to what a lot of the Neuse permits
I of 2 6/20/02 1:02 PM

Re: TWA Plant #1 (not Cashiers!)
> > included) asking them to assess their treatment system and implement
> > solutions. I wanted to make you all aware of that and also see if there
> > is anything else I should include or be aware of.
> > Thanks,
> > Natalie
2 of 2 6/20/02 1:02 PM

Re: TwsA Plant #I
Subject: Re: TWSA Plant #1
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 10:03:22 -0400
From: Kevin Barnett <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR - Asheville Regional Office
To: Natalie Sierra <[e-mail]>
CC: Roger Edwards <[e-mail]>,
Forrest Westall <Forrest.Westall @ ncmail.net>
Hi Natalie:
Yes, TWASA would be mine to review.
My main concern is that the existing facility is not a 1.5 mgd facility.
There has been recent non-compliance (including civil penalty assesments) related
to pH, TSS, and I think BOD-5 in the last 12 months. There have .been several
technical assistant visits from this office (Mr. Roger Edwards (WWTPC)) where
recommendations have included a larger / deeper clarifier.
It would be a travesty to renew this permit with 1.5as the permitted capacity,
withoud sufficient clarifiers to handle such flow.
Best Regards,
Kevin B
Natalie Sierra wrote:
> Kevin-
> I don't know if this would be yours to review, so if it's not, please
> pass it along. This is the first draft (i.e. for in-house review
> purposes only) of the TWSA permit. I'm hoping to notice it by the 21st;
> just let- me know if you can't get comments to me by then and I'll
> postpone to the 4th of September.
>
> - --
- --------------------
> Name: MC0039578_draft.doc
> NC0039578_draft.doc Type: Winword File (application/msword)
> Encoding: base64
> Download Status: Not downloaded with message
> Name: NCO039578_Fact Sheet.doc
> NCO039578_Fact Sheet.doc Type: Winword File (application/msword)
> Encoding: base64
> Download Status: Not downloaded with message
Jt6jo 'I771,-,�4 A&V
e_
_ �4 7
4=N
41
I of I 80:09 M

I
t• / SerVine )adaM Q01V
uckaseigee / y y ♦ Chairman. J.C. Alexander James Cochran
Water and Sewer Authority Wrh"'°r Dihsboro
- Vice -Chairman, Mickev Luker Alvin Stiles
Jackson Couch/ Sylva
Jerry R. King
5.rendin, Director
April 2, 2002
Attn: Mrs Valery Stephens
NC DENR
WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
Subject: Permit renewal, TWSA Plant # 1 (NC 0039578)
Dear Mrs. Stephens,
Ann P. Cabe
Keith Ward
Sylva
Jackson.Couuh/
Marion Jones
C. I. Carter
Sy17n
lNeslern Carolina LLlive'sity
APR • 5 M U
OENR - WATER QUALITY
POJNT SOURCE BRANCH
i�
i
With this letter and completed application, the Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority hereby
requests renewal of the discharge permit for our TWSA Plant # I facility located in Jackson
County.The NPDES permit number assigned to this facility is NC0039578.
The summary of metals analysis included on page 10 of the permit renewal application includes
all analysis conducted since Jan. 1998. Based on these data, and the fact that this facility has no
industry that contributes to the wastestream as a significant industrial user, we request that metals
analysis be dropped from the permit, or at a maximum, be conducted only in the months that
toxicity is analyzed. Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated.
If you have questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. I can be reached directly
at 828-586-9318.
Sind
Stan Bryson
Wastewater Operations Superintendent
Tuckaseigee Water & Sewer Authority
32 Asheville Hwy. Post Office Box 1051 Sylva, North Carolina 28779 828/586-5189

BLOWER
1@40HP
t
INFLUENT BAR
PUMPS SCREEN
6 @ 9.4 HP ea.
yjSLUDGE TO
GRIT CNAMBER
AERATED
CHLORINE CONTACT
CHAIMER
2 @ 0.033 MG TOTAL
SLUDGE
PUMPS
CLARIFIERS
2 @ 0.0754 MG
ilrllu" JLULIIL YUNY
2 @ 15 HP eII.
INTERMEDIATE
PUMP STATION
2 @ 40 HP ea.
EQUALIZATION
BASIN
0.345 MG
AERATION BASIN
2 @ 0.234 MG
1 @ 0.285 MG
SCHEMATIC ILLUSTRATION
OF
JACKSON COUNTY WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
DESIGN FLOW = 1.5 MGD

SLUDGE MANAGEMENT AT THE
TUCKASEIGEE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
(PLANT # 1)
Residuals generated at the facility are stored in an aerobic digestor. The digestor has a
capacity of 285,000 gals.Air is supplied to the digestor by two 900 cfm blowers driven by
50 horsepower electric motors.
Sludge is pumped from the digestor to a 1.2 meter Komline-Sanderson belt press where it
is dewatered to an average solids content of 18%. Sludge cake is then coveyored to a lime
pastuerization system as supplied by RDP company. Residuals treated in this manner meet
the 503 regulations as a Class A product. Residuals are then stored on a 50 ft. by 220 ft.
concrete pad until given away to be used as a soil amendment.