NC0021709_Permit (Issuance)_20010420

NPDES DOCUHENT !;CANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0021709
Jefferson WWTP
Document Type: ,
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Technical Correction
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
April 20, 2001
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore arty
content on the reiterse side

State of North Carolina .
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
April 20, 2001
Mr. Tim Church
Town of Jefferson
P.O. Box 67
Jefferson, North Carolina 28640
AviTrvi
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0021709
Jefferson WWTP
Ashe County
Dear Mr. Church:
Division of Water Quality (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).
As described in the cover letter to your draft permit, the new permit is a phased permit,
reflecting your facility's proposed expansion to 0.6 MGD. In determining the effluent limits for the
expanded facility, the guidelines for the South Fork New and New Rivers ORW area per 15A NCAC
2b.0225 (e)(4)(B) and (C) were used. I would also like to remind you of the following changes,
highlighted in the draft permit:
• For the 0.3 MGD discharge, the monitoring frequency has decreased for both the
conventional parameters (BOD, Total Suspended Solids, etc.) and for metals as a
result of your facility's being downgraded to a Class II facility. You will now monitor
weekly for conventional wastewater parameters and twice monthly for metals. Please be
aware that upon expansion, you must notify the Technical Assistance and Certification
Unit of the Division of Water Quality, at which point the wastewater treatment plant will
revert to a Class III facility.
• Lead monitoring has been reduced to quarterly due to a finding of no reasonable
potential to contaminate the receiving stream with lead.
• The cyanide limit has been removed from your permit for discharge at or below 0.3
MGD only. No reasonable potential for cyanide contamination was found for effluent
flows of 0.3 MGD. Please note that you are still required to monitor monthly for cyanide.
Please note that beyond the change in limits, there are some additional parameters that will
be limited upon expansion. These include ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N), dissolved oxygen and pH.
There are also different summer and winter limits for both BOD5 and ammonia nitrogen.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within
thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless
such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The
Division may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not
affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or
any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Natalie Sierra at telephone
number [phone], extension 551.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED t3Y
BILL REID
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
Aquatic Toxicology Unit

Permit NC002 1709
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, the
Town of Jefferson
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Jefferson WWTP
NC Highway 16 South
East of Jefferson
Ashe County
to receiving waters designated as Naked Creek in the New 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 June 1, 2001.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on March 31, 2006.
Signed this day April 20, 2001.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BILL It4D
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0021709
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
The Town of Jefferson
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.300 MGD wastewater treatment system
consisting of the following:
• Wet well with manual bar screen
• Flow splitter
• Dual aeration basins
• Clarifier
• Chlorination (disinfection)
• Dechlorination
• Aerobic digestor
• Gravity sand filters
The facility is located at Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant, NC Highway 16
South, east of Jefferson in Ashe County;
2. After receiving an Authorization to Construct, expand the facility not to exceed a
design flow of 0.600 MGD and
3. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Naked Creek, classified C+ waters in the New River Basin.

?B5
000
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
Permit # NC0021709
Naked Creek, Class C+
Quad #: B13NW, Quad Name: Jefferson
Ashe County
L):;)
fr
Ir
3000
1r
T In
0
3000
c
USGS Quad: Jefferson, NC
Latitude: 36°24'35"
Longitude: 81 °25'43"
Stream Class: C+
Subbasin: 50701
Receiving Stream: Naked Creek
NC0021 709
Town of Jefferson
WWTP
North
SCALE 1:214000

Permit NC0021709
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS — FINAL
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and prior to expansion above 0.3
MGD, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly
Average
LIMITS
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
MONITORING
Measurement
Frequency
REQUIREMENTS
Sample
Type
Sample Location
Flow
0.300 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)'
30.0 mglL
45.0 mglL
- Weekly
Composite
Influent & Effluent
Total Suspended Solids'
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mglL
Weekly
Composite
Influent & Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µgIL
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
(NO2+NO3+TKN)
Semi-annually
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Semi-annually
Composite
Effluent
Cadmium
14 jig/
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Cyanide2
Monthly
Grab
Effluent
Copper
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Lead
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Zinc
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Mercury
0.08 µg/L
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Silver
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
pH3
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity4
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2. The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 ug/1 (10 ppb). Levels reported at less than 10 ug/1
shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
3. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units at the
effluent.
4. Whole effluent toxicity will be monitored using the Pass/Fail Chronic Toxicity test with
Ceriodaphnia at 14%. Samples shall be taken in February, May, August & November; see A. (3.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace
amounts

Permit NC0021709
A. (2.) EFFLUENT 'LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
During the period beginning on expansion above 0.3 MGD 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
DISCHARGE
Monthly
Average
LIMITS
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
MONITORING
Measurement
Frequency
REQUIREMENTS
Sample
Type
Sample Location
Flow
0.600 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)1
(April 1- October 31)
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
- 3/Week
Composite
Influent & Effluent
BOD, 5-day (20°C)'
(November 1- March 31)
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Total Suspended Solids
20.0 mg/L
30.0 mg/L
3/Week
Composite
Influent & Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1- October 31)
2.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1- March 31)
4.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen2
31Week
Grab
Effluent, Upstream,
Downstream
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
3!Week
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µgIL
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (°C)
3/Week
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen
(NO2+NO3+TKN)
Semi-annually
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Semi-annually
Composite
Effluent
Cadmium
3.4 µg/L
15 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Cyanide3
8.4 µg/L
22 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Copper
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Lead
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Zinc
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Mercury
0.02 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Silver
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
pH4
3lWeek
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Footnotes:
1. The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2. The daily average dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L. Upstream
samples should be taken just below the Highway 16 bridge (100 feet above discharge) and
downstream samples should be taken 100 yards downstream of discharge, just beyond the end of
the aerobic digestor.
3. The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 ug/1 (10 ppb) . Levels reported at less than 10 ug/1
shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
4. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units at the
effluent.
5. Whole effluent toxicity will be monitored using the Pass/Fail Chronic Toxicity test with
Ceriodaphnia at 30%. Samples shall be taken in February, May, August & November; see A. (4.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace
amounts

Permit NC0021709
A. (3.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY) - 0.3 MGD
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 14%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised
February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of 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 II Chronic Whole
Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric
mean of the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or
survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction
or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase 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..

v
Permit NC0021709
A. (4.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY) - 0.6 MGD
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 30%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, Quarterly monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised
February 1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of February, Mau, 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 II Chronic Whole
Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric
mean of the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or
survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction
or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase 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..

PUBLIC NOTICE
STATE OF
NORTH CAROUNA
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION / NPDES
UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE
CENTER
RALEIGH, NC
27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF
INTENT TO ISSUE A
NPDES WASTE WATER
PERMIT
On the basis of thorough
staff review and applica-
tion of NC General Statute
143.21, Public law 92-500
and other lawful standards
and regulations, the North
Carolina Environmental
Management Commission
proposes to issue
a National Pollutant Dis-
charge Elimination System
(NPDES) waste water
discharge permit to the
person(s) listed below
effective 45 days from the
publish date of this notice.
Written comments regard-
ing the proposed permit
will be accepted until 30
days after the publish date
of this notice, All com-
ments received prior to
that date are considered in
the fteal determinations,.
" ijardinN the proposec"j
permit. The Director of the'
NC Division of Water
Quality may decide to hold
a public meeting for the
proposed permit should
the Division receive a
significant degree of public
interest.
Copies of the draft permit
and other supporting
information on file used to
determine conditions pres-
ent in the draft permit are
available upon request
and payment of the costs
of reproduction. Mail com-
ments and/or requests for
information to the NC
Division of Water Quality
at the above address or
call Ms. Christie Jackson
at [phone], exten-
sion 538. Please include
the NPDES permit number
(attached) in any commu-
nication. Interested per-
sons may also visit the
Division of Water Quality
at 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604-1148
between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
to review information on
file.
NPDES Permit Number
NC0021709, Town of Jef-
ferson WWTP, P.O. Box
67, Jefferson, NC 28640
has applied for a permit re-
newal for a facility located
in Ashe County discharg-
ing treated wastewater into
Naked Creek in the New
River Basin. Currently
cadmium, mercury, cya-
nide, ammonia -nitrogen
and EOD are water quality
limited. This discharge
may affect future
allocations in this portion
of the receiving stream.
Publisher's
Affidavit
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASS COUNTY, SS:
The attaer ed information personally appeared before me,
the undersigned, Rexford A. Goss, General Manager of
the JEFFERSON POST, a public newspaper, of general
circulation, published in West Jefferson, in the county
aforementioned who, being duly sworn, upon his oath
sayeth that the notice which is attached is a true copy, and
was duly published in said paper the following
dates: 3 L' /
Publication Fee $
5-61
Subscribed and sworn to before met-
J
My commission expires

NPDES/Non-Discharge Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
NPDES OR NONDISCHARGE PERMITTING UNIT COMPLETES THIS PART:
Date of Request 1/30/01
Facility
Town of Jefferson WWTP
Permit #
NC0021709
Region
Winston-Salem
Requestor
Natalie Sierra
Pretreatment A_D Towns- Keyes McGee (ext. 580)
Contact E-L Towns- VVaeant-Reeitien D e G,oe u ►+ Go : c L 5q
M-R Towns- Dana Folley (ext. 523)
S-Z Towns- Steve Amigone (ext 592)
!PRETREATMENT UNIT COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status of Pretreatment Program (circle all that apply)
1) the facility has no SIU's and does have a Division approved Pretreatment Program that isINACTIVE
2) the facility has no SIU's and does not have a Division approved Pretreatment Program
the facility has or is develo in a Pretreatment Program
2a) is Full Program with LTMP or 2b) is Modified Program with STMP
4) the facility MUST develop a Pretreatment Program - Full Modified
5) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
Flow Permitted Actual D
% Industrial D 2.1
STMP time frame:
most recent
o. ‘S`r'',G 0 , o $ re J
next cycle
% Domestic t7.\SwNvD
L
T
M
P
Pollutant
Check List
POC due to
NPDES/Non-
Discharge
Permit Limit
Required
by EPA'
Required by
503 Sludge"
POC due to SIU"'
Site specific POC (Provide Explanation)""
z
STMP
Frequency
effluent
at
LTMP
Frequency at
effluent
✓
BOD
\/
4
Q M
✓TSS
✓
4
Q M
NH3
../
4
Q M
'/
Arsenic
✓
4
Q M
4
Cadmium
✓
4
✓
4
Q M
4
Chromium
4
✓
4
Q M
4
Copper
4
,/
4
Q M
Cyanide
4
Q M
'J
Lead
4
✓
4
Q M
✓Mercury
../
4
Q M
✓vlolybdemum
✓
4
Q M
AI
Nickel
4
✓
4
Q M
Silver
4
Q M
✓Selenium
✓
4
Q M
4
Zinc
4
4
Q M
-Nto� t.\ -,os.
✓
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
'Always in the LTMP
"Only in the LTMP if the POTW land applies sludge
"' Only in LTMP while the SIU is connected to the POTW
"" Only in LTMP when the pollutant is a specific concern to the POTW (ie-Chloride to a POTW who accepts Textile waste)
0= Quarterly
M=Monthly
Comments: & cv-o re% \\w A '1`...
® S'T'M ? 1 `-k Can SQ.. v }-! v-e d a_A-`
S rv‘Uv-‘ :\sO `- t V,‘ 0\ 2-V ..vs �+ `J V tk v,s .
�a• •Ceb'e\ ' \' --)9� 0.tio
2-ob.1 0 �40. �C.1 l
NPDES_PI RFform.0008041
Revised: August 4, 2000

02/02/1995 10:19 3369822828
JEFFERSONWATERPLANT
PAGE 02
Client :
Attention:
Date Received:
Report Date:
Sample Date:
BRL N:
Lab Sample ID:
Client Sample ID:
Parameter
Cd
Cr
Cu
Mo
Ni
Pk�
Se
Hg
As
PO Box 2040• Plne Mountain Road
Lenoir, North S:arollna 28045 In I a "
Telephone C291) 244•0 140 — — �^—
Water Quality Services, Inc.
P. O. Box 1102
Banner Elk, NC 28604
Mr. R. Trample!
10/ 18/2000
07-Nov-00
16-Oct-00
BRL-2000-1027
LSED-2000-04843
010fi60 Jefferson EFF
Reported By:
Analysis Analysis
Result MQL Unit Method Time Dxte Analyst
* 0.002 rng/l EPA 200.7 15:04 1(1/24/0O
* 0,0(15 ntg/I EPA 200.7 15:041(}/24/(HJ MLS
0.009 0,008 mg/1 EPA 200.7 15:04 10/24/00 MLS
• (1.(J 12 mg/1 EPA 200.7 17:43 10/25/00 AIR
0.01 mg/1 EPA 2011.7 15:04 10/24/00 MLS
(),111 mg/1 EPA 200,7 I5:(14 10/24/00 ML$
+ 0 01 mg/1 EPA 200.7 10:45 10l25/(1i) AIRL
Il.(}1g 0.01 mg/1 EPA 200.7 15:04 10/24/00 MLS
• (1A{)(12 ing/1 EPA 245.1 14:00 10/3(/0(J AIRL
+ 0.01 mg/1 EPA-200.7 As 15:04 10/24/00 MLS
• p‘1.0 F /� Matheson. S.J. Johnson
* Concentrations are below Minimum Quantification Limit except where noted.
NC Laboratory Certificate No. 27S
Page 7 of 7

02/02/1995 10:19 3369922828
JEFFERS0NWATERPLANT
PAGE 03
Client
Attentini:
Date Received:
Report Date:
Sample Date:
BRL #:
Lab Sample ID:
Client Sample ID:
Parameter
Cyanide
Pa Bull 4111e • Plno Mountain Paad
Lenoir. North Carolina 4aa1ir�r
Telephone (ape) 7g19-0i4e tot— sair"*'"
Water Quality Services, Inc,
P. O. Box 1102
Banner Elk, NC 28604
Mr. R. Trammel
10/18/2000
07-Nov-00
16-Oct-00
BRL-2000-1027
LSID-2000-04841
010-658 Jefferson
Result
Reported By:
MQL Unit Method
0.005 mg/I EPA 335.2
Matheson, 5.J. Johnson
* Concentrations are below Minimum Quantification Limit except where noted.
NC Laboratory Certificate N9. 275
Page 5 of 7
Analysis
Date Analyst
11:14 10/27/00 K$M
Analysis
Time

02/02/1995 10:19 3369822828 JEFFERSONWATERPLANT PAGE 04
Client :
Attention:
Date Received:
Report Qate:
Sample Date:
BRL #:
Lab Sample ID:
Client Sample ID:
Parameter
Cd
Cr
Cu
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
Hg
As
PO bow 494o• Pine Mountain Roadinmw
Lenoir. North Caroline 4BBa! I, .1111V
MEMO
Telephone (BBB) 728,0149 111=1 4
Water Quality Services, Inc.
P. Q. Box 1102
Banner Elk, NC 28604
Mr. R. Trammel
10/25/2000
08-Nov-00
17-Oct-00
BILL-2000-1057
LSID-2000-04975
010-0900 Jefferson Headworks EFF
Reported By:
Result MQL Unit
▪ 0.1102 mg/1
0.051 0.005 mgll
0.025 n 005 mg/1
0.017 0.01 2 mg/1
mg/1
" 0,0I mg/I
0.01 mg/1
0,0:12 0.005 mg/I
* 0,01102 mg/1
+ 0.01 rng/I
Method
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200,7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200,7
EPA 245,1
EPA-200.7 As
utheaun. S.J. Johnson
Analysis
Time
15:24
15:24
15:24
18'28
15:24
15:24
1$:28
15:24
14:00
15:24
Analysis
Date
11/2/00
I I/2/00
11/2/00
I0/27/00
11/2/00
11/2/00
10/27/011
11/2/00
10/31 /00
11/2/00
Concentrations are below Minimum Quantification Limit except where noted.
NC Laboratory Certificate No. 275
Paysuof 11
Analyst
KSM
KSM
KSM
AIRL
KSM
KSM
AIRL
KSM
AIRL
KSM

02/02/1995 10;19 3369822828
JEFFERSONWATERPLANT
PAGE 05
Client
Attention:
Date Received:
Report Date:
Sample Date:
Lab Sample ID;
Client Sample ID:
Parameter
Cd
Cr
Cu
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
Hg
As
PO Rots CQLO• PM. Mountetn Road te =;
Lenoir. North Carotin° 28617 _ ��a
Telephony M01 TC9•O149
Water Quality Services, inc.
P. O. Brno 1102
Banner Elk, NC 28604
Mr. R. Trammel
10/25/2000
08-Nov-00
18-Oct-00
BRL-2000- t 057
LS1D-2000-04074
010-903 Jefferson Headwords EFF
Reported By:
Rewlt MQL Unit
▪ 0.002 mg/1
* O.005 g/1
().() 16 0.095 mg/1
0.019 0.012 mg/1
+ 0.01 mg/1
• (1,(11 m /I
* (1()1 inWl
0.1)24 0.005 mg/1
* 0.0(102 mg/1
* ().01 mg/I
Method
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200,7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 24_5.1
EPA-200.7 As
K. ntheilon, S.J. Juhnygn
Ad41yeis Analysis
Time bate Analyst
15:23 11/2/00 KSM
15:23 I1/2/(x) KSM
15:23 11/2/00 KSM
18:32 10/27/00 AIRL
15:23 1I12/(NI KSM
15:23 11/2/00 KSM
1X:32 10/27/(1() AIRL
15:23 11/2/00 KSM
14:00 1(1/31/00 AiRL
15:23 11/2/00 KSM
Concentrations are below Minimum Quantification Limit except where noted.
NC Laboratory Certificate No. 275
Page x of 1'3

02/02/1995 10:19 3369822928
JEFFERSDNWATERPLANT
PAGE 06
Client
Attention:
Date Received:
Report Date:
Sampk pate:
DRL #:
Lab Sample ID:
Client Sample ID:
parameter
Cd
Cr
Cu
Ma
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
Hg
As
PO Bra 994P• Fine Mountain toed
Lenoir. North Carolina 4164B i
Telephone Ma) 72 .OI49 Mrmow
Water Quality Services, Inc.
P. 0. Box 1102
Banner Elk. NC 28604
Mr. R. Trammel
10/25/2000
08-Nov-00
19-Oct-00
BILL-2000-1057
LSID-2000.04971
010-958 Jefferson Headwor1cs EFF
Result MQL Unit
• 0.002 mg/1
0.006 0.005 nig/1
0.039 0.005 mg/1
• 0.012 mng/1
• 0,01 mg/1
* 0.01
* 0.075 mgll
0.039 0.005 mg/1
t 0.0002 mg/1
* 0.01 mg/1
Reported By:
Method
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 245.1
EPA-200./ As
Analysis Analysis
Time Date Analyst
15:19 11/2/00 KSM
15:19 11/2/01) KSM
15:19 11/2/00 KSM
18:42 10/27/00 AiRL
15:19 11/2/00 KSM
15:19 11/2/00 1c$M
18:42 10/27/00 A1RL
15;19 11/2/00 KSM
14:041 10/31/01) AiRL
15.19 11/2/00 KSM
K. . Matheson, S.J. Johnson
x Concentrations are below Minimum Quantification Limit except where noted.
NC Laboratory Certificate No. 275
Page 5 of 11

AWL / IN • Irt • LA' v mat,' c
CH
[1.9
Ag
Cd
Cr
CIA
P6
Mb
Se,
Zn
2/9 14s. n41
S <S.
•
<0,2 0,2.
<2, <I,
<3, <3.
<l. < 1.
<3, <3,
21. z1.5
<5, <(,„
<3,
4 5, <5.
5, 31
<5.
<0,2
<5.
<1,
<5.
ti io 9
6.3 40,
0.2
<0,2
4.2Z
<0,Z <6,3
<5. 5, ;<5, '5.
1<z,, <25,
<5,
to. <5,
i0. <10,
<1, H. -el ,
13,
3,5 < 5
20/. ; 2.17
10,
<5i
<10,
QS,
33.
ReAoval Rct-ies
CH_ f (pq
1.15_ )()
Ar
Ay-
Cu.
P6
e 5,
<12. (6,
<10, <10.
<SO
72,5 60,
cd
cwitflit popfruio, s
Rgtot Atiz
r7 Co 5
13.2 3,5 '<5.
1.<c)2.
<5. <5,
<5.
3.7
<5,
12.40
t2.,6
7.3
z,g 1,5
<5,
-4-
24.5 12,5
<10. <10,
<S. <5,
.lull • Yi "
CWO
11 3 , Z
5. 5, Z8
<0,2
1-<<s, 3.
I, 3,0
3,
13, zq, 31, 16.'1
7.
<-0, 2.
<5,
<1.
7. 5, 13. Z.6
3. ri 5, I • 8
Z
188. 2g41. )33, iti6*
69, 3
94. Re WA pc ecfpz-r-
6g.1
82. 3
L
gq 7
6 .3.00
50
< 27,
Z7Z.
PC r
Im;t1 S cLcke 71:-A- C-Jc. rkr/j"1 WA
'r Viz Lc sr 4ry c

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0021709
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
Town of Jefferson WWTP
Applicant Address:
303 E. Main St.; Jefferson, NC 28640
Facility Address:
1233 Hwy 16 South; Jefferson, NC 28640
Permitted Flow
0.6 MGD
e of Waste:
81% Domestic
19% Industrial
Facility/Permit Sta
•
Active, renewal
Coun
Ashe
:iscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Naked Creek
Stream Classification:
C+
Regional:Office
Winston-Salem
-State Grid,/ USGS Quad:
B 13NW/Jefferson
303(d) Listed?
Yes (biologically
impaired)
Permit Writer:
Natalie Sierra
Subbasin:
Drainage Area (mi2):
05-07-01
6.4
Summer 7Q.10 (cfs)
2.2
Winter 7Q10'(cis
3.4
30Q2 (cfs).
4.5
Average Flow (cis):
12
14 (currently)
29.7 (with
expansion)
Date.
1February01
Lat. 36° 24 37" N Long. 81° 25' 45" W
BACKGROUND
Jefferson WWTP is a 0.3MGD wastewater treatment plant serving the Town of Jefferson
and a small number of commercial and industrial facilities. The plant has been at or near design
capacity for several years and has recently requested an expansion to 0.6 MGD. The facility
discharges to Naked Creek, which is class C+ waters in the New River Basin and 303(d) listed
for biological pollution. This means that any proposed expansion will be accompanied by
stringent limits to protect water quality in the receiving stream.
A speculative limit request for the expansion was made in 1998. Preliminary design
plans have been submitted to DWQ; they include plans for advanced nutrient and oxygen
consuming waste removal. The overall pollutant load to the receiving stream after expansion
will actually be less than the current value due to the tightening of effluent limits.
Instream Monitoring and Verification of Existing Conditions and DMR Data Review.
A review of low flow conditions in Naked Creek was required during this renewal duet o
some discrepancies in the listed summer 7Q10. The last permit contained limits based upon a
7Q10 of 2.8 cfs. A 1992 request by Jackie Nowell to USGS returned a 7Q10 of 2.2 cfs. Using
the 1993 document "Low -Flow Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina" (USGS), I
calculated the 7Q10 for Naked Creek using the HA10 regional equation and a mean annual
runoff of 2.0 ft3/s/mi2. This resulted in a 7Q10 flow of 2.04 cfs. After discussions with Curtis
Weaver of USGS, it was decided that this calculation supports the 1992 flow estimate, the latter
of which would have taken into account hydrologic properties specific to the immediate area.
This sets the summer 7Q10 for Naked Creek at 2.2 cfs.
DMRs were reviewed beginning in January 1997 through November 2000. Average flow
during this time was 0.26 MGD. Average flow in the past four years has exceeded 80% of the
design capacity (with periodic flow exceedences) emphasizing the imminent need for expansion.
The facility currently monitors cadmium, lead, copper, silver, zinc, cyanide, mercury, total
phosphorus and total nitrogen in addition to conventional parameters. Average total phosphorus
concentration during the permitting cycle was 2.69 mg/L. Average total nitrogen concentration
was 6.52 mg/L.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0021709 Renewal
Page 1

Results of Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA):
A reasonable potential analysis (RPA) was performed for all monitored parameters. It
was determined that there is reasonable potential for pollution from the following:
• Cadmium
• Copper
• Silver
• Zinc
• Mercury
For flows above 0.3 MGD, there also exists reasonable potential for contamination
from cyanide. The only metal for which no reasonable potential exists is lead.
Copper, silver, and zinc are all action level pollutants. Since the Town of Jefferson
does not currently have toxicity problems, these compounds will be monitored only, not
limited. Lead monitoring will be reduced to monthly.
Correspondence:
A review of the correspondence files over the course of the past permitting cycle
indicates a need for plant upgrades and a flow/capacity expansion. Much of the inspection
comments relate to flow exceedences and problems with settling in the clarifiers and solids in the
chlorine contact chamber. The facility also experiences problems with foaming in the aeration
basins. The proposed expansion and capital improvements should eliminate these problems.
George Smith (WSRO) indicates that there is a potential nutrient impact downstream of the
discharge visible as green and brown algae in the creek bed. This may be attributable to this
discharge; it is likely that the upgraded system may serve to alleviate this problem.
The facility has been issued various NOVs over the course of the past few years for
violations of the mercury, cadmium, BOD, fecal coliform and flow limits. The past four
inspection reports have been accompanied by NOVs. Civil penalties have been assessed and
paid in most recent cases.
The inspection reports generally give positive ratings of the operations and maintenance
of the facility, indicating that problems may arise more from the inadequacy of the facility to
treat the wasteflow rather than the staff.
WLA:
The last WLA acknowledges a re-evaluation of the 7Q10. A 1992 request made by
Jackie Nowell to Curtis Weaver of USGS establishes the summer 7Q10 of Naked Creek as 2.2
cfs, not the 2.8 cfs that was used in the previous permit. The current limits (i.e. those at or below
0.3 MGD) will be based upon the 7Q10 of 2.8 cfs as per the 1994 WLA. New limits for the
expansion will be based upon the updated 7Q10 of 2.2 cfs. The facility is aware of the change in
the 7Q10 and the associated limits change.
PERMITTING STRATEGY AND SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
The facility has made a request that while its discharge remains at 0.3 MGD, that it be
reclassified to a Class II facility. I spoke with Tony Arnold of the Technical Assistance and
Certification Unit, who concurs with this decision. The facility must then notify Technical
Assistance and Certification when it begins expansion above 0.3 MGD, as it would then be
classified back to a Class III facility.
The cyanide limit will be removed from the permit due to a finding of no reasonable
potential. The facility will still be required to monitor for cyanide monthly. The lead monitoring
will be reduced to quarterly — not only was there a finding of no reasonable potential, but the
facility has only had eight lead detects out of 95 samples taken over the past four years.
Water quality limited parameters for the 0.6-MGD discharge are cadmium, cyanide, and
mercury. The effluent limits for these parameters will be based upon a 7Q10 of 2.2 cfs, as per a
1993 update of the low flow value for Naked Creek. Limits for conventional parameters for the
0.6-MGD discharge are based on the guidelines specified in the NC 2B.0200 rules for the New
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0021709 Renewal
Page 2

e
River. The facility requested speculative limits about a year ago and is aware of the stringent
limits that will accompany the expansion.
The receiving stream is biologically impaired, and this discharge is cited as one of the
reasons for impairment. The proposed expansion to 0.6 MGD can serve as a valuable tool for
improving stream quality such that it can meet the water quality standards of the ORW
classifications. We may wish to include phased in phosphorus and nitrogen limits if the regional
office feels that the current discharge is having a detrimental impact downstream.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: February 28, 2001
Permit Scheduled to Issue: April 13, 2001.
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:
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0021709 Renewal
Page 3

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Prepared by: Natalie Sierra, 2/2101
Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
Qw (cfs) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
!WC (%) =
Jefferson wWTP
NC0021709
0.3
0.46416
2.8
14.24
Parameter
Chronic CCC w/s7Q10 dil. Acute CMC w/no dil.
FINAL RESULTS, ug/I FINAL RESULTS, ug/I
Frequency of Detection
#Samples # Detects
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Copper (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Silver (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Zinc (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Total Phosphorus
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Total Nitrogen
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
15
10.1
175.5 34
7.3
1.2
67
22.4
35.1 22
NA
23.6
0.0 20
29.7
0.0 NA
199 22
95 8
97 95
13 8
98 90
196 2
162 3
6 6
6 6
Modified Data: Use 0.5 Detection Limit for non -detects

REASONABLE POTENTIAL
Prepared by: Natalie
Facility Name =
NPDES # =
Qw (MGD) =
Qw (cfs) =
7Q10s (cfs)=
IWC (%) =
ANALYSIS
Sierra, 2/2/01
Jefferson wWTP
NC0021709
0.6
0.92832
2.2
29.71
Chronic CCC w/s7Q10 dil.
Acute CMC w/no dil.
Frequency of Detection
Parameter
FINAL RESULTS, ug/I
FINAL RESULTS, ug/I
#Samples
# Detects
Cadmium
Max. Pred Cw
104.4
Allowable Cw
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
3.4
10.1
15
199
22
Allowable Cw
Copper (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
42.1
200.2
1022
95
8
Allowable Cw
Silver (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
11.8 -
. 33.6
7.3
97
95
Allowable Cw
Zinc (A.L.)
Max. Pred Cw
0.1
804.2
1.2
13
5
Allowable Cw
Cyanide
Max. Pred Cw
84.1
22.4
67
98
92
Allowable Cw
Mercury
Max. Pred Cw
8.4
25.1
22
196
2
Allowable Cw
Total Phosphorus
Max. Pred Cw
0.020
23.6
NA
162
3
Allowable Cw
Total Nitrogen
Max. Pred Cw
NA
29.7
NA
6
6
Allowable Cw
NA
20
6
6
Modified Data: Use 0.5 Detection Limit for non -detects

MEMO
To: WLA File
From: Jim Blose
Subject: Summary of issues for Jefferson WWTP renewal
Date: July 11, 1995
Jefferson is currently applying for a renewal at .300 MGD. In 1993 the plant applied for
an expansion to .375 MGD but withdrew its request once it realized what the new limits would be.
Throughout this process the listed design capacity was .385 MGD. The reason for this is obscure.
Jefferson has an ATC for only .300. When the facility does expand it will have to meet the limits
sPecified in the 0200 regs for the South Fork New River ORW Area (BOD=5, NH3=2, TSS=20).
The draft of the New River basin plan notes that Naked Creek is rated as partially supporting
below the plant. 1993 biomonitoring rating was fair (the rating was poor in 1986).
The plant consistently violates ammonia tox limits in the summer. There is some
discussion regarding this limit in our files --in particular whether the facility should have been given
an ammonia tox limit in the first place. While the permit files give no indication that the limit has
been removed, the WSRO has provided a copy of a permit modification issued in April to remove
the NH3 limit. Cl and CN limits have each been violated once in the past year. The Cl limit was
put in the permit in 1992 when the plant switched from UV to a contact chlorine chamber. The
plant has passed its only WET test this year, but failed 3 times in a row in 93-94.
Current limits were set in a 1992 WLA, using a 7Q10=2.8. The WLA for the withdrawn
1993 expansion request used a new USGS 7Q10 estimate of 2.2 cfs. A new Level B model was
developed at this time. A 7Q10 of 2.8 was used for the toxics analysis conducted for the present
WLA since no expansion is involved (toxics data: used: May 94 to April 95). Based on a review
of die most recent data, a mercury limit has been recommended.
Analysis of LTBOD data indicates a CBOD/BOD5 ratio of 6.68, probably due to
refractory carbon.
Pretreatment report (from Bo McMinn, 7-5-95):
The town is currently monitoring effluent quarterly but qualifies for the modified program and
could thus cut back. Major dischargers are a rubber company and a hospital. Hospital has had
past problems with Ag and Hg, but should have improved Hg recently (note: there have been 2 Hg
detects this year). There may not be much the town can do about Hg now that the hospital is in
compliance. Main source of metals is leachate from the County landfill. The WWTP has a
panning feud with the county about this. Pretreatment has no concerns about dropping the
monitoring requirements for several metals, as recommended in the WLA.
From the region (George Smith, WSRO, 7-11-95):
The ammonia tox limit has been removed. The plant is maintained fairly well, although it is a
difficult facility to operate. Jefferson is aware of the ORW issue and is looking into nondischarge
alternatives. The County opened a new landfill in 92 and the plant had tox problems as soon as it
began accepting leachate. This is the reason for the WET test failures several years ago. The
leachate is extremely high in Zn, NH3 and BOD (See note above on LTBOD).
b , coj 0,0 115/., j, e S) (A° • °
aot,y d g0

11e5 b--Lco1 . 2
1YIeGZ 0..a- v
3`1 cis =�O50 ,y,,, z
gQt0 I O Co
i=o2 I,So
1-14 ►= _ (M C,,) = I. 5 c_FS 1K,2's (0,4 vim,;
c s5(q,Lo)
MAT== 12a Q g
\./1 cs-h,nvy,.. 2. cyCfs _ C‘ c / f
M2-142-

o,\ jEl-----FLec.)1\ \NINTP
NC00anoq
Ctu�tr�y L
MR-1 zooc -KewaL
1 L Fr/ LC - rv& 'HON iT'ei = -t 31,iLk.
J 1 0 .N tzb, c,y 6 I NT tvaAK�
s)
AUGOSS Rol l 1999 Th REr,-
Q10 to ).(oked C�-k = atocfs.
142-p 3a C )mac=c)%)
-t-----ISHLQucksu2;) Q61 n ooilcM ' Ov
� v,6-) �s o.� w &\c�(pM,1od) J
WU✓) c'� - o ►C)-125 \i-16 pn
-N-NJL ALl
vJILL NA6 1 feDva lain ` ° 1/4-T1Eft3) 1 C vein ei n r✓
Cl2 %MT( -, POST-A:CM-10N 36 r CCYACM .N.

• A r ► 1 • EXPArkSic , 1'oLL.N . Lc) lx- h
V\i6-,1�1D Pc- LLLI �� v c 42,-b ��E L.o 10> N cc ,a ►� j
gTIQ V C7 � I\ T t-o--t ri ,
't.e A-1" 0.3\-tk'
NUvJ
way, r-Af..-) -161 I celda,.�
TSS .--"A", 1 " t
No-3 iris
3�,51b/�f J
Gt r1A aviite/ni
� F +i Coir-tPu—b 410,1 z4Apt t
V
—NO EX?AtJSi °v.] —yip CNo �
— 7oSED C-X1y 1Okit2t5'b0
.--EXPANs)oN vs1 Se4.A9
— C0\1 )0 tru% �E(A rrAc k, cr7 (.eNV `it Sr€1s i i 111i; AY2x�q
fie_ Uor tsre...)cnoN bLiT' L ) t -
(t ► rJt'. r t\J 7 -ONf
- Aff itt ACi11 AN L LO J L corm Kst o
USDA —g.utriL bZv4.c{tSnfr
— NC_ cow
— t ( Co .crev clue 6 it rr,LS
IN Iqg3,
Ave. 1cA It cES
S1C�1 U s2,).cCS
1ZIn1 rr n b
1 N eES PoNS E ?Qt 0 O;-'s
1°1g5 1jj\ �� -s s�Qk) asa,Tcls IwC , i fq%
%\VL" c5SS Ct
t-1 S cPVM 100 IC-yfl N IDS) rt n-�eC . As L.J .0 mot' T b

2E-qkS .Pt\4 StU N --c) 0, 3Q,S b-b i N (i5,
C)70 +-1 t b Ott �o �r.► S r is Ltk1 t` vet
A\op Z (ALA t. tsrs c.Q t L As D, a c
NM)-DXtc c-C9 Wec6t is ti MKT -Peit c rn c,1/41C Lej t vc -ne c L ( T
-e,UIEVJ Cyr Co:RE-, hue,
t 01,o100 tio\i O (c cu Ev c,
'J +. 4 t (16- ,fier246-i ( ruivkA ,ot
cap ,tiik. (fad
wvovx rriesQ. () llsli)
A- 0:6iimiumk- • ' ' " ei Las I ob )
101\-22,lc o Tee„- oa r-t i -A r
-row. 4.5 3 5tvs
,�
I6\19 NOLs
V-to Nm-k\-1 - V wk_
�1 I21kal 1\13v T.
101ZZ1a9 Ce*Ackor.,cz Ncecc`lok
6ce6E Strl
�► 'F-D- (4-` { Iry
SOLOS \ N C ( VA:S.
(Vc -c)r
ry (LAM)
3O� 1(112-kf1)

l lC/‘
I!\ P 2r- ( \ t. Wct-%
10,7(oI lk CoµPu Ca- F.V+AL. 11,1sezt ,iv �be c�E St-► Cam, WC P�
Vt\.sc iS Ie n)
Z14 (.c)1 IC 1) GC.Ak C LEA % b r S a sk �s
c t-1IN6-7 /rlC --/
NO €t(
-Tos --CO e-. -
2:11
1 LI h1 C. E. 1.
)-( 3:1.\\Ly r-iAx - -wtz col
Q� - I
w� v�onti.� a1 �,,-
lm7
I
( \\lQ`c V ic��
I-
1.,1 Nti fX \)lQU .-0(Z Cr) Cs)
f �> ire�►ti. � A�s
If�S��lio `r x
3 US � . -� e w._ co,) 16.s tom- loa-i _ ttbsQ
`'1 sAry LANbcc L �
.21 19 C. > —&R..m Ciaj;c K -1 C 1 ceudeth(

Jeffersbn
Subject: Jefferson
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 16:13:55 -0500
From: George Smith <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR Water Quality
To: Natalie Sierra <[e-mail]>
Natalie,
The following comments are offered:
The fact sheet shows the the facility is permitted at 0.6 MGD. Do you
think that 0.3 should also be identified as the current flow?
The supplement to the cover sheet shows the facility consisting of a
rotating biological contactor. This should be removed.
The effluent page A.(1.) should read "and prior to expansion above 0.3
MGD..".
The effluent page A. (2.) should read 0.600 MGD for the monthly flow
limit.
The chronic toxocity on A. (4.) should be 0.6 MGD.
I understand that a non -discharge permit was issued for sprsy on the
water reuse. Therefore, the downstream DO should be above this point,
which is approximately 100 yards downstream, just beyond the end of the
aerobic digestor. The upstream can be located just below the Hwy 16
bridge, which is about 100 feet above the discharge.
Hope this helps,
George
G
george.smith.vcf
Name: george.smith.vcf
Type: VCard (text/x-vcard)
Encoding: 7bit
Description: Card for George Smith
1 of 1
2/5/01 4:40 PM

Meredith Ballou
Manager
Tim Church
Director
May 16, 2000
Ms, Christie R. Jackson
NC DENR / Water Quality / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699- 1617
Operators
John Bower
Fred Walters
MAY 2 2 MO0
DENR - WATER QUALITY
BRAPrq.
RE: Renewal of NPDES Permits Nos. NC0021709 and NC0083470 for Jefferson
WWTP and Jefferson WTP respectively
Dear Ms. Jackson;
Please find enclosed information regarding application for renewal of NPDES permits
NC0021709 for the Town of Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant and also NC0083470
for the Town of Jefferson Water Treatment Plant (Filter Backwash Lagoons). There have
been no significant changes at either of these facilities since the present permits were
issued.
In regard to the permit for the Jefferson Wastewater Plant I am taking this opportunity
to request a modification specifically to the monitoring frequency schedule. Through con-
versations with DENR regional office personnel I have learned that rules which determine
the grade of a wastewater facility are no longer based upon a points system for each type
of treatment and the pieces of equipment present on site, but rather are mainly based upon
the facility's average daily flow. In light of these changes I feel that it is appropriate for the
Jefferson WWTP to now be classified as a Grade II facility, thereby changing much of the
permit's required monitoring from three times per week to a eekly frequency.
If you have questions or comments please give ri4e'ar4.3tt [phone] or fax at
[phone].
-Kespectfully,
Tim Church
Water Resources Director
ENCL: Maps of each outfall
Sludge management plan for each facility
PO Box 67 Water Plant [phone]
1233 Hwy. 16 N Wastewater [phone]
Jefferson, NC 28640 FAX [phone]

.44
1 1 •
frd
•
Dlt
X 3165/ •
X 3054
r
2800'
I
•-•
X 2872

TOWN OF JEFFERSON WATER RESOURCES
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
Sludge Management Plan
Biosolids management at the Jefferson WWTP is accomplished by
land application of liquid sludge to 34 acres of currently permitted land.
A pending modification to our permit WQ 0004166 will increase that
capacity to a total of 75 acres.
Three aerobic digesters are used for stabilization and storage. The
main digester is 65,000 gallons in capacity and receives sludge from the
return sludge pump station located between our clarifyer and this digester.
Two centrifugal blowers are dedicated solely to the main digester. It is
equipped with a gravity dewatering device that allows sludge to be thick-
ened to 2 - 3 % total solids.
The remaining two aerobic digesters serve as a station for the addition
of lime for the purpose of stabilization to meet PSRP and Vector Attraction
Reduction requirements. At that point a slurry of hydrated lime is mixed
with the sludge to acheive necessary pH values. An activity log of PSRP
and Vector Attraction Reduction is maintained on site. The two digesters
also provide storage capacity and have a loading station to allow transport
of sludge away from the WWTP. The units have a combined capacity of
25,000 gallons which gives the facility a total sludge storage capacity of
90,000 gallons.
All of our application sites are grasslands consisting of fescue, timothy,
clover, and/or bluegrass. They are used for hay production and also
provide grazing as pastureland. Areas used as pasture land are isolated
by the use of solar -powered fencing. Care is taken to assure that livestock
have access to fresh drinking water at all times.
Sludge is transported to these sites by a 1200 gallon tank truck equipped
with 10 wheel drive. This helps assure that no turf is destroyed by the loss
of traction. A six foot spreader bar is located at the rear of the truck and
has a valve that is controlled from within the cab of the truck. These
features provide even application rates with no ponding or runoff.
Annual sludge analysis is done for metals, nutrients, and TCLP. Annual
soil samples are also taken at each site.

McG
A s s o c i:, T r s
July 9, 1999
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
RE:
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Town of Jefferson
NPDES No. NC0021709
NPDES Permit Application
Return No. 2052
Ashe County, North Carolina
On behalf of the Town of Jefferson, please find enclosed four (4) copies of the
above referenced NPDES permit application. Based on direction from Mr. Jay Lucas of
the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, this project does not require a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) from State Clearinghouse. Therefore, the permit
application is being resubmitted for your review. Also included with this transmittal is a
letter from the Town identifying McGill Associates as their authorized representative,
and a check for $215 which has been revised at your direction to cover the processing
fee.
Since this permit application was incorrectly returned by your office, we assume
that this re -submittal will not be treated as a new submittal but, instead, will be reviewed
immediately. Please note that the original permit application was previously submitted
on April 13, 1999.
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MICHAE . WARESAK, P.E.
Project Engineering Ma
Enclosures
Cc: Meredith Ballou
Tim Church
Jay Lucas
99712/003/cw09ju19.doc
Engineering • Planning • Finance
M� Gil! Associate.,. P.A. • P.Q. Box 2259. Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street. Asheville. NC 28801
828-252-0575 • I:AX 828-252-2518

Town o, f Jefferson
ALDERMEN
L.F. Anderson, Jr
Cbulea Caudill
BIuferd Eldreth
Dana.Tugman
Max Yates
302 Brut Main Strut MAYOR
PO Box 67 D.B. Hightower; DYM
Jefferson, NC 28640 TQWN MANAGER
Meredith $allow
FINANCE OFFICER
May 28, 1999 Cathy L. Howell
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Raleigh, North Carolinas . 27626�0535
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Please be advised that McGill Associates, P.A. is the
authorized representative during the NPDES permitting process for
the Town of Jefferson.
Meredith Ballou
Town Manager
E 0 W ii-,)
JUL 1 3 1999ild;
1
J
DENR - WATER QUAI.t'f
POINT SOURCE B?.` '
A
Phone [phone]

Prowc 7-411 Ely446,44/ //o
/23
99
du y- 41 w 4 1 9
JUN
,�.�,_.. h 4 �.: 6A. �- ib�
33 % /�/ DENR - WATER QUALITY
y W C POINT SOUR!;E BR_ NCH
33 C
711) Ce"-Ct 1----11A4-1. I A- itte
4 9.
. - ,� ,�
.1,�// arson
4 G 'ri w! a__ , c, r��1T '�t1 , fr'' 'u1 Fs% 4C002 1709
NPDES Permit Application
Ashe County, North Carolina
l r-%
Dear Mr. Weaver:
���u _ a 1�99
On behalf of the Town of Jefferson, we offer the following responses to your
letter dated May 27, 1999 regarding the Town's NPDES Permit Application:
1. According to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), the 7Q10
flow for Naked Creek is 2.2 cfs. The proposed discharge is for 0.6 mgd or 0.93 cfs.
Since the wastewater treatment plant will be discharging 0.93 cfs, the actual 7Q10
flow would be a total of 2.2 cfs plus 0.93 cfs, or 3.13 cfs. Therefore, the proposed
discharge would equate to 29.7 percent of the actual 7Q10 flow. This is consistent
with the speculative permit limits issued by your office on February 9, 1998 in which
the instream waste concentration for a 0.6 mgd discharge was determined to be 30
percent. Therefore, we respectfully disagree with your statement that the requested
flow would yield a permitted flow greater than 50 percent of the receiving stream's
7Q10 flow.
2. A Preliminary Engineering Report and an Environmental Assessment for this project
were submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality on March 2, 1999
with the Town's grant application. Review comments from NCDWQ related to this
submittal were provided to us in a letter dated April 21, 1999. Since there were no
review comments related to the Environmental Assessment included in this letter, we
assumed that the Environmental Assessment was acceptable as submitted. The
Environmental Assessment concluded that this project will have no significant
adverse impacts to the environment. The proposed improvements include ammonia
removal and tertiary filters which will actually reduce the overall waste load to the
stream. We find it unusual to receive notice over 12 weeks after submittal that a new
review of the Environmental Assessment is now going to be conducted.
Engineering • Planning • Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville. NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
828-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

3. Please find enclosed a letter from the Town of Jefferson authorizing McGill
Associates as the Town's Authorized Representative during the NPDES permitting
process.
4. The application fee submitted was $400. At your request, we will reduce the amount
of the check to $215 when the application is resubmitted.
In conclusion, we do not believe that a formal Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) from the State Clearinghouse is required for this project. However, if after
reviewing this information NCDWQ still requires a FONSI, we request that the process
be expedited immediately since it has been over 12 weeks since the Environmental
Assessment was submitted to your office. Please notify us as soon as possible as to how
we are to proceed. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate
to contact us.
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
MICHAEL 7. WARESAK, P.E.
Project Engineering Manager
Enclosure
Cc: Meredith Ballou
Tim Church
Jay Lucas
99712/003/cw31 may9. doc

FROM : TOWN OF JEFFERSON
PHONE NO. : 336 246 2288 JUN. 01 1999 09:02PM P2
Town of Jefferson
ALDERMEN 302 East Main Strcct MAYOR
L.F. Anderson, Jr PO Box 67 D.E. Hightower, DYM
Charles Caudill Jefferson, NC 28640 TOWN MANAGER
Blufcrd Eldretb Meredith 8&Uuu
Dana.Tugman FINANCE OFFICER
Max Yates May 28, 1999 Cry L. Howell
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Raleigh, North Carolina ' 27626T0535
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Please be advised that McGi11 Associates, P.A. is the
authorized representative during the NPDES permitting process for
the Town of Jefferson.
Sincerely,
Meredith Halloo
Town Manager
t.
Phone [phone]

Town of Jefferson
ALDERMEN 302 East Main Street MAYOR
L.F. Anderson, Jr PO Box 67 D.E. Hightower, DVM
Charles Caudill Jefferson, NC 28640 TOWN MANAGER
Bluferd Eldreth Meredith Ballou
Dana Tugman FINANCE OFFICER
Max Yates May 8 ' 1 9 9 Cathy L. Howell
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Weaver:
Please be advised that McGill Associates, P.A. is the
authorized representative during the NPDES permitting process for
the Town of Jefferson.
Sincerely,
Meredith Ballou
Town Manager
nE6ffUd�
lu
JUN
- 4 199.
- 4 1999
DENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
D
Phone [phone]

McGffl
ASSOCIATES
January 15, 1999
Mr. David Goodrich
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
RE: Town of Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES # NC0021709
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
On behalf of the Town of Jefferson, please find enclosed two (2) copies of a Preliminary
Engineering Report which evaluates and recommends the expansion of the Town of Jefferson
Wastewater Treatment Plant from a capacity of 0.3 mgd to 0.6 mgd. This engineering report is
being submitted to comply with the State regulation which requires that a plan of action be submitted
when plant flows reach 80% of capacity. It is our understanding that submittal of this report will
allow the Town to treat and discharge flows up to 90% of the permitted flow, at which time plans
and specifications for construction of the proposed expansion must be submitted. By copy of this
letter to George Smith, we are also transmitting one (1) copy of the engineering report to the
Winston-Salem Regional Office for their review.
The Town is currently pursuing funding for the improvements recommended in the report. If
you have any questions regarding the engineering report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
McGILL ASSOCIATES, P.A.
#(4471,/,'
MICHAEL J. WARESAK, P.E.
cc: Meredith Ballou, Manager
Tim Church
George Smith, Winston-Salem Regional Office (w/enclosure)
89115.00Bridges/DG 18Aug7. doc
Engineering • Planning • Finance
McGill Associates, P.A. • P.O. Box 2259, Asheville, NC 28802 • 55 Broad Street, Asheville, NC 28801
704-252-0575 • FAX [phone]

MOO
PIM
forl
rim
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
FACILITY UPGRADE
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
ASHE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
MICHAEL J. WARESAK, P.E.
McGill
ASSOCIATES
Engineering • Planning • Finance
Post Office Box 2259
Asheville, North Carolina 28802
NOVEMBER, 1998
97164.02

AMA
AMR
t. N • •. ' Y.1 t :Lt
YrriYYrkYYr rittt::LY1ri Yiti.
L�k�Sr22YYYYYY�`YYY LLLrr;.rrYY2YYYYLLt1rrLYLYY;
�r�`�rY>L�rYYY��2�ti 22Y`tYYYYYY•r.�={•L. `}�YYY`YY�YYYYkYYY
r}� rirri♦ r r♦ Lr1 trK V,
i tx YYYZY �YY I) YY 2xtk�i{:rYY Y Y > }r$+' r`;Yt
� }YY�r}{��L� Yk} kKk�a�� Yr�� �kY{�{2{{Y'
ri kY>1 Y '{{{rri YF 2 >Lrr r Yrrrh Y r}Yi:Y
?YYY;Yrr�Y2�i 2�rY2`Y ,�,Y�YYrrY2�k2� #Yr,2�rYYY`Y2Yµµ2
.a.:1.;.101;YY{YYY?21 }rfYYYz;��;}{rY`.Y
SECTION DESCRIPTION
Section I Introduction
w., Section II Existing Facilities
Section III Proposed Improvements
Section IV Wastewater Treatment Alternatives
1.+ Section V User Charges
Section VI Recommendations and Conclusions
Appendix
Speculative NPDES Permit Limits
Current NPDES Permit
1
Owl
run
PAGE NO.
1
3
6
14
17
19

MOM
SECTIC
The Town of Jefferson is located 25 miles northeast of Boone in the northwestern
mountain area of North Carolina, where it serves as the county seat for Ashe County (see Figure
I-1). The population of Jefferson is approximately 1,450 persons. Ashe County's southwestern
boundary is with Wataugu County, the southeastern boundary is Wilkes County, the eastern
boundary is Johnson County, the western boundary is Alleghany County, and the northern
boundary is with Grayson County, Virginia.
The Town of Jefferson is located in the South Fork New River Basin, and the wastewater
treatment plant discharges its effluent to Naked Creek, a tributary of the South Fork New River.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) has classified the South Fork New
River as a High Quality Water (HQW), and this area of the South Fork New River is also
designated as an Outstanding Resource Water (ORW). This designation is given to streams that
not only have an "excellent" water quality rating, but that also have a distinctive outstanding use
either as wildlife habitat or for its recreational value. In addition, the Federal Government has
recently named the New River as an American Heritage River as part of the American Heritage
River Initiative.
The Town of Jefferson authorized McGill Associates, P.A. to prepare this Preliminary
Engineering Report (PER) which evaluates alternatives to expand their existing wastewater
treatment plant from 0.3 million gallons per day (MGD) to 0.6 MGD. Each alternative will be
discussed from both a technical and economic viewpoint. Specific recommendations will be made
to allow The Town of Jefferson to accommodate the desired expansion and to continue to provide
service to an expanding customer base.

TOWN OF JEFFERSON
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
•
\� L Pkotittrombin3st3
• 1,
r•
•
r•/kg4997DcLonac. Stceft,AtLs;USA i \ IT`ri ., %- (N' t:. \ \ /

ASO
SECTION iI :.:.
Wastewater Treatment Plant
ISTING FACILITIES
The existing wastewater treatment plant operated by the Town of Jefferson is permitted at
0.3 MGD capacity. The facility currently consists of a manual bar screen, a wet well with three
dry pit influent pumps, a flow splitter box, two aeration basins, one clarifier, chlorination and
dechlorination facilities, and a defoaming agent storage and feed system. The plant has three (3)
digester tanks with a total volume of approximately 103,000 gallons, and the plant currently
utilizes lime stabilization to obtain a Class B biosolids prior to liquid land application by the Town
on permitted sites. Sludge drying beds are also available for backup sludge dewatering.
A performance evaluation by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
conducted in November 1997 revealed that, although there are some operational inefficiencies
which are apparently related to the oil and wax received from a local industry, the Town of
Jefferson wastewater treatment plant is a well -run and well -maintained facility. This same
evaluation also revealed that the existing sewer system has an infiltration/inflow rate much lower
than that considered excessive, indicating the collection system is not responsible for any
significant increase in the plant flow. The oil and wax may be contributing to some of the plant's
inefficiencies with solids settling. However, this is a problem that should be handled by adequate
pretreatment at the source and does not have any direct effect on the need for plant expansion.
Plant flow at the Jefferson facility has increased, however, to the point that the plant is
now operating at more than 80% of it's rated capacity. Current State regulations require that a
facility prepare an engineering report with a plan of action when effluent flows reach 80% of
design capacity. If adequate sewer service for the economic growth and well being of' the
Page 3

Jefferson community is to be available for the future, the capacity of the wastewater treatment
f"' plant will have to be increased.
eml
AIM
flut
The existing NPDES permit for the Town of Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant has
the monthly discharge limitations shown below in Table 1. A copy of the NPDES Permit is
included in the Appendix to this report:
TABLE 1
CURRENT NPDES EFFLUENT PERMIT LIMITS
THE TOWN OF JEFFERSON WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
Permit No. NC0021709
`,`,•M:!•1: tiff!.:>ti•V:! !:;•.:!:..1
!. I.M. ri
Flow
0.3 MGD
BOD
30.0 mg/1
TSS
30.0 mg/1
Fecal Coliform
200/100/1
Total Residual Chlorine
28.0 ug/1
pH
6.0-9.0
Page 4

011111
All
fal
tun
enq
The following table shows the existing capacities for the various units in the
wastewater treatment plant. Based on a preliminary investigation, the table also contains
recommendations to increase the capacities of the units to accommodate the proposed
flow increase to 0.6 MGD.
TABLE 2
EXISTING TREATMENT UNITS
THE TOWN OF JEFFERSON
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY
.}:ti ti?Ytit l. ••• • . T•h'•}'....•.� •::'}: t��•::•}�
U...........:•:..::::>:::<.::�<.::::::::::.:::..
�•: ••��'•�• •'•��•••:::.� �• �' -• :: ({?•:•: .�': .:/':.� .:..• •........• ��• •: •• ••.. � .••••�-' � •::�• �:::�,:�' .•.:.• •:.::•:•:•••• � :• :•• �•'i':�:�:�:':::'
:CURRE�N'F...
rC ..AC T.
•{� :•: •.�•�i •� :'::.•.,...�, ... •.• .'..• -- •••'...: .'.:.. �.• ••..{
CO�I�i�ND�;!�.••� •�.N::}:�
Bar Screen
Adequate for both current and
projected flows
No improvements needed
Influent Pump Station
600 gpm total pumping capacity, 325
gpm with largest pump out
Upgrade pumps and install
variable frequency drives to
handle new flow
Splitter Box
Currently not functioning properly;
uneven flow split
Construct new splitter box
Aeration Basins
Adequate for current capacity
add aeration basin for increase
to 0.6 MGD
Clarifier
330 gpm/SF @ 0.3 mgd
add new clarifier for increase
to 0.6 MGD
Chlorine Contact
Basin
43 minute detention time @ 0.3 mgd
Construct new chlorine
contact basin for additional
contact time for 0.6 MGD
Dechlorination Feed
System
Capacity adequate, feed equipment in
underground vault
Provide new above ground
storage and feed system
Effluent Flow Meter
Adequate for current capacity
Relocate existing flow meter
to new chlorine contact basin
Sludge
Digester/Storage
Sludge handling and storage adequate
Additional sludge storage
needed for 0.6 MGD
Sludge Pumps
Adequate for existing facility
New sludge pumps required
for new facilities
Page 5

MEM
SECTIONL PRUPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
The Town of Jefferson's wastewater treatment facility has a NPDES permit to discharge
0.3 MGD to Naked Creek. Average daily discharge for the 12-month period between April, 1997
and March, 1998 was approximately 0.255 MGD with daily peak flows as high as 0.57 MGD.
This average daily discharge represents 85% of the permitted discharge. As mentioned in an
earlier section of this report, infiltration and inflow do not play a significant role in the high flows
at the facility. For that reason, the plant capacity needs to be increased in order to treat future
influent flows. This section will discuss each of the plant facilities and improvements which will be
required to upgrade the wastewater treatment plant to a capacity of 0.6 MGD.
The NCDWQ has issued to the Town speculative NPDES permit limits to increase the
discharge beyond 0.3 mgd, up to 0.6 mgd. A copy of the speculative limits is included in the
Appendix. These limits include an extremely stringent requirement of 5.0 mg/I for BOD, which
will necessitate the construction of tertiary filters as part of any plant expansion. The speculative
permit limits also include a stringent limit of 2.0 mg/1 for ammonia -nitrogen (NH3). Therefore,
ammonia removal must be addressed in the proposed expansion.
BAR SCREEN
The current headworks consists of a manual bar screen with one-half inch spacing. At this
time, it appears this screen is adequate for both the current and projected flows. No improvements
are planned for the bar screen at this time.
INFLUENT PUMP STATION
There are currently three (3) dry pit, flooded suction influent pumps with rated capacities
of 150, 175 and 275 gallons per minute (gpm). Although these have been adequate for current
plant conditions, they would not be able to handle the anticipated peak flows for a 0.6 mgd
facility. Utilizing a peaking factor of 2.5, the influent pump station would be required to pump
Page 6

1.5 mgd or 1042 gpm with the largest pump out of service. It is recommended that the two
mo smaller pumps be replaced with 550gpm pumps, and that a fourth 275gpm pumpbe added to
P P P P P�
provide a total pumping capacity of 1100 gpm with one pump out of service. It is recommended
a.
that two of the new pumps be installed with variable -frequency drives to pump lower influent
flows and equalize flows into the plant. Associated piping upgrades will be required with the
OM
installation of the new pumps.
Another improvement needed in the wet well is replacement of the floats controlling the
influent pumps. The old floats no longer work and the pumps are being operated manually.
AERATION BASINS SPLITTER BOX
At this time, influent flow is pumped to a metal box between Aeration Basins Nos.1 and 2,
where it is divided into the two basins. Return sludge is also pumped to this point for distribution
to the aeration basins. From an operational standpoint, this box is creating a problem by not
dividing flow evenly. Since both the basins are virtually the same size, they should receive the
same flow. However it appears that Aeration Basin No. 1 is getting a greater portion of the flow,
which is creating some operational problems for the plant.
It is recommended that the two (2) existing aeration basins be hydraulically connected to
function as one (1) basin, and that a new splitter box be constructed to split the flow between the
existing basins and the proposed aeration basin. A larger splitter box with adjustable weir gates
should be built which will ensure adequate mix of the return sludge and influent flow and would
allow flows to be divided between the basins. Because the existing aeration basins were not sized
to achieve ammonia removal through nitrification, the splitter box most likely will need to be
designed to divert less than half the flow to the existing aeration basins. This will require that the
new aeration basin be designed to treat greater than half the flow to meet the stringent ammonia
limit.
Page 7

NMI
MIII
AERATION BASINS
For expansion to 0.6 MGD, an additional aeration basin will have to be constructed. This
new basin will be built adjacent to the existing basins and will operate in a similar manner, with an
aeration system consisting of floor mounted diffusers and aeration blowers installed in a blower
building. The new aeration basin will most likely need to be designed to treat greater than half the
plant flow to allow the existing aeration basins to achieve ammonia removal.
According to the NCDWQ report, it would also appear that there is a deficiency in the
operation of the diffusers in Basin No. 1, which is causing some operational problems in the waste
treatment process. The low oxygen levels are suspected to be causing excessive filamentous
growth, which is periodically resulting in poor settleability in the clarifiers. Therefore, after
0.4 construction of the new basin, it is recommended that the flow be removed from Basin No. 1 and
the coarse bubble diffuser assemblies be replaced with fine bubble disc diffusers assemblies that
Mit will provide more efficient oxygen transfer to the wastewater and improved mixing of the basin.
As mentioned earlier, it is also recommended that the two existing aeration basins be hydraulically
connected after the new aeration basin is constructed to simplify plant operation.
During design of the plant expansion, consideration should be given to the addition of a
"selector" zone upstream of the aeration basins to minimize filamentous growth and provide the
potential for nutrient removal. The selector zone is an anoxic or anaerobic zone located ahead of
aeration that promotes the growth of preferred microorganisms in the biological process. This
selector zone may also reduce the size of the aeration basin required to provide adequate
ammonia removal.
AERATION BASIN BLOWERS
The plant currently has two (2) positive displacement aeration blowers, each rated at 625
cfm, to provide air to the aeration basin. Blower capacity for the existing facilities is generally
adequate. However, any expansion will require additional blower capacity to be supplied. It is
Page 8

recommended that two (2) additional blowers be installed for the new aeration basin inside a new
blower building.
CLARIFIERS
The existing 34-foot diameter clarifier has a surface loading rate at 0.3 mgd of
approximately 330 gpd per square foot. The clarifier has experienced some difficulties with
achieving sufficient solids removal, and the plant operator occasionally adds polymer to aid in
settling of solids. It is recommended that a new clarifier be constructed for the proposed
expansion, along with a clarifier splitter box with adjustable weir gates to allow the operator
additional flexibility in dividing flows to the clarifier. The additional clarifier will also increase the
reliability of the plant by providing multiple units.
BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT
The Town is currently utilizing the 70,000 gallon digester as an aerated sludge holding
tank, along with the other two smaller sludge holding tanks. The total liquid sludge storage
capacity is approximately 103,000 gallons. Current State regulations require that a facility have at
least thirty (30) days of liquid sludge storage. Based on 2% solids in the basins, and an estimated
730 pounds per day of sludge to be wasted at the future design flow of 0.6 mgd, approximately
131,300 gallons of liquid sludge storage would be required. Therefore, it is recommended that a
second 70,000 gallon aerated sludge holding tank be constructed with the proposed plant
expansion. An additional aeration blower will be required for the new sludge holding tank.
The Town currently utilizes a manual method of lime stabilization to provide a Class B
biosolids, which is land applied on permitted property, typically in liquid form. The Town
operates the land application program under Permit No. WQ0004166. The current operation
includes adding bags of lime to the smaller sludge holding tanks, mixing the lime into the sludge
with mechanical mixers, and pumping of liquid sludge into trucks for land application. It is
recommended that a sludge loading station be constructed to allow for simplified disposal of the
Page 9

liquid Class B biosolids. In addition, it is recommended that the Town further improve their
sludge treatment by installing as sludge dryer facility which will produce a Class A biosolids
product. A dryer will significantly reduce the volume of sludge produced by providing up to 90%
solids content in the final proudct. The Town's existing land application permit should be
maintained as a back-up disposal method.
Due to the limited reliability and performance of the sand drying beds, the Town seldom
uses the drying beds to dewater the liquid sludge. To improve reliability and biosolids dewatering
capacity, it is recommended that a belt filter press facility be constructed in conjunction with a
sludge dryer. The belt filter press and dryer would be typically installed inside a building, allowing
for operation during poor weather. Installation of the belt filter press facility will allow the sand
drying beds to be demolished. With the demolition of the sand drying beds, the existing pump
�., that is currently used to pump sludge from the smaller sludge holding tank to the sand drying beds
can be utilized to pump the liquid sludge to the proposed sludge loading station. The
r•, construction of a dried sludge storage building is also recommended to protect the final product
of the new equipment from becoming wet and harder to manage. A concrete slab with push walls
and a roof would be sufficient to protect the dried sludge and provide an area to load sludge for
hauling off -site.
It is also recommended that the deteriorating wood structure which covers the existing
aeration blowers for the digester be demolished and replaced with an enclosed metal building.
CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
Current contact time at the existing chlorine contact basin at 0.3 mgd is approximately 43
minutes. While this is more than adequate for the current flow, doubling the capacity of the plant
would reduce the contact time to approximately 21 minutes, less than the recommended 30
minutes. Since the existing basin is a baffled, metal structure, it would not be easy to expand the
size. An increase in capacity at the plant will require either a new structure sized for 0.6 MGD or
effir, an additional structure adjacent to the existing one to increase the contact time with the chlorine.
Page 10

MI
PPM
Mil
Fr
An upgrading of the current chlorine feed system is also recommended at this time, with
replacement of the chlorinators, piping and scales. A new building for the chlorine equipment is
recommended to ease maintenance and unloading new chlorine cylinders.
DECHLORTNATION
Currently dechlorination is performed at the chlorine contact basin discharge pipe. The
feed facility for the liquid sodium metabisulfite is located in a below ground vault, which is not
ideal for accessibility and long term functioning of the system. As part of the proposed expansion,
it is recommended that a new sodium metabisulfite storage and feed system be installed in an
aboveground enclosure. If a new chlorine contact basin is constructed, the existing chlorine
Nm
contact basin can be converted to a dechlorination contact basin.
rail
Mg
mg
Mg
fml
Pen
fml
PM
POST AERATION
The speculative permit limits include a minimum dissolved oxygen (D.O.) concentration of 6.0
mg/1 in the plant effluent. Currently, there is no minimum requirement for effluent D.O.
Therefore, it is recommended that a blower be installed to add air after the dechlorination
chemical feed point to increase the D.O. in the effluent.
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
In addition to the above improvements, the following items should be included with any
expansion of the plant:
Tertiary filters
Due to the stringent effluent limits issued in the speculative permit limits, any expansion
will require the addition of tertiary filters to the treatment process to protect the water quality of
fint
Page 11

rgla
011
flegl
the receiving stream and the South Fork New River. These filters will be included between the
clarifers and the chlorine contact basin in the treatment process as a final treatment prior to
discharge.
Emer2encv power
Any expansion will include the addition of emergency power to the wastewater treatment
plant, which currently has no provisions for power in the event of a power failure.
Potable Water Line
Within the next year, the Town will be installing a potable water line along the highway
adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant. Therefore, it is recommended that this project include
the installation of a 6-inch water line to the wastewater treatment plant.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
From an environmental standpoint, the proposed wastewater treatment plant
4.1 improvements will serve to improve the quality of the water in Naked Creek and, consquently,
the New River. The expanded facility will be designed to provide for significant reductions in the
�-+ major pollutants that are discharged. In order to achieve this higher level of treatment, tertiary
filters will be added and the whole treatment process refined. This means that in terms of total
pounds of pollutants released through the effluent, the new plant will actually discharge
significantly less than the current plant, even at twice the allowable discharge rate. The table
0.' below reflects the estimated reductions in biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended
solids (TSS) and ammonia -nitrogen (NIH3-N) that will result after the proposed improvements are
aim
constructed.
Owl
Page 12

AEI
Fim
ESTIMATED POLLUTANT REDUCTIONS
PARAMETER
CURRENT
LIMIT
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
AT 0.3 MGD
PROPOSED
DESIGN
LIMIT
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
AT 0.6 MGD
ESTIMATED
REDUCTION
BOD
30 mg/1
75.1 lb/day
5.0 mg/1
25.0 lb/day
- 50.1 lb/day
TSS
30 mg/1
75.1 lb/day
5.0 mg/1
25.0lb/day
- 50.1 lb/day
Ammonia
None
37.5 lb/day
2.0 mg/1
10.01b/day
- 27.5 lb/day
In addition, the proposed improvements will increase the dissolved oxygen concentration
in the effluent to maintain a minimum of 6.0 mg/1. This increased oxygen content will be
beneficial to fish and wildlife in the stream. The proposed improvements include an emergency
�► generator to provide electricity for operation of the plant during power outages, which will
minimize the potential for sewer overflows to the stream. The proposed second clarifier will also
improve plant reliability and reduce the potential for carry over of solids into the effluent.
rint
The recent designation of the New River as an American Heritage River has increased the
environmental awareness of the general public and the Town representatives. At this time, the
federal government has indicated that there will be no additional regulations imposed upon
treatment facilities as a result of the designation. However, a "river navigator" is expected to be
appointed to monitor closely the water quality of the river. This increased monitoring should
provide the Town with assistance in maintaining the highest water quality standards in the effluent
that is discharged.
Page 13

This section of the report presents alternatives to meet the expansion requirements of the
treatment facility of the Town ofJefferson. Preliminary project cost estimates are provided at the
end of this section.
ALTERNATE NO. 1
NO EXPANSION
This alternative represents the least costly short-term option for Jefferson since no capital
would be invested, but the long-term costs of not being able to allow future economic growth in
the area would be much greater. The existing plant is rapidly approaching full capacity after which
no additional industries or development would be possible. This is an unacceptable alternative to
the Town ofJefferson.
ALTERNATE NO. 2
EXPANSION OF EXISTING FACILITIES TO 0.6 MGD CAPACITY
This alternative represents the best option for the Town. It will allow for the future
growth of economic opportunities in the area while at the same time safeguarding the water
quality in the area. It will also give the Town an opportunity to improve the operation of the
existing facilities by making needed improvements at the same time the expansion is being
completed. It is recommended that the plant expansion consider the construction of a selector
zone upstream of the aeration basin to decrease filamentous bacteria growth which can cause
poor settleability in the clarifiers. The selector zone will also provide the potential for biological
nutrient removal of phosphorous and nitrogen. Although nutrient removal is not currently a
requirement of the effluent permit, current trends in the eastern part of the State indicate that
NCDWQ may require nutrient removal in the future. This alternative also includes the installation
Page 14

.04
mit
of a sludge dryer facility to produce a Class A biosolids and significantly reduce the quantity of
Am
treated biosolids generated at the plant. A site plan showing the proposed improvements is
provided at the end of this section.
ALTERNATE NO. 3
EXPANSION FACILITIES WITH SPRAY IRRIGATION OF TREATED WATER
This alternative requires that all the expanded facilities be constructed as in Alternative
No. 2, with the addition of a 0.3 mgd pumping and piping system for a spray irrigation system.
This alternative represents the most expensive alternative due the increase costs of equipment and
the land requirements for spray irrigation. This alternative is not cost effective and, therefore, is
considered infeasible.
4.14
ALERNTATIVE NO. 4
CENTRALIZED REGIONAL FACILITY
iso
The construction of a centralized regional wastewater treatment facility could conceivably
provide service to the Town of Jefferson, the Town of West Jefferson, and other areas of Ashe
County. The design capacity of a regional facility is estimated to be 2.0 mgd. Due to this larger
capacity, it is likely that this facility would have to be constructed near and discharge to the South
Fork New River. From an environmental standpoint, this option is not preferred because a
relatively large amount of environmentally sensitive land would be impacted for the construction
far.of the facility near the river. Although there would be some minor reductions in operational costs
through consolidation of personnel and testing, the additional capital costs to purchase the land,
construct a new facility, and construct pump stations, force mains and gravity lines to transmit the
sewage to the regional facility would far exceed the minor operational savings that could be
expected over a 20 year planningPeriod. In addition, based on past history,it is highly unlikely
that the two (2) towns and the county would be successful in developing the required agreements
PM
that would be necessary for a centralized facility. For these reasons, this alternative is eliminated
as a feasible alternative.
Page 15

EXISTING,._.._.._.._..-
CHtOr (NE CONTACT BASIN
PROPOSED (CONVERT; TO
6" WATER LINE DECHLORINATION
BASIN)
ULTRA —VIOLET
wW_ —is DISINFECTION
2" SUCTION FOR
FROTH SPRAY
PROPOSED
INFLUENT PUMP
STATION IMPROVEMN TS
MH
PROPOSED
\ CHLORINE BUILDING
MH
•
-
•
BOX \PULL \
DEFOAMING BUILDING —
(CONVERT TO
DECHLORINATION
MH ��.SUILDING)
•
•
•
•
PROPOSED
EMERGENCY
GENERATOR
PROPOSED
BLOWER ADDITION
PROPOSED
TRUCK LOADING
STATION
•
N.
•
•
•
•
•
NAKED CREEK �—.-
MH
V—NOTCH WEIR &
FLOW RECORDER
TANK
'•"A
PROPOSED
CHLORINE CONTACT
BASIN
PROPOSED
REPLACE SLUDGE METERS
PROPOSED
TERTIARY FILTER (DEMOLISH EXIST. BLOWER
BUILDING & RELOCATE BLOWERS)
PROPOSED /
NEW BLOWER BUILDING, 1
RELOCATED DIGESTER BLOWER,
2 NEW AERATION BLOWERS
PROPOSED
AERATION SPLITTER BOX
i
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT EXPANSION
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
asre courrryNORTH CAROWA
PLAN
SCALE: 1 "= 30'
McGi11
ASSOCIATES
ENGINEERING. PLANNING •FINANCE

ALTERNATIVE NO. 1
This alternative requires no expansion to the wastewater treatment plant and therefore there are
no costs associated with this alternative.
Page 16

PIM
von
Aft
014
01114
AMR
ALTERNATIVE NO. 2
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
November 10, 1998
Item:.....: .. :- ...:..:.
'IrOTAL•COSTS:::
1
MOBILIZATION
$63,000
2
INFLUENT PUMP STATION UPGRADES
$80,000
3
YARD PIPING
$70,000
4
$8,000
6-INCH POTABLE WATER
5
$20,000
AERATION BASIN SPLITTER BOX
6
NEW AERATION BASIN
$235,000
7
$20,000
CLARIFIER SPLITTER BOX
8
NEW CLARIFIER
$125,000
9
$150,000
TERTIARY FILTERS
10
NEW CHLORINE CONTACT BASIN
$30,000
11
DECHLORINATION STORAGE AND FEED FACILITY
$30,000
12
CHLORINATION STORAGE AND FEED FACILITY
$30,000
13
REPLACEMENT OF DIFFUSERS IN EXIST. AERATION BASIN
$30,000
14
$175,000
BELT FILTER PRESS AND ACCESSORIES
15
$150,000
BELT FILTER PRESS/SLUDGE DRYER BUILDING
16
SLUDGE DRYER
$350,000
17
NEW AERATION BLOWERS
$30,000
18
POST AERATION BLOWER
$10,000
19
NEW BLOWER BUILDING (DEMOLISH OLD)
$50,000
20
70,000 GALLON SLUDGE HOLDING TANK
$50,000
21
NEW BLOWER AND DIFFUSERS FOR SLUDGE TANK
$33,000
22
SLUDGE PUMPING IMPROVEMENTS (NEW PUMPS)
$20,000
23
SLUDGE FLOW METERS (ONE WASTE, ONE RETURN)
$30,000
24
SLUDGE LOADING STATION
$4,000
25
DEWATERED SLUDGE COVERED STORAGE
$30,000
26
$1,000
RELOCATE EXISTING FLOWMETER
27
$15,000
SITE WORK AND DEMOLITION
28
EMERGENCY GENERATOR
$50,000
29
ELECTRICAL
$220,000
:---------
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
$2 109 000
Contingencies
$210,900
201 Facility Plan Amendment & Environmental Assessment
$30,000
Engineering Design
$135,800
Construction Inspection and Contract Administration
$52,200
Legal/Administrative
$20,000
.... ..... ...........TOTAL. PROJE.C.. :.C.OS.TS.
•

own
1101
IONI
Ala
Pik
ALTERNATIVE NO. 3
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
November 10, 1998
Item .::. • :..:...:..:. :.......:....:.. ::
TOTAL COSTS
1
WWTP IMPROVEMENTS (ALTERNATIVE 2)
$2,109,000
2
80 ACRES FOR SPRAY IRRIGATION @ $5,000/ACRE
$400,000
3
2" SPRAY IRRIGATION PIPING (61,250 LF @ $8/LF)
$490,000
4
1,250 SPRINKLER HEADS a, $50 each
$61,250
5
SPRAY IRRIGATION PUMP STATION
$125,000
6
15 DAY STORAGE LAGOON (4.5 MG)
$1,800,000
7
6-INCH PIPE TO IRRIGATION FIELDS (15,000 LF a $20/L
$300,000
:::<:::<>: .:.:::::.. .. <,.:TOTAL:CONSTRUCTION. COSTS
$5;285,250...:.
Contingencies
$528,525
Engineering Design
$310,500
Construction Inspection and Contract Administration
$89,500
Legal/Administrative
$25,000
............ ....... . ..:............. :.TOTAL PROJECT COSTS::::: :::::. _•
$ ,23$9: -

A. CURRENT SEWER RATE SCI1 EIULE — TOWN OF JEFFERSON
INSIDE TOWN LIMITS
OUTSIDE TOWN LIMITS
RESIDENTIAL
0 — 2000 GAL
2001 — 5000 GAL
S3.66 minimum charge
$0.1832 per 100 gallons
$7.32 minimum charge
$0.3664 per 100 gallons
NON-RESIDENTIAL
0 — 2000 GAL
2001 — 5000 GAL
5001-10,000 GAL
OVER 10,000 GAL
$3.66 minimum charge
$0.1832 per 100 gallons
$0.1832 per 100 gallons
$0.1832 per 100 gallons
$7.32 minimum charge
$0.3664 per 100 gallons
$0.3664 per 100 gallons
$0.3664 per 100 gallons
B. CURRENT WATER RATE SCHEDULE — TOWN OF JEFFERSON
INSIDE TOWN LIMITS
OUTSIDE TOWN LIMITS
RESIDENTIAL
0 — 2000 GAL
2001 — 5000 GAL
$15.24 minimum charge
$0.2480 per 100 gallons
$30.48 minimum charge
$0.4960 per 100 gallons
NON-RESIDENTIAL
0 — 2000 GAL
2001 — 5000 GAL
5001-10,000 GAL
OVER 10,000 GAL
$15.24 minimum charge
$0.2480 per 100 gallons
$0.1858 per 100 gallons
$0.1858 per 100 gallons
$30.48 minimum charge
$0.4960 per 100 gallons
$0.3716 per 100 gallons
$0.3716 per 100 gallons
Page 17

Om
H
Pia
OR
fille
AIIR
Isml
014
C. AVERAGE MONTHLY USER CHARGE
Based on the current user charges, the monthly charge for sewer service to a resident
located inside the Town limits is $9.16 per 5,000 gallons. The monthly charge for water service
for a resident located inside the Town limits is $22.68 per 5,000 gallons. The total water and
sewer charge per 5,000 gallons is, therefore, $31.84 for a resident located inside the Town limits.
Page 18

RECOMMENDATIONS
In order for the Town of Jefferson to continue to provide sewer treatment to an expanding
customer base, it is recommended that the existing treatment plant to be expanded from the
current capacity of 0.3 MGD to 0.6 MGD. As part of the proposed expansion, the treatment
facility should be upgraded with tertiary filters so that the quality of the effluent that enters the
receiving stream is higher than that of the current discharge. Other significant improvements,
including an additional secondary clarifier and an emergency power facility, are proposed which
will improve the reliability of the plant and reduce the potential for sewer overflows in the future.
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
There are several potential funding sources available to the Town of Jefferson for this
project. These sources include the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), the Economic
Development Administration (EDA), the United States Department of Agriculture - Rural
Development (USDA-RD) and the North Carolina Rural Center. In addition, the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Construction Grants and Loans Section provides grants
through the Clean Water Trust Fund, and provides grants and low interest loans through the State
Revolving Fund (SRF). The State of North Carolina has recently passed a major bond referendum
which has increased significantly the available funds in the SRF program. It is recommended that
the Town begin working with Region D Council of Governments immediately to identify the
funding sources with the greatest potential so that grants and loans can be actively pursued as
soon as possible. The NCDWQ Construction Grants and Loans Section has already been made
aware of the project and the possibility of the Town pursuing funding through their organization.
I'age 19

:! t
tio,
fin
•
=} i
:77
far
APPENDIX
n r

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
417A
NCDENR
JAMES B. HuNrJM
GOVERNOR
WAYNE MCDEVITT
SECRETARY
A. PRESTON HOWARD,
JR., P.E.
DIRECTOR
014
011,4
February 9, 1998
Mr. Meredith Ballou, Town Manager
Town of Jefferson
P.O. Box 67
Jefferson, North Carolina 28640-0067
Dear Mr. Ballou:
*GILL ASSOC. FILE COPY
nECEIVep
FEB 13 1998
ProF/le1#Ct # �''7y� °i
Subject: Speculative Limits for Jefferson WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0021709
Ashe County
This letter is in response to the request of Mr. Danny Bridges of McGill
Associates for speculative effluent limits for the Town of Jefferson WWTP's •
proposed expansion to 330,000 GPD on an interim basis and 600,000 GPD on a
permanent basis. The staff of the NPDES Unit of the Point Source Branch has
reviewed this request.
Please be advised that response to a speculative request does not guarantee
that the Division will issue an NPDES permit to discharge treated wastewater. lit
accordance with the North Carolina General Statutes, the practicable waste
treatment and disposal alternative with the least adverse impact on the
environment is required to be implemented. Nondischarge alternatives, such as
spray irrigation or connection to a regional treatment and disposal system, are
considered to be environmentally preferable to a discharge. Therefore, prior to
submittal of an NPDES application, a detailed alternatives analysis must be
prepared to assure that the environmentally sound alternative was selected from
the reasonable cost effective options. Attached is a guidance document that will
assist you or your consultant in preparing an engineering alternatives analysis.
The Town of Jefferson discharges into Naked Creek, which has a stream
classification of C+. The plus (+) symbol identifies the receiving stream as being
subject to a special management strategy to protect downstream waters designated
as ORW (outstanding resources water). Jefferson's WWTP is located upstream of
the segment of the New River that has been reclassified as C ORW.
P.O. BOX 29535, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626.0535
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Letter to Mr. Ballou
Page 2
Currently, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has specific management
strategies for the New River that have been approved to protect the exceptional resource
waters. This strategy includes designated limitations for new and expanded dischargers,
stormwater controls; 50%aof the total instream flow not to be exceeded by total volume`
of upstream discharges, and safety factors for toxics and toxicity to be protected at the
ORW segment. The specific action recommended for the South Fork New and New
Rivers ORW area per 15A NCAC 2B.0225 (e)(4)(B) and (C) states that "new or
expanded NPDES permitted discharges located upstream of the designated ORW" will
comply with limits for oxygen consuming wastes of BOD5 of 5 mg/1 and NH3-N of 2
mg/1. A dissolved oxygen limit of 6 mg/1 and a fecal coliform limit of 200/lOOm1 are
also required.- In addition, a limit for. total suspended solids of 20 mg/1 will be applied to
all discharges to non -trout waters. Therefore, the following effluent limitations for
tertiary treatment will be .applicable to.a11 fo a expansions for the Jefferson.facilitx:
BOD5
NH3-N
DO
TSS
Fecal
Summer
5 mg/1
2 mg/1
6 mg/1
20 mg/1
200/100m1
Winter
lO mg/1
4mg/1
6mg/1
20 mg/1
200/1O0m1
• DWQ is recommending chlorine limits and dech.1.o_rii tion.for all new or
expanding dischargers proposing the use of chlorine for disinfection. An acceptable level
of chlorine in the effluent at either wa,steflow is .28iepght. The process of
chlorination/dechlorination or an alternate form of disinfection, such as ultraviolet
radiation, should allow the facility to comply with the total residual chlorine limit.
The instream waste concentrations (IWC) for Jefferson at the expanded
wasteflows are: -
Wasteflow IWC
0.330 MGD . 4199
O9MQD �oa
A chronic toxicity testing requirement with quarterly monitoring will remain a
condition of the NPDES permit. Per 15A NCAC 2B.0225 (e)(4)(B)(ii), "a safety factor •
shall be applied ...to protect for chronic toxicity in the ORW segment ... ". The Town
can anticipate that effluent limits and/or monitoring.for cadmium, cyanide, copper, lead,
• • �a :+�.•�:iC!'�+�Pl'Y: .isi' •`-'C�Rt:•�.:. �•N .•: .•... •.�':.Yi ... ,.• •.., .. _ �..
silver, zinc, and mercurymay be recommended after a review of monitoring data. A '
o plee'evaluadon of limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants
will be addressed at the time of formal NPDES application..

.A•,
RIM
Letter to Mr. Ballou
page 3
DWQ has implemented a basinwide water quality management initiative. Tlie
plan for the New River Basin was issued in September 1995. The plan attempted to
address all sources of point and nonpoint pollutants where deemed necessary to protect of
restore water quality standards. In addressing interaction of sources, wasteload
allocations may be affected. Those facilities that have already committed to high levels
of treatment technology are least likely to be affected.
We hope this information provides some assistance in your planning endeavors.
As previously mentioned, final NPDES effluent limitations will be determined after a
formal permit application and modification request has been submitted to the Division.
If there are any.additional questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact
Jackie Nowell at [phone] (ext. 512).
E
. Sincerely, .
David A. Goodrich
NPDES Unit Supervisor
Water Quality Section
DAG/JMN
cc: Steve Mauney
Bobby Blowe, Construction Grants
fanny B. Bridges, McGill and Associates
• Michelle Suverkrubbe
Central Files
WLA File

Permit No. NC0021709
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
1121
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,
0.1
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Town of Jefferson
01111
to receiving waters designated as Naked Creek in the New River Basin
rim
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I,
II, and III hereof.
Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant
NC Highway 16/88
east of Jefferson
Ashe County
The permit shall become effective December 1, 1995
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on November 30, 2000
Signed this day October 30, 1995
. Preston Howard, Jr. .E., Director
Division of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

«•1
Permit No. NC0021709 .
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Jefferson
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 0.300 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of a wet
well with manual bar screen, flow splitter, dual aeration basins, clarifier, chlorination
disinfection, dechlorination, aerobic digestor and gravity sand filters located at Jefferson
Wastewater Treatment Plant, NC Highway 16/88, east of Jefferson, Ashe County (See Part III
of this Permit), and
ram, 2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Naked
Creek which is classified Class C+ waters in the New River Basin.

L,WY
TOWN OF JEFFERSON
Permit # NC0021709
Naked Creek, Class C+
Quad #: B13NW, Quad Name: Jefferson
Ashe County
I,P
c7r.
cr.cI
3
S

1 1 1 I 1 4 3 l I 1 I 1 1 3 1 1 1 3, 1
A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0021709
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s)'serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
—Measurement Sample *Sample
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg. Daily Max Frequency - • Type 1.ocation
Flow 0.300 MGD Continuous Recording 1 or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C** 30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/1 3/Week Composite E, I
TSS 30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/I 3/Week Composite E, I
Fecal Conform (geometric mean) 200.0 /100 ml 400.0 /100 ml 3/Week Grab E
Total Residual Chlorine 28.0 µg/I 3/Week Grab E
Temperature 3/Week Grab E
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN) Semi-annually Composite E
Total 'Phosphorus : Semi-annually Composite E
Chronic ' Toxicity*** _ Quarterly ' Composite E
Cadmium 14.0 14/1 Weekly Composite E
Cyanide 35.0 µg/I Weekly Grab E
* Sample locations: E- Effluent, I - Influent
** The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective influent value
(85% removal).
*** Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 14%;August, November, February, May; See Part III, Condition H.
+ Mercury limit shall be effective December 1,1996. Monitoring will be required until the limit is implemented.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored 3/week at the effluent by grab
sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

l l l l l 4 3 4 4 l l l l l l l l t o I
A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0021709
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. (Continued)
fffluer_t Characteristics
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Mercury+
Silver
Discharge limitations
Units (specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg. Daily Max
0.08 µg/1
-Monitoring
•Measurement
Frequency
2/Month
2/Month
2/Month
Weekly
Quarterly
Requirements
Sample "Sample
Type Locatio_n
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
•

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Mr. Tim Church
P. 0. Box 67
Jefferson, North Carolina 28640
Dear Mr. Church:
wolf
HNFl
December 18, 1995
Subject: NPDES Permit Modification
NPDES Permit No. NC0021709
Town of Jefferson WWTP
Ashe County
On October 30, 1995, the Division of Environmental Management issued NPDES Permit No.
NC0021709 to the Town of Jefferson WWTP. A review of the permit file has indicated that an error was
inadvertently made in the permit. Accordingly, we are forwarding herewith the modification to the
subject permit to correct the error. This permit modification is to the effluent monitoring page. The
modification corrects the reference that the toxicity testing information is found in part III Condition G,
not Condition H.
Please find enclosed an amended effluent monitoring page which should be inserted into your permit.
The old pages should be discarded. All other terms and conditions contained in the original permit remain
unchanged and in full effect. This permit modification is issued pursuant to the requirements of North
Carolina General Statutes 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit modification
are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty
(30) days -following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of
Administrative Hearings, Post Office Drawer 27447, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447. Unless such
demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
If you have any questions concerning this permit modification, please contact Mary Cabe at telephone
number [phone], extension 518.
Sincerely,
��/A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
S'
cc. Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Permits and Engineering Unit
Lany Ausley
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0021709
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics pischarge limitations Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg. Daily Max Frequency T pe location
Flow 0.300 MGD Continuous Recording I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C** 30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/l 3/Week Composite E, I
TSS 30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/I 3/Week Composite E, I
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0 /100 ml 400.0 /100 ml 3/Week Grab E
Total Residual Chlorine 28.0 µg/l 3/Week Grab E
Temperature 3/Week Grab E
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN) Semi-annually Composite E
Total Phosphorus Semi-annually Composite E
Chronic Toxicity*** Quarterly Composite E
Cadmium 14.0 µg/I Weekly Composite E
Cyanide 35.0 µg/l Weekly Grab E
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective influent value
(85% removal).
*** Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 14%;August, November, February, May; See Part III, Condition H.
+ Mercury limit shall be effective December 1, 1996. Monitoring will be required until the limit is implemented.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored 3/week at the effluent by grab
sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0021709
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. (Continued)
Effluent Characteristics
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Mercury+
Silver
Discharge Limitations
Units (specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg.
Daily Max
0.08 µg/I
Monitoring
Measurement
Frequency
2/Month
2/Month
2/Month
Weekly
Quarterly
Requirements
Sample *Sample
Type Location
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E

•
A. (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL Permit No. NC0021709
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from '
oulfall(s) serial number (X)l. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics
Flow
BOD, 5-Day, 20°C**
TSS
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Phosphorus
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Chronic Toxicity"'
Cadmium
Cyanide
Copper
Lead
Mercury****
Silver
Zinc
*
**
***
Discharge Limitations
Monthly. Avg.
0.30 MGD
30.0 mg/I
30.0 mg/I
200.0 /100 ml
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample 'Sample
Weekly Avg. Daily Max. Frequency Type Location
Continuous Recording I or E
45.0 mg/I 3/Week Composite E, I
45.0 mg/I 3/Week Composite E, I
400.0 /100 ml 3/Week Grab E
28.0 µ g/I 3/Week Grab E
3/Week Grab E
Semi-annually Composite E
Semi-annually Composite E
Quarterly Composite E
14.0 µ g / I Weekly Composite E
35.0 µ g/ 1 Weekly Grab E
2/Month Composite E
2/Month Composite E
.08 µ g / I Weekly Composite E
Quarterly Composite E
2/Month Composite E
Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value
(85% removal)
Chronic Toxicity (Ccriodaphnia) P/F at 14%; August, November, February, May; See Part III, Condition G.
**** The Mercury limit shall become effective December 1, 1996. Monitoring will be required until the limit is implemented.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units at the effluent. Effluent monitoring shall be conducted 3/week
by grab samples.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.