NC0020451_fact sheet_20230606

NCO020451
Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NCO020451
Permit Writer/Email Contact: Gary Perlmutter, [e-mail]
Date: June 6. 2023
Division/Branch: NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
Fact Sheet Template: Version 08Sept2016
Permitting Action:
® Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification (Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers, EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements, Engineering Alternatives Analysis, Fee
• For Existing Dischargers (POTW), EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans, 4 2"d species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers (Non-POTW), EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Infonnation
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
I own of West Jefferson / West Jefferson W WTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 490. West Jefferson. NC 28694
Facility Address:
335 Clearwater Drive, West Jefferson, NC 28694
Permitted Flow:
0.5 MGD
Facility Type/Waste:
MAJOR Municipal / 95%domestic; 5016 industrial'
Facility Class:
Grade II
Treatment Units:
Mechanical bar screen. grit removal, dual channel oxidation ditch.
secondary clarifiers, tertiary filters. tIV disinfection, post aeration
basin, aerobic sludge digester
Pretreatment Program (YIN)
Yes, active
County:
Ashe
Region:
Winston-Salem
Footnote.
I. Based on a total pemniued 5111 Ibm ,,[ 0.025 MGD.
Page 1 of 15

NCO020451
Brieflp describe the proposed permitting action andAciiitp background: The Town of West lellei soil has
applied for NPDES pennit renewal and submitted a renev+al application dated October 28. 2021. Rev icvv
of the application fbund it incomplete with effluent pollutant scans (PPAs), process narrative. sludge
management plan, and chemical addendum lacking. A total of eight of 2"a species toxicity tests using the
Fathead Minnow plus several quarterly Ceriodfrphnia thibia test reports were submitted with the
application. The PPAs and Chemical Addendum were received upon request on 1/31/2023; PPAs were
sampled in October 2018. July 2019 and March 2020. 'Hie Chemical Addendum stated that based on the
influent profile (primarily domestic with one cheese manufacniring source). no additional pollutants are
expected.
At the time of application submission, the facility served a population of -1300 residents including the
town of West Jefferson ( -755). The Town bas an active pretreatment program with a short term monitoring
program (STMP) involving one SIU. Ashe County Cheese.
Sludge management. Biosolids are digested then land applied as a liquid by tanker truck under permit
W 00003992.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s):
Outfall 001 t UT to Little Bullalo Crcl<
Stream Segment:
10-2-20-1
Stream Classification
C; l r;
Drainage Area (mi2):
1.8
Summer 7QI0 (cfs)
0.6
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
0.9
Average Flow (cfs):
4.0
I WC (% effluent):
56%
NC 303(d) listed/parameter:
Benthos. Fish Community
Subject to TMDL/parameter.
State%%ide Mercury TMDL.
Basin/HUC:
New / 05050001
USGS Topo Quad:
Jefferson, NC
Footnote.
I. "+ - subject to special managcmen( sn'ategicn- specified in I M NCAC 2B .0225 — "Oulstanding ReSOal'CC AA;u. i
l(1RW I rule. ai proiacl du\\nstream waters designated as ORP . Snate@irs arc speci tied in Rate .0225(c)14) tirc the Noah
Folk Nee RIvel'ORAA Area.
The receiving water is exceeding criteria for Benthos and Fish Community. Benthos was last assessed at
Station KB059. 0.3 miles upstream of the outfdl, on 5/29/1985 with a POOR bioclassification, and at
Station KB032. -0.8 miles downstream ofthe oulftIl, on 8,28'2013 with a FAIR bioclassification. Fish
Community was last assessed at Station KF21, 2.25 miles downstream of the outfall. on 7/12t2019 with a
FAIR bioclassification. 'I lie receiving water lies within the North Pork Ne\c River Outstanding Resource
Waler (OR W) Area.
Page 2 of 15

3. Effluent Data Summary
NCO020451
Effluent data are summarized below for the period June 2018 through December 2022.
Table I. Effluent Data Summary.
Parameter
Units
Average
Max
Min
Limits t
Flow
MGD
0.30
1.53
0.13
MA = 0.5
BOD
mg/L
2.8
8.5
< 2.0
MA = 5.0
(Apr I -Oct 31)
WA = 7.5
mg/L
2.5
9A
< 2.0
(NovBOD
I -Mar 31)
WA = 15.0
BOD removal
%
87.1
99.7
33.3
> 85
TSS
mg/L
3.1
19.0
< 2.5
MA - 10.0
WA = 15.0
TSS removal
%
96.1
99.9
20.7
> 85
NH N
mg/L
0.38
4.48
0. I
MA = 1.6
(Apr I -Oct 31)
WA = 4.8
NH3-N
mg/L
0.50
5.15
< 0.02
MA - 3.6
(Nov I-Mar31)
WA= 10.8
DO
mg/L
7.96
11.58
6.35
> 6.0
pH
SU
6.80
7.62
6.14
6.0-9.0
Temperature
°C
16.6
23.5
7.4
Fecal Coliform
#/100 mL
3I
517.2
< I
MA = 200/100
(geometric mean)
.
WA = 400/100
Conductivity
µrthos/cm
447
5.12
684
Total Residual
hg/L
All values were - 15
DM = 282
Chlorine (TRC)
Total Nitrogen
mg/L
7.12
11.55
2.86
Total Phosphorus
mg/L
1.55
4.02
0.32
Total Hardness
mg/L
86.9
195
28.4
Total Copper
µg/L
10.6
98.0
< 1.0
MA = .0
DM 52
= 52.0
Total Selenium
pg/L
19.5
298
< I
Footnotes.
I. MA=Monthly Acerugc: WA W'cekl% Aeerage: DM= Dail) Maainnun.
2. Compliance le%el = ifl p0 : maninun dam are from Effluent Pollutant Scan& collected in 10/2018. 7/20K 3/2020.
The highest annual average flora was 0.35 M G D (69%of the limit) in calendar year (CY) 2020.
Page 3 of 15

NC0020451
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring maybe required in certain situations, for example: I) to verify model predictions when
model results for instream DO are within I mg/I of instream standard at full permitted flow; 2) to verify
model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3) to provide data for future TMDL; 4) based on other instream
concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Pennittee, and there are also Monitoring Coalitions
established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee (in which case instream
monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
Is this./acilify a member ofa A4onitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring OW): No.
Name of Monitoring Coalition: N/A:
If applicable, snmmari-e am, instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this permit
action: The current permit requires instream monitoring for I lardness. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen
(DO) and Conductivity. The upstream location is 50 feet above discharge, and the downstream is located
at the bridge off of Dogget Rd. No water supply watershed lies downstream of the outfall between point of
discharge and the Virginia state line, -30.5 miles from the discharge. Hardness is sampled upstream for
calculation of dissolved to total metals for hardness -dependent metals. including Copper, and is addressed
in Section 6.4 - Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants.
Instream data were collected by the Permittee at the above locations. Data were obtained from the
Permittee-submitted DMRs spanning.lunc'_018 through December 2022 fin' review. Data were compared
against corresponding instream water quality standards and between stations as well as concurrent effluent
data for assessment of effluent impacts. Averages were compared using Student's t-tests with levels of
significant differences set at p = 0.05. Summary data are in fable 2.
'Fable 2. Instream monitoring averages and ranges (in parentheses) of permit -required parameters.
*Statistically different from Upstream.
Parameter
Upstream
Downstream
Standard'
Avg - 9.20
Avg = 8.52*
DA - 6.0 for
Dissolved Oxygen yen ( 6 DO), m �� L
(7.40 13.28)
(6.36 12.95)
Trout waters
Temperature. °C
Avg = 13.9
Avg 14.5*
DM = 29.0
(3.7 19.4)
(3.9 20.5)
212.2
248.1*
Conductivity. (unhos/cm
(16.8-1.847)
(_'6-1,701)
Total Hardness, mg/L
Avg 70.3
NA
(35.4 -175)
Pooniote.
I. DA - Dail} Average: DK1 - Daih Maximum.
Dissolved Ovigen (DO) Instream DO remains in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic lite.
Reviewed instream DMR data revealed summer lows to be above the stream standard of6.0 mg/L for] rout
waters 115A NCAC 02B .02111 that this outfall discharges into. A statistically significant difference way
detected between the two station DO averages. with downstream lower. Concurrent effluent DO r;duc
appear lower on average, but with no values below 6.0 mg'L. Rule I5A NCAC 0211 .0225(d)(14) tirr the
North Pork New River ORW refers to rule ISA NCAC 0213 .0224 for determining 11O1). Ammonia and
DO limits. Rule subsection .0224(c)(2)(A) states: "Afore st ingem limitations .chid/ be set, i/ necessarlt to
Page 4 of 15

= NCO020451
ensure Ihat the rwnuhuire lwllrnoru discharge of o.rrs;en-rnn.crrmine is rcies does not cause the DO q1 the
receivint water to crop more ihan 0..5 ing,I below background levels, and in no cure Mon, the .Standard."
The downstream DO was lowerthan the upstream DO by 0.68 mg-L on average wish a total ol'273 instances
of downstream DO measurements that were > 0.5 mg/l. lower than their corresponding upstream values. or
66%of all monitoring events. Concurrent elfhient DO was 7.96 mgtl. on average, lower than either instream
value and thus appears to be affecting the instream DO. To address this pattern. the effluent DO will be
raised to 7.0 mg/L in the permit.
Temperature - Instream Temperature remains in the permit as a parameter of concern for aquatic life.
Temperatures in both sites were below the standard of 29°C for upper piedmont and mountain waters. A
statistically significant difference was detected between the two station temperature averages with the
downstream higher. There were two occurrences where the downstream temperature exceeded the water
quality standard of 2.8°C above the natural water temperature when compared to upstream data (Table 3).
In both cases the effluent was higher. Overall, concurrent effluent temperatures were higher on average
with winter lows substantially higher than those instream, suggesting its effect on the instream temperature.
Table 3. Temperatures (°C) on days where downstream increase was higher than the 2.8°C standard.
Date
Upstream
Downstream
Increase
Effluent
1/22/2019
5.2
9.3
4.1
8.7
10/17/2022
13.5
16.4
2.9
16.9
The receiving water is a designated 'front Water, with more stringent temperature standards of 20°C and
not to increase more than 0.5°C due to discharge of heated liquids per 15A NCAC 02B .021 ](18). The
maximum upstream temperature was below the 20°C Troul Water standard, but in two instances the
downstream standard exceeded 20°C: 20.5°C on 7/6/2022 and 20.4°C on 7/12/2022. A total of 246
instances of the downstream increase were found in the datasel. However. only two instances of over 20°C
out of hundreds of measurements downstream, the effluent's impact on the trout stream appears to be
minimal and thus current monitoring is appropriate; no changes were made to the permit.
C'onductiviir - Instream Conductivity remains in the permit as a parameter of concern from industrial
discharges, which are treated by the WWTP through its active pretreatment program. Review of the data
found significant differences between instream averages with the downstream higher. Concurrent effluent
Conductivity is 2- higher on average than either instream average, indicating its impact on the stream
conductivity. A local limits assessment will be required with the pennit renewal. and the pennittee shall
assess potential sources of conductivity.
Fecal Colrlonn - Instream Fecal Coliform monitoring is not required since the receiving stream is not listed
as impaired for this parameter, nor is it a Class B waterbody. Elfluent geomean fecal colifonn is 3.1 cfu/ 100
mL (range: < I — 512 cfu/100 mL). thus not appearing to impact the stream fecal colifornh. Therefore.
instream monitoring for Fecal Coliform is not required and will not be added to the pennit.
No changes are proposed to the above instream monitoring parameters. However. instream monitoring for
nutrients Brill be added after finding a trend of increase in at a monitoring coalition station -3 miles
downstrean of the discharge (see Section 6.7 Other TMDL / Nutrient Management Strategy
Considerations).
Page 5 of 15

NCO020451
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 ),ears): Front January 2018 through
December 2022 the facility had reported exceedences in BOD, TSS and Total Copper resulting in various
enl'orcenient actions (Table 4).
1 able 4. Effluent monitoring violations surnmary. January 2018-December 2022.
Weekly
Monthly
Daily
Notices of
Notices of
Enforcement
Parameter
Average
Average
Maximum
Exceedences
Exceedences
Exceedences
Deficiency
Violations
Cases
BOD
1
0
NA
I
0
0
Total Copper
NA
2
3
2
1
2
TSS
2
0
NA
0
0
2
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test resins (past
5 ),ears): The facility passed all 20 quarterly chronic toxicity tests, as well as all 8 second species chronic
toxicity tests. Second species tests were sampled on February -April 2017. March. July. October 2022. and
January 2021.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The most recent facility compliance
inspection, conducted on 07/03!2019. reported no compliance issues and that the inspection was
satisfactory. 'three pretreatment inspections were conducted since the compliance inspection. in March
2020. February and December 2022. None of these inspections reported any compliance issues.
6. Water Quality -Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
6.1. Dilution and Mixing Zones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0206, the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: IQIO streamflow (acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow (chronic Aquatic
Life; non -carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow (aesthetics); annual average flow (carcinogen, HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered (e.g., based on CORAR model results): NA
If applicable. descrihe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
6.2. Oxygen -Consuming Waste Limitations
Limitations for oxygen -consuming waste (e.g., BOD) are generally based on water quality modeling to
ensure protection of the instream dissolved oxygen (DO) water quality standard. Secondary TBEL limits
(e.g., BOD = 30 mg/L for Municipals) may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
Ifperntit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how linnits mere developed: BOD limits were set
by 15A NCAC 02B .0225(d)(14) for waters in the North Fork New River Outstanding Resource (ORW)
area.
Page 6 of 15

NC0020451
6.3 Ammonia and Total Residual Chlorine Limitations
Limitations for ammonia are based on protection of aquatic life utilizing an ammonia chronic criterion of
1.0 mg/L (summer) and 1.8 mg/L (winter). Acute ammonia limits are derived from chronic criteria, utilizing
a multiplication factor of 3 for Municipals and a multiplication factor of 5 for Non -Municipals.
Limitations for Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) are based on the NC water quality standard for protection
of aquatic life (17 µg/L) and capped at 28 µg/L (acute impacts). Due to analytical issues, all TRC values
reported below 50 µg/L are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limitsfor this permit renewal: The current permit
limits for both TRC and NH,-N are based on a wasteload allocation (WLA) analyses. The WLA was
performed again for both parameters, yielding results that are no different than the previous WLA results.
No changes are proposed for either parameter.
6.4. Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95% Confidence Level/95% Probability; 2) assumption of zero
background; 3) use of/a detection limit for "less than" values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6, 2016, NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards, dated June 10, 2016.
Effluent and instream (upstream) Iardness monitoring is required in the current permit. Permittee-
submitted DMR Hardness data were used in the RPA for hardness -dependent metals. Two outlier data,
Selenium of298 µg/L and Copper of 53 µg/L, both from samples collected on 4/15/2020. were removed
from the RPA after consulting with the ORC, who confined the lab results are accurate, but does not
believe they are accurate. The facility switched labs after these results.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between June 2018
through December 2022. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated
water quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis, the following permitting actions are proposed for
this permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitorine. The following parameters will receive a water quality -based
effluent limit (WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable water
quality standards/criteria:
o Total Copper MA — 18.8 µg/L; DM = 26.1 µg/L
• Monitoring Only. The following parameters will receive a monitor -only requirement since they
did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria, but
the maximum predicted concentration was> 50%of the allowable concentration: None.
• No Limit or Monitorine: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality standards/criteria
and the maximum predicted concentration was < 50% of the allowable concentration: Arsenic,
Berrllhon, Cadmium, Chromium, Total Phenolic Contpomadc, Ownide, Lead. Nickel. Selenium
and Zinc.
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans were evaluated for
additional pollutants of concern. Samples for the pollutant scans were collected in October 2018,
Page 7 of 15

NC0020451
July 2019, and March 2020. Only one parameter was detected. Toluene at 21.3 µg/L in the 2019
scan.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a water quality -based effluent limit (WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set, two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration: None.
o The following parameter(s) will receive a monitor -only requirement, since as part of a
limited data set, one sample exceeded the allowable discharge concentration: Toluene.
If applicable, attach a spreadsheet of the RPA results as well as a copy of the Dissolved Metals
Implementation Fact Sheet for freshwater/saltwater to this Fact Sheet. Include a printout of the RPA
Dissolved to Total Metal Calculator sheet if this is a Municipality with a Pretreatment Program.
6.5. Toxicity Testing Limitations
Permit limits and monitoring requirements for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) have been established in
accordance with Division guidance (per WET Memo, 8/2/1999). Per WET guidance, all NPDES permits
issued to Major facilities or any facility discharging "complex" wastewater (contains anything other than
domestic waste) will contain appropriate WET limits and monitoring requirements, with several exceptions.
The State has received prior EPA approval to use an Alternative WET Test Procedure in NPDES permits,
using single concentration screening tests, with multiple dilution follow-up upon a test failure.
Describe proposed toxicity test requirement: This is a Minor POTW at a design flow of < I MGD, with a
chronic WET limit at 56% effluent and a quarterly monitoring frequency. No changes are proposed.
6.6. Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPA's mercury fish tissue criteria (0.3 mg/kg) for human health protection. The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year (81 lb/year), and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources (--2% of total load), the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities > 2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury (> I ng/L) will
receive an MMP requirement. Industrials are evaluated on a case -by -case basis, depending if mercury is a
pollutant of concern. Effluent limits may also be added if annual average effluent concentrations exceed
the WQBEL value (based on the NC WQS of 12 ng/L) and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL value
of 47 ng/L.
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: 'fhe current permit requires mercury to
be monitored via the three effluent pollutant scans. Results from submitted DMRs are below:
Table 5. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2018
2019
2020
No. of Samples
3
I
I
Annual Average Cone. ng/L
0.6
0.5
0.5
Maximum Cone., ng/L
0.69
0.50
0.50
TBEL. ng/L
47
WQBEL, ng/L
10.6
Page 8 of 15

NC0020451
Because no result was higher than either the TBEL or WQBEL, no limits are required. Because the facility
is 2 MGD, no MMP is required. No changes were made to the permit: mercury monitoring will continue
via the three effluent pollutant scans.
6.7. Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
/fapplicable, describe any other TMMINutrient Management Siralegies and their implementation within
this permit: The New River Basin has neither any'1'MDLs nor a Nutrient Management Strategy. The nearest
instream monitoring station with nutrient data is K6400000, -3.3 miles downstream ofthe outfall in Buffalo
Cr. This station was monitored by the New River Basin Coalition (NRBC), of which West Jefferson was a
member from 201 12016. NRBC stopped sampling in 2018 due to a reduction in members and funding
issues. Available data from K6400000 show an increase in Total Nitrogen from 2015 to 2018. but no overall
change in Total Phosphorus (Fig. 1). Effluem Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus are currently monitored
semi-annually per facility size (< I MGD) and river sub -basin (New) as specified in 15A NCAC 02B .0508.
Based on these trends, effluent monitoring for nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) will be increased to
quarterly, and the Total Nitrogen components Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and Nitrate -Nitrite Nitrogen
(NO3-N + NO2-N) will be added. To track the effluent's impact on instream nutrients, quarterly monitoring
for the nutrient parameters above will also be added, at a quarterly frequency both up- and downstream of
the outlall.
Instream Nitrogen
Instream Phosphorus
• TO
• NI-N1, ■ If.
Pi.onr(IN;
• iP ..... hn., ltPJ
0
oUl
6o
Ae ■
1)U
■ ■
0.05
•ON...................................
Eos•-� •
• •
•
. •
E poi
....... ............. ..............................._._•
pert
°4,;
°°I
om ■ •
• • • • •
• • •
Of
ono
l�,y
�16 \ ,e 1�,,
\�,^ 'A1e
�`• �`y
'P,� Q`b �,1
't��, 'P
hq\fie'
\\b ,�\ta
\bN
1V 1\�h
,\j\
9\.yl •\�0\
a.�1\'• \\N.,\
1
%$'\ 6\`•\
9\11\ •\,p\
Fiia. 1. Instream nutrient data collected in Buffalo Creek at Statinn Kh400nOn by NRRC 9nt S — 10I R
6.8. Other WQBEL Considerations - Permit Limit Development
If applicable, describe any other parameters gfconcern evaluated for IVQBELs: Emerging contaminants
PFAS and 1,4-Dioxane were considered when the facility submitted its Chemical Addendum on 1.31/2023,
in which the Town responded: "Based un iglhrent nmkerrp nfrnnsily domestic with one industrial user that
makes cheese, we du nut anticipate addiNunal pol/rrtrrnts entering tyre stream. " The receiving stream does
not enter any water supply waters before crossing the Virginia state line -30.5 miles downstream of the
discharge.
Based oil the location of the discharge with no downstream water supply waters and the industrial input
profile (a cheese factory), PFAS monitoring will be added to the permit at a 2/year frequency. Until the
final method is approved, as it may involve changes to the parameter list, the proposed 2/year PFAS
sampling requirement will include a compliance schedule which delays the effective date of this
requirement until the first full calendar quarter beginning 6 months after EPA has a final wastewater method
in 40 CFR 136 published in the Federal Register. This date may be extended upon request and if there are
no NC -certified labs.
Page 9 of 15

NCO020451
No potential source of 1.4-Dioxane is reported, so no requirements are needed and none will be added to
the permit for 1,4-Dioxane.
Ifapplicwble, describe any compliance schedules proposedfor-this permit renewal in accordance lvith 15A
NCAC 211-0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 12247, and EPA May 2007 Memo: A three-year compliance schedule
with a WER option will be added to the permit for the revised, more stringent Total Copper limits.
ff applicable, describe any water quality, standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 1 f3-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for• this permit renewal: NA
7. Technology -Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements (30 mg/L
BOD w TSSfor Monthly Average, artd 45 mg/L for BOR51TSS,for Weekly Average). YES
If NO, provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Are 85% removal requirements for BODs/T.SS included in the permit? YES. Reviewed data found 2
occurrences below 85% BOD removal and 7 occurrences below 85% TSS removal from December 2018 -
November 2022. All occurrences involved low concentrations in the influent, suggesting Inflow and
Infiltration (W) issues, likely during stone events.
If NO, provide ajustification(e.g., waste stabilisation pond). NA
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge)
The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit must
document an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2). In all cases,
existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing use is maintained
and protected.
IJ applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and an- water qualih, modeling results: NA
9. Antibacksliding Review
Sections 402(o)(2) and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(I) prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits. These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit, with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed (e.g., based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent litrriiatiotis less• sn•irhgci7i than prei,iotes permit o'ESINO): NO.
Page 10 of 15

NC0020451
If 1 E$ confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated• NA.
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following regulations
and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 2B.0500; 2) NPDES
Guidance, Monitoring Frequency for'foxic Substances (7/15/2010 Memo); 3) NPDES Guidance, Reduced
Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance (10/22/2012 Memo); 4) Best Professional
Judgement (BPJ). Per US EPA (Interim Guidance, 1996), monitoring requirements are not considered
effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act, and therefore anti -backsliding
prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
All eftlueot parameters are monitored in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0500 and NPDES Guidance
document on monitoring frequency for toxic substances (7/15/2010).
For instream monitoring, refer to Section 4.
11. Electronic Reporting Requirements
The US EPA NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was finalized on December 21, 2015. Effective December
21, 2016, NPDES regulated facilities are required to submit Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs)
electronically. Effective December 21, 2020, NPDES regulated facilities will be required to submit
additional NPDES reports electronically. This permit contains the requirements for electronic reporting,
consistent with Federal requirements.
12. Summary of Proposed Pennitting Actions
Table 6. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes.
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change n
Basis for Condition/Change
Flow
MA 0.5 MGD
No change
15A NCAC 2B .0505
Monitor continuously
Summer
MA = 5.0 mgtl,
WA = 7.5 mg/L
WQBEI_. BAT limits to protect
BODS
Winter
No change
downstream ORW per 15A NCA(
MA = 10 mg/t_
02B .0225. Monitoring frequency
WA = I5 mg/L
based on 15A NCAC 02B .0500.
Monthly weekly
MA = 10 mg/L
TBEL. Secondaq trcai n a
TSS
WA — 15 mg/I,
No change
standards / 40 CFR 133 / 15A
Monitor weekly
NCAC 2B .0406..0500.
Page 11 of 15

NCO020451
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change'
Basis for Condition/Change
Sumner
MA = 1.6 mg/L
WA = 4.8 me/I.
WQBEL. Wasteload Allocation to
NI k-N
Winter
No change
protect against annnonia toxicity.
MA = 3.6 mu'I
Monitoring frequency based on I5A
WA = 10.8 mu l
NCAC 02B .0500.
Monitor week l y
WQBEL. BAT limits to protect
DA > 6.0 me 1
11 1 7.0 mg/I.
downstream OR W per 15A NCAC
DO
-
02B .0225 in light of instream data
Monitor weekll
No change in
showing decreases> 0.5 mg/I. DO.
-
monitoring frequency
Monitoring I equency based on 15A
NCAC 02B .0500.
MA = 200 /100 nil.
WQBEL. ISA NCAC 2B A200.
Fecal Colifonn
WA = 400 /100 ml
No change
U500.
Monitor weekll
DM - 28 p e I
Add to monitor when
WQBEL. 15A NCAC 2B .0200.
TRC'
Monitor 2hcec
usingchlorination Im
'(ht10; WLA results.
disinfection in footnote.
PH
Between 6 and 9 SU
No change
WQBEL. 15A NCAC 2B .0200.
Monitor weekly
.0500
1 emperature
Monitor weekly
No change
15A NCAC 2B .0500
Conductivity
Monitor weekly
No change
15A NCAC 213.0500
Increase to quarterly.
Increasing trends found instream: to
Total Nitrogen
Monitor 2/year
Add quarterly instream
better understand effluent nutrient
monitoring.
patterns for future evaluation.
Add quarterly effluent
To better understand effluent
Total Kjeldahl
No requirement
and instream
nutrient patterns for future
Nitrogen ("I'KN)
monitoring
evaluation.
Nitrale-Nitrile
Add quarterly effluent
To better understand cfflucnt
Nitrogen
No requirement
and instream
nutrient patterns for tinure
(NO.-, N01)
monitoring
evaluation.
Increase to quarterly.
1-o better understand effluent
Total Phosphorus
Monitor 2/year
Add quarterly instream
nutrient patterns R1r future
monitoring.
Cvalnan011.
Monitor effluent and
Revised WQS and EPA's guidelines
Total Hardness
instream (upstream)
No change
on hardness -dependent metals.
quarterly
Page 12 of 15

NC0020451
Parameter
Current Permit
Proposed Change'
Basis for Condition/Change
MA = 18.8 lig/L.
DM - 26.1 µg/t"
MA = 37.0 µgiI
Add 3-yr compliance
Total Copper
DM = 52.0 µg'L
schedule with WF.R
WQBEL. 15A NCAC 2B .0200. RP
option: retain current
found, using updated Hardness data.
Monitor n)onthly
limits as interim.
No change in
monitoring frequency.
Total Selenium
Monitorquarlerly
Remove tion) permit
No reasonable potential to violate
stream WQ standard in RPA.
Add quarterly
One result exceeded Allowable
toluene
No requirement
Concentration in limited dataset
monitoring
RPA.
EPA recommendations (memo,
PEAS
No requirement
Add 2/year monitoring
12i5,'2022). to gather data for
evaluation
Chronic Toxicity
Chronic limit 56%
WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
Test
effluent
No change
an)ounts. 15A NCAC 213 .0200,
Monitor quarterly
.0500
Effluent Pollutant
Three limes per permit
Update sample years:
Scan
cycle
2025.2026, 2027.
40 C'F'R 122
Electronic
pcondition
Update special
In accordance with EPA Electronic
ReportingSpecial
condition
Reporting Rule 2015.
Footnote.
I. MG) = million gallons Fer dad. MA =monthly average. WA = %%eekl% a%erage. UM - dai l) nriximum.
13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 04/27/2023.
Per I SA NCAC 2H .0109 & .01 1 I, The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice. Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the Director
within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the patty filing such request and the reasons
why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact
If you have any questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached pennit, please contact
Gary Perlmutter at (919) 707-361 1 or via email at gary.perlmutter@nederingov.
Page 13 of 15

NC0020451
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
Were there any changes made since the Urafr permit was public noticed Q'es/No): YES. Comments were
received from the Southern Emironmental Law Center representing MountainTYue, North Carolina Trout
Unlimited State Council. North Carolina Wildlife Federation and Watauga Riverkeeper on May 24, 2022,
addressing trout waters temperature standard be applied to this and four other draft NPDES permits. The
comments recommend inserting the following language as found in similar permits for facilities discharging
into trout waters:
"The in.s1reunt temperature .shall not he increased hp morn Chun 0. 5°C (0.9°F) clue m the cli.SLharge qJ
heated hgruidv. but in no case to exceed 20°C (b$°F). h' the stream temperature esree<Is 2!I°C due to
natural background conditions, the e11luen! cannot cause unr increase in instream water tengtetature.'
From the instream data review, downstream temperature has been observed at levels greater than 20`C on
just 2 occasions during the period reviewed. with one such occasion reporting a lower effluent temperature
than downstream temperature. As such. additional temperature permit requirements have not been added at
this time. However, the Town is encouraged to consider temperature control options for the tircility to
reduce effluent temperature and potemially mitigate influence on ambient water temperature in this
sensitive stream.
In addition, SELC commented the following:
• TSS limits were incorrect as 30/45 mg/L. not 10/15 mg/l. as in the previous permit:
• Compliance schedule for Copper is too long at 3 yrs, and includes Silver and Zinc.. whose limits
are not in the pennit:
• PFAS condition is too lenient; monitoring should be quarterly and be implemented immediately;
• Add Henry Gargan (hearsarwisele.org) to distribution list for final permit.
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:
The following changes were made in response to the received comments:
• The TSS limits were corrected to what was in the previous perntit:
• Mentions of'fotal Silver and Total Zinc were removed f}om the Copper compliance schedule as
correction
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• Three Effluent Scans from 2018. 2019, 2020
• Process Narrative
• Sludge Management Plan
• NPDES Pretreatment POC review form
• 2022 303(d) list. p. 92
• Belittles Site Details, KB059 (upstream)
• Benthos Site Details KB032 (downstream)
• Fish Community KI'21 2018
• Monitoring Report Violations report
• WETTesting Summap. page 114
• Inspection reports: 1 compliance. 3 pretreatment
• Waste load allocations for TRC and NI :-N
• RPA Spreadsheet Summaries and dissolved to total metal calculator
Page 14 of 15

NCO020451
• Dissolved Metals Implementation/Freshwater
• MercuryWQBF,I../IBEI. evaluation
• Chemical Addendum
• SELC comments to the draft pen nit
Page 15 of 15

Permit No. NICOo Z p y .5-1Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Outfall 001
Facility Name: Town of West Jefferson ORC :
Date of sampling: 10/ 16, 11/27/ 18 Phone:
Analytical Laboratory: Blue Ridge Labs
Month O . /��✓
Year Z- 01
Brandon Patrick
828-898-6277
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number of
samples
Ammonia (as N)
Composite
ammonia
0.2
<0.20
mg/1
1
Dissolved oxygen
Grab
SM19 450OG
0.1
7.31
mg/1
1
Nitrate/Nitrite
Composite
SM19 450ON
0.08
3.27
mg/1
1
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Composite
SM19 450ON
0.5
5.88
mg/I
1
Total Phosphorus
Composite
EPA 365.2
0.5
0.142
mg/l
1
Total dissolved solids
Composite
SM19 2540C
1
226
mg/1
1
Hardness
Composite
SM19 2340B
0.662
36.8
mg/1
1
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Grab
SM19 4500GI
0.015
mg/1
1
Oil and grease
Grab
SM19 5520E
5
<5
mg/1
1
Metals (total recoverable), cyanide
and total
phenols
Antimony
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.025
*
mg/1
1
Arsenic
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
*
mg/1
1
Beryllium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.005
*
mg/1
1
Cadmium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.002
*
mg/1
1
Chromium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.005
*
mg/1
1
Copper
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.002
0.036
mg/I
1
Lead
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
*
mg/1
1
Mercury
Composite
EPA 245.1
0.0001
*
mg/1
1
Nickel
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
*
mg/1
1
Selenium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
*
mg/1
1
Silver
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.005
*
mg/1
1
Thallium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.02
*
mg/1
1
Zinc
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
*
mg/I
1
Cyanide
Grab
SM19 4500C
0.005
*
mg
1
Total phenolic compounds
Grab
EPA 420.1
0.01
*
mg/1
1
Volatile organic compounds
Acrolein
Grab
EPA 624
50
*
ug/1
1
Acrylonitrile
Grab
EPA 624
10
*
ug/l
1
Benzene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Bromoform
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Carbon tetrachloride
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Chlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/l
1
Chlorodibromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Chloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
*
ug/1
1
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Grab
EPA 624
5
*
ug/1
1
Chloroform
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Dichlorobromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
1, 1 -dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
1,2-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
Grab
I EPA 624
1 1
*
ug/l
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 1

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No. IV�Q Z o��� Month Qck- 0 N4V.
Outfall o D 1 Year Mk
l k
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number of
samples
Volatile organic compounds (Cont.)
1, 1 -dichloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
1,2-dichloropropane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
1,3-dichloropropylene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Ethylbenzene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Methyl bromide
Grab
EPA 624
5
*
ug/1
1
Methyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Methylene chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
*
ug/1
1
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Tetrachloroethylene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/ 1
1
Toluene
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
Ug/ 1
1
1, 1, 1 -trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/ 1
1
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
1
*
ug/1
1
Trichloroethylene
Grab
I EPA 624
1
ug/1
1
Vinyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
*
ug/1
1
Acid -extractable compounds
P-chloro-m-creso
Grab
EPA 625
10
ug/1
1
2-chlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
2,4-dichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
2,4-dimethylphenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
Ug/ 1
1
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
2,4-dinitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
2-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
4-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Pentachlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Phenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Base -neutral compounds
Acenaphthene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Acenaphthylene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Benzidine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Benzo(a)anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Benzo(a)pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
3,4 benzofluoran then e
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
2-chloronaphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 2

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No. il/� VO Z oN�� Month Oc:4. AlOy.
Outfall —ALL_ Year 7 01d
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
Parameter
Sample
Type
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number of
samples
Base -neutral compounds (coat.)
Chrysene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
1,3-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
1,4-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Diethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Dimethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
Fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Fluorene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Hexachlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Hexachloroethane
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/ 1
1
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Isophorone
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
Naphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
Nitrobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Phenanthrene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/1
1
Pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
1 10
*
ug/1
1
1,2,4,-trichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
10
*
ug/l
1
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction
and supervision in accordance with a system to design to assure that qualified perdonnel properly
gather and evaluat the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons that
manage the system, or those persons directly responsibel for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Authorized Representative name
�/p
ignature
I-15-n
Date
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 3

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan Permit No: NC0020451 .Month: July
Outfall:001 Year.2019
Facility Name
Date of sampling
Analytical laboratory
Town of West Jefferson GRC
7 1 19 Phone
Blue Ridge tabs
Brandon Patrick
336-246-3558
Ammonia as N
Dissolved oxygen
Com osite
Grab
ammonia
SM19 450OG
0.5
0.1
4.48
7.03
1
Mgt1
1
Nitrate Nitrite
Total l9eldshl nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Chlorine(total residual, TRC
Gil and grease
Composite
Co osite
Corn osite
Co osite
Composite
Grab
Grab
SM19 450ON
SM19 450ON
EPA365.2
SM19 2540C
SM19 2340B
SM19 450OG
SM19 5520B
0.08
0.5
0.02
1
0.03
0.015
1
2.01
6.44
1.64
98
62
m 1
1
mg/ 1
mg/ I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
l
1
Arsenic
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
ChromiumComposite
Co22perer
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Cysnide
Total henolic wounds
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
_.Composite
Com osite
Com osite
Composite
Composite
Com osite
C osite
Grab
Grab
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
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
SM19 4500C
EPA 420.1
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.0002
0.001
0.001
0.01`
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.005
0.01
*
0.04
"
0.028
1
l
I
m I
m 1Lead
I
mg/L
1
m I
1
1
mg/1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
i
Acrolein
Ac lonitrilc
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
ane
th loin 1 ether
m
romomethane
roethane
oethane
LI,2-dichlwoethme
-dichlorceth leae
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
50
50
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
5
5
5
5
51
*
*
`
*
.
*
*
*
u 1
u
u 1
u
u 1
u
u 1
u
u 1
u
u 1
u
u 1
u
1
1
l
1
l
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1-dichloroeth lene
1,2-dichloropropme
1,3-dichlomProPylene
Eth lbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
EPA 624
5
5
5
5
10
10
u
u l
u i
u I
u 1
u 1
1
t
1
1
1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 1

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No: NC0020451 Month: July
Outlall: 001 Year:2019
Methylene chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
1 1 2 2-tetrachl"mthane
Grate
EPA 624
5
u l
1
Tetrachloroeth lene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
Toluene
Crab
EPA 624
5
21.3
u
1
1 1 1-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u
I
1 1 2-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
1
Trichloroeth lene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
Ymlchloride -
Grab
EPA 624
2
u I
I
P-chloro-m-creso
Greb
EPA 625
0.005
m' I
1
2-chloro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
2 4-dichloro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
2 4-dimeth I henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
t
1
4 6-dinitro-o-cresol
Grab
EPA 625
0.07
1
1
2 4-dinitro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.08
`
1
1
2-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
MR11
1
4-nitro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.04
*
1
1
Pentachl henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.025
1
1
Phenol
Grab
17PA 625
0.005
1
1
2 4 6-tichlor henol
Gj ab
EPA 625
0.005
m;, I
I
Acena hthene
Grab EPA 625
0.005
mg/1 1
Acena hth lene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
Anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
Benzidine
- Grab
EPA 625
0.085
1
1
Benno anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
l
1
Benno rene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.01
m l
1
Berue(ghilverylene
Grab
EPA 625
a 0.015
1
1
Benno fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
Bis 2-chloroetho methane
Grab
EPA'625
0.005
*
1
1
Bis 2-chloroeth 1 ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
Bis 2-chloroiso ro 1 ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Bis 2-eth lh 1phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.08
I
1
4-broam hen 1 phenyl ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m I
1
Butvl benzvl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.01
1
1
2-chlorona hthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
14-chlorovhenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Grab
Grab
EPA 625
EPA 625
0.005
0.005
Nil
1 1
NEENIE
mg/1 1
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.03
1
1
Dibenro hauthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.05
I
1
1 2-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
1 3-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
1 4-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
1 0.005
I 1
3 3-dichlorobenzidine
Grab
EPA 625
0.06
1 1
Diethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Dimeth 1 phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m
l 1
2 4-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1 1
2 6-dinitrotaluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1 1
1 2-di hen lh dramme
Grab
EPA625
0.02
1 1
Fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1 1
Fluorene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1 1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 2

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
• Permit No: NCO020451 Month: July
Ou tfall: 001 Year. 2019
Hexachlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
I
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
Hexachloroc clo- entadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.06
*
1
1
Hexachloroethane
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
Indeno 1 2 3-cd ene
Grab
EPA 625
0.014
*
1
Iso horone
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
Naphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
Mg/1-
Nitrobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
N-nitrosodi-n-propylarnine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
N-nitrosodimeth lamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
N-nitrosodi hen lamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
Phenenthrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
l
1
Pyrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
1
1
1 2.4-trichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction
and supervision in accordance with a system to design to assure that'qualified perdonnel properly
gather and evaluat the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons that
manage the system, or those persons directly responsibel for gathering the information, the
information submitted is , to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
LdL.V
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 3

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No: NC0020451 Month: March
.. Cutfall:001 Year:2020
Facility Name
Date of sampling
Analytical Laboratory
Town of West Jefferson ORC Brandon Patrick
3/10/20 Phone [phone]
Blue Ridge Labs
Parameter
Sam Is a
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number of
samples
Ammonia as N
Composite
ammonia
0.5
2.94
l
1
Dissolved oxygen
Grab
SM19 4500G
0.1
8.99
I
1
Nitrate Nitrite
Composite
SM19 4500N
0.08
3.51
mg/1
1
Total Keldahl nitrogen
Composite
SM19 4500N
0.5
7A4
t
1
Total Phosphorus
Composite
EPA 365.2
0.02
2.53
t
1
Total dissolved solids
Com osite
SM19 255 C
1
117
1
1
Hardness
Coosite
SM19 23
0.03
103.9
m40B I
1
Chlorine total residual TRC
Grab
ISM19 4500G
1 0.0151
11
Oil and grease
I Grab
ISM195520BI11
1.8
m 1
I
Metals total recoverable cyanide
and total phenols
Antimony
Composite
I EPA 200.7
0.01
mg/1
1
Arsenic
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
mg/1
I
Beryllium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
mg/1
1
Cadmium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.0002
1
]
Chromium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
mg/1
1
Copper
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
mg/1
1
Lead
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
mg/1
1
Mercury
Composite
EPA 245.1
0.0001
m L
1
Nickel
Composite
I EPA 200.7
0.001
1
1
Selenium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.01
1
I
Silver
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
I
1
Thallium
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
mg/1
I
Zinc
Composite
EPA 200.7
0.001
0.068
m l
1
Cyanide
Grab
SM19 4500C
0.005
mg/1
1
Total phenolic compounds
Grab
EPA 420.1
0.01
m l
1
Volatile organic compounds
Acrolein
Grab
EPA 624
50
u I
1
Acrylonitrile
Grab
EPA 624
50
u 1
1
Benzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Bromoform
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
Carbon tetrachloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Chlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Chlorodibromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
I
Chloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
10
u I
I
2-chloroeth lvin 1 ether
Grab
EPA 624
10
•
u 1
1
Chloroform
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Dichlorobromomethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
I,1-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
1,2-dichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u t
1
Trans-1,2-dichlo roethvlene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Parameter
pe
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Units of
Measurement
Number of
samples
Volatile organic compounds (Cont)
1,1-dichlorocth lene
Grab
EPA 624
5
ugI
1
1,2-dichloro ro ane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
1
1,3-dichloropropylene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
1
Eth (benzene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Meth 1 bromide
Grab
EPA 624
10
u 1
1
Methyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
10
u I
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 1

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No: NCO020451 Month: March
Outfall: 001 Year: 2020 ..
Methylene chloride
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
1
1 1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
1
Tetrachloroeth lene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
Toluene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u I
1
1 1 1-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
1
1 1 2-trichloroethane
Grab
EPA 624
5
u l
I
Tricbloroeth lene
Grab
EPA 624
5
u 1
I
Vinyl chloride
Grab
EPA 624
2
u 1
I
Acid -extractable compounds
P-cbloro-m-creso
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
2-cblorophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m I
1
2 4-dichloro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
2,4-dimeth I henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Grab
EPA 625
0.07
mg/1
I
2 4-dinitro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.08
*
m l
I
2-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0,005
I
1
4-nitrophenol
Grab
EPA 625
0.04
m 1
1
Pentachloro henol
Grab
EPA 625
0.025
mg/1
1
Phenol I
Grab IEPA
625
0.005
m I
1
2,4,6-trichloro henol I
Grab I
EPA 625
0.005
m I
I
liase-aeutral compounds
Acena hthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m I
1
Acena hth lene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Benzidine
Grab
EPA 625
0.085
I
1
Benzo a anthracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
1
1
Benzo a ene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m I
1
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.01
mg/1
1
Benzo(ahilDervlene
Grab
EPA 625
0.015
m l
1
Benzo k fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
I
]
Bis 2-chloroetho methane
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
MR/1
1
Bis 2-chloroeth 1 ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
Bis 2-chloroiso ro I ether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
Bis 2-eth the 1phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.08
mg/1
I
4-bromo hen 1 phenylether
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Butvl benzyl Phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.01
m I
1
2-chlorona hthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
4-chloro hen 1 phenyl ether
Grab
I EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
Parameter
Sample Type
Analytical
Method
Quantitation
Level
Sample
Result
Units of
Measurement
Number of
sam les
Base -neutral compounds cunt.
Chrysene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m I
1
Di-n-butyl phthalatc
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.03
mg/1
1
Dibenzo a h antbracene
Grab
EPA 625
0.05
m l
1
1 2-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
I
1
1 3-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0,005
m l
1
] 4-dichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
3 3-dichlorobenzidine
Grab
EPA 625
0.06
m l
I
Diethyl phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
mg/1
I
Dimeth l phthalate
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
I
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
Mg/1
I
2 6-dinitrotoluene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
I
1 2-di hen Ih drazine
Grab
EPA 625
0.02
mg/1
1
Fluoranthene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
Fluorene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
Form - DMR- PPA-1 Page 2

Annual Monitoring and Pollutant Scan
Permit No: NCO020451 Month: March
Outfall: 001 Year: 2020
Hexachlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
Mg/1
1
Hexachlorobutadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
mg/1
1
Hexachloroc clo- pentadiene
Grab
EPA 625
0.06
Mg/1
1
Hexachloroethane
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m 1
1
Indeno 1 2 3-cd rene
Grab
EPA 625
0.014
*
m l
1
Iso horone
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
Naphthalene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
Mg/1
1
Nitrobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m I
1
N-nitrosodi-n-propylaniine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
Mg/1
1
N-nitrosodimeth lamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m I
1
N-nitrosodi hen lamine
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
*
m 1
1
Phenanthrene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m 1
1
P rene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
Mg/1
1
1 2 4-trichlorobenzene
Grab
EPA 625
0.005
m l
1
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction
and supervision in accordance with a system to design to assure that qualified perdonnel properly
gather and evaluat the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons that
manage the system, or those persons directly responsibel for gathering the information, the
information submitted is , to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate and complete. I am
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Authorized Representative name
Signature
Date
Form - DMR- PPA- I Page 3

Tom Hartman, Mayor
Brantley Price, Town Manager
Bradley Jordan, Chief of Police
John B. "Jak" Reeves, Town Attorney
Town Of West Jefferson
'Estab&rwd 19li
"(Anryrenty, Gruwtfi_4c&eversen1 ..
Process Narrative
Russell W. Barr, III, Alderman
Calvin Green, Alderman
Crystal C. Miller, Alderman
John K. Reeves, Alderman
Stephen Shoemaker, Alderman
Influent enters the headworks in front of a mechanical bar screen, which compacts the
screenings to be put in a dumpster. Next, a chain and bucket grit collector captures and dumps
grit which is emptied into a dumpster. The influent gravity feeds to a wet well monitored by
SCADA, where three vertical influent pumps, all vfd and controlled by SCADA, pump to the
outer channel of the oxidation ditch. There are two floating aerators on the outer channel and
two floating aerators on the inner channel. From the inner channel, mixed liquor gravity flows
to a tank which divides it between two secondary clarifiers. The clarifiers are operated with
two horizontal pumps with vfds controlled by SCADA. The two horizontal pumps act as return
and wasting pumps. To waste, valves are used to divert the flow to one of three digesters.
Normally, the pumps are returning to the oxidation ditch. The water from he clarifiers flow to a
mixing box, before entering the tertiary filters. Water is divided between two traveling bridge
sand filters before flowing through the UV disinfecting channel. After disinfection, the effluent
is aerated before being ultrasonically measured for flow as it flows to the outfall. Flow is
recorded via SCADA.
Post Office Box 490 oY S. Jefferson Ave.
Phone: 336-246-
Fax:[phone]
Q(is irigitutinn is an wpm(optwrrmdey pnxiAnrmiJemp(nw•r:
www.townofwinc.com
West Jefferson, NC 28694
3551

Tom Hartman, Mayor
Brantley Price, Town Manager
Bradley Jordan, Chief of Police
John B. "Jak" Reeves, Town Attorney
Town O. f -West jefferson
,Esta6fufied 1915
"tProsperity, Growtk Ar6ievetnent"
Sludge Management Plan
Russell W. Barr, III, Alderman
Calvin Green, Alderman
Crystal C. Miller, Alderman
John K. Reeves, Alderman
Stephen Shoemaker, Alderman
The Town of West Jefferson has three aerobic digesters that are used for storage and
assimilation. Total storage ability is approximately 250,000 gallons. Thorough aeration and
mixing occur within the digesters using coarse air diffusers.
Measurement of PH is performed using an Orion PH meter. An activity log is kept
documenting dates of land application. We are using the 30 day bench scale, SOUR, and fecal
coliform tests to satisfy PSRP and vector attraction reduction criteria. Samples are analyzed on
the sludge per 503 regulations and soil samples are taken on the application sites annually.
Once the contents of the digester meet PSRP and vector attraction criteria, the sludge is
removed from the digesters and land applied by surface method. Sludge can be transferred from
any other digester to prepare it for surface application.
Post Office Box 490 of S. Jefferson Ave.
Phone: 336-246-
Fax:[phone] griu ututionisanetivaroylwrtuuityl,rmMerai,ernpGlWr.
www.townofwjnc.com
West Jefferson, NC 28694
3551

A 6 c I O II I I c I H I I I I I II I L 1 11
x a
NPDESIPT POC Review Forth
N•rs^--�--
]
1. Papailya G...'lnfomrMfon
3
de. la'atll Mww'
- ..
c. POCmvl.tluelo:
e. CmNd lnlamatim
Oaed OepllMwwn
rMnw'piNPCES rerwa
ngervl gnue lPol WmSrnn sNem
5
NflIESPemIWM yw1
6a}FaTr'.,uvv
NN4aT.tiMPne+a
❑
-W, Gramar.'rx..tusy nOIrPOE59M .... ..-.
OPixMy
6
PemneefxWYNme
a( W.NiP MJ w n
xmlMUWw
❑
IT]Iell, er 1 Bm on PVln:4 cwnN6tbvmohrea n,.
]
WPOEsh:m1 xunrr.
..r �....
WNR
❑
LRecelvi,p SUIT
]
emu EnK,ee me
.,._
—a.ra Wg_
O
amid
p
C,emuPiRJNclum 9NmlYl Oele
OAW reb[dwryWmnA
❑
Pw„rvq 9rvn
Lna..I
tree
16
es Pr PlW,xN[eode
to,o,{Oae
❑
sae.n0.¢
cIT�
l010 131 We
I1
G.PCC nNev u4T•. uWn:
MY De
11
CWOI Luq
13
f]
a.WWTP Cnpetlry 5unmery
atla011
N1M. Wed-
CS CaV^tl Fur 6.,
PMNNflmm
OF crt
ay
C.;
e. lu Summan
SIT—
b. IT Does. Summary
.11".
wren uq
Ifi
.WS ppma Me
I/.'(i:c
eSNa
1
ea PNS WxWrwm tllrt Dacl,,rwMe'1 ❑ Rs 0
T
Vry
33Sj
-
eCWa
0
CanrMe
Ifi
rjF�
xVlneearLIII
yaf/]
NNMLx
Thnreunr�np sllw,mepler[na pud�e..ale:IigVly eli'r4�ML.'Iwiu,_ IO VuII'�ii�--I rrvies C,.n�.. a.uii:il nru. �.
IMuapW Upuar M(wma1MM
31
Mx✓ro
Y.M1
rvNm tc .Ptlum a Tm'MNM
..
1A4'_n P _
7. _ r .
3]
3<
33
]6
]I
cemmx
R
3. SMua of Pn0ea0nmlPmpran(Nxk all MM uppm
3]
SWua
If PplT,,MM(ChKk all mn upped
3a
1fedb heano SllYs.tloen have qvi&one aveE ReOealmenl
Pm um lLelis INACTIVE
33
]) laueltv has no SlV¢. Con nolNrt CivlLan a{provetl ReOeaMmlRW..D
_
3B
31a M1as apgoveC ReOaalmml Ropem
3p
JBn
iC
_
IamlI, LW
mu) Meddled Proem wN STMP
aeJMmal tmelbrc mg&dq PeeOemmeal aMNecl w luteC OMvv
eIN- e�einplaaeee(pMled or
SI6I
ple-Wel
and Ma w0 io §50]4]I
edMv
¢u n
a
r M ale eaakm 1p.Ia,wmLn e. whim lanaelr.
e amd
as
Ofi
Sludge Dlepoval Plm:
a]
SluCpe PerMl m:
.,,r 1 mui Poc Pe..r. rmm

B O
ae
4. LTMPMTMP and MA Review
49
PW'. Find VSWP dommenl. HWA epreacisheal. DMR, premus and new NPDES permX for nead seclpn.
5p
L
S
,E
U
o
Pacmeterol Concem
PoL Check List
New
NPDES
PoC
Previous
NPDES
POC
Requbed Ey
EPA PTI
POCduato
Sludge 2
POCdueb
SIU ]
POW!
POC 4
%
Retrovel
Rare
STMPEMuau
F
NPDES
Effluent
POLs review
Cam vent
POL fro
STOOP, uBII
Reaulted POL
per NPDES
pennil
R Fcomn
POL, ugll
Ss
0
rtow
0
❑
v
BDD
1399.n
pu.nnry
>bpL
5a
Ia
T8B
e
m
❑
ouen+N
s..,L
a5
m
NHa
13
12
93.v
DuanelY
of me/.
5g
p
anamic
E3
❑
awrN
foo
rqunvm.wee vnL
sT
❑
Barium
0
❑
cl
59
❑
BmStllurrg5)
E3
❑
❑
5s
0
LadMurryll
wu '
wm evOl
Dp
0
CM1mMumlll
❑
❑
la
❑
❑
❑
OwneM
In
tan
aee lLL
fil
0
CopPadf)
E3
0
®
laM51
D•rrnN
In
ea
fiz
0
Cynlde
❑
❑
❑
la
❑
de
Ovsn.a
eJ
0
Lmdll)
❑
❑
la
(a
13
0
11WneM
IDo
wr.l PDL
84
Mermry(5)
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
-11
._ww
pwL
fi5
0
Molybdenum
❑
❑
IM
a
13
JI
p..N
nefleryntu
mxerrnmurmJN PoL
gp
0
afl rmltl
❑
❑
la
to
❑
❑
o
a,nwN
sP
omr..raed m'.
fit
Seknlum
❑
®
0
❑
b
lluanaM
Ipe
6a
nSilver
a
❑
❑
❑
]5
nwneXY
to
O
0
Zlnc(f)
❑
❑
0
(a
❑
-wnwil
In.
nia
TD
Wdpa Flowto D'rspoFa1
00
❑
Wnwn,
yl
0
%feeidsm Olsposel
©
❑
❑
anwy
2
DII B Drama
0
❑
N.fl
nuanerp
n
CL
TN_
❑
❑
Ta
❑
TP
❑
2s
o
13
❑
❑
❑
e
OE3❑
2D
IL❑
❑
❑
19
o
❑
❑
❑
❑
SO
D
❑
13
❑
fil
❑
a
fi]
y
ds
w
0]
fie
p9
Br
Footnotes:
III AM1'7 11 LiMP:SiMP 1. b EPA PI reewrmen!
I
I:r ONyn LlMF51MPIWNnaNepe prml
glQbmLIMP:s1MP mue MY ne6xnupeam PolW
Inu.lrb LrmP:sTMP rmen Pdlur.M.vamwrarPw Polw i
LSIbLMP:StNI tI— of yw.rrl
I.. I— imo 1.Mpe
ee n WNr1 dare '
6L[[MeeG ur (pW.rvnll-Pa:a'rmna ovary ncluneurmmrrnN PoCL[I - —
-
9z
6. Corrarrmts
83
FoOnyS Mnae Nockground inrormetionlNPDES-PT regulamry no,on'.
POCbMMtlFM1r2lNrn VSNP
B<
95
•i6
y1
WCxurmmenlsmlWPOC
r Ilvn
A0.IdlmaSlPPemamalCtenC—
puaxXM d
wiplaaga re L'SNP
vPpiWa cm
mLES wmmens
uMesln
ea
S. Prebesprgntu ad
solo NPMpemdlrnaed!
8a
NPpES PemX ElrenMOne fe0 tl[yvalln eX¢6M <aleL:i Perm¢IWIIDI, prenxe addliA Of renunMRM—MlInId PT updw sire NPDES pnmrl corerle 777-1
aoe. 2M, POC Renew I—

NORTH CAROLINA 2022 303(D) LIST
Upper New New River Basin
AU Name AU Number Classification AU_LengthArea AU —Units
AU ID Description
New River Basin 05050001 Upper New
South Fork New River 10-1-(3.5)a C+ 0.3 FW Miles
45 From Winkler Creek to 0.1 miles downstream of Hunting Lane
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY CRITERIA STATUS REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification AM8
Cobb Creek
10-1-10-3
C;Tr:+ 2.7 FW Miles
54 From source to Meat Camp Creek
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Turbidity (10 NTU, AL, Tr) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Legacy RAMS Assessments 2012
Middle Fork South Fork New River (Chetola Lake)
10-1-2-(1)a
INS -IV:+- 3.9 FW Miles
13376 From source to Sumpter Cabin Branch
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Biodassification 2012
East Fork South Fork New River
10-1 3-(1)
WS-IV;T r:+ 2.3 FW Miles
58 From source to Watauga County SR
1524
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2008
Little Buffalo Creek
10-2-20-1
C;Tr:+ 4A FW Miles
234 From source to Buffalo CGeek
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 201G
Fish Community (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2020
Little River
10-9-(6)1)
C 1.1 FW Miles
13989 From Bursh Creek to NC 18 (Blevins
Crossroad;)
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2020
Brush Creek
10-9 10
C; IT 27.2 FW Miles
290 From SOLrCC to Little Rrvcr
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY
CRITERIA STATUS
REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos (Nar, AL, FW) 5
Exceeding Criteria
Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification 2020
6/7/2022 L_ , - -.r,_ ,, ;.I , � r, i,,, LI (-!. ,,, , 92 of 192

r
1/30/23. 2:35 PM NCDEQ-DWR :: Benthos Site Details
a
Benthos Site Details
wonstaod9
location
Station lD
Dote Bloclosslllcatlon
L BUFFALO CR
US 221
K8059
29 May 1985 Poor
County 8 digit
HUC Latitude
Longitude
Elevation (B)
Ash. 05050001 36410278
-8/A85000
2965
Level IV Ecoreglon
Drainage Area (m12) Stream Width (m)
Stream Depth (m)
New RNer Plateau
0A 2.0
0.1
Lanause Percentages
Forest Developed
Impervlou5 CUItNa[ion Grass/Shrub
Wetland
Water Barren
00 0.0
0.0 00 0.0/00
0.0
00 0.0
Water Quality Parameters
1985
Temperaturs,M
0.0
DlswK*d Oxygen(mg/L)
0.0
Specific Conductance(pS/cm)
0.0
pH(su)
0.0
Substrate Percentages
1985
Boulder
10
Cobble
30
Grovel
30
Sand
20
Sib
10
Other
Habitat Assessment Scores (max score)
0
Water Clomw
Sample Date Sample ID
Method ST EPT
BI
EPT 81 &.1assl(Icatbn
29 May 1985 3457
Full Scale 24 4
7,53
3.62 Poor
https:// 9.nmater.orgt?page=672&SitelD=KBO59 1/1

1/30/23, 2.44 PM
NCDED-DWR :: Benthos Site Details
Benthos Site Details
Waterl olg
Location
Station ID
Dote
Blocloesl6cotan
L BUFFALO CR
OFF SR 1153
K8032
28 Aug 2013 Fair
County
8dIgfl HUC Latnude
longitude
Elevatlon(it)
Ashe
05050001 36420480
-81493220
28W
Level IV Ecareglon
Drainage Area(M2)
Stream Wdth(m)
Stream
Depth(m)
New River Plateau
30
so
03
Londuse Percentages
Forest
Developed Impervious Cultivation
Grass/Shrub
Wetland
Water
Barren
512
327 83 US
19/12
0.0
00
03
Water Quality Parameters 2013
2008
2003
1998
IW3
Tempermure Pq 00
18.1
160
122
00
DlswNed OxlJgen(mg/r) 0.0
B7
BA
87
00
Speoftc Conductance(pS/cm) 00
276.0
2000
1600
00
pH(su) 0.0
0.0
7.1
0.0
00
Substrate Percentages 2013
2"
2003
19%
1993
Bwlder 20
30
30
35
25
Cobble 20
25
30
35
35
Gravel 40
30
15
20
30
Soya 10
15
25
10
10
Sift 10
0
0
0
Other
Habitat Assessment Scores (mox score)
50
Water Cladty
Clear
Sample Date
Sample 10 Method ST
EPl
BI
EPT BI
80[laeedlCotbn
28 Aug 2013
11650 Fun Scale 52
14
5.67
4.09
Fair
21 Aug 200B
10545 Full Scale 63
13
5.69
467
Fair
20 Aug 2003
9228 Full Scale 22
6
663
4.14
Poor
IB Aug 1998
7713 Full Stole 39
14
663
401
Fair
13 Jul 1993
6265 Full Stole 24
0
820
Poor
https://www.nmater.orgl?page=672&Site]D=KBO32 1/1

FISH COMMUNITY SAMPLE
Waterbody
Location
Station ID
Date
Bioclassification
BUFFALO CR
NC 88/194
KF21
07/12/18
1 Not Rated (Fair)
County 8 digit HUC i Latitude Longitude I Elevation (ft) Reference Site
ASHE 05050001 36.43314G -BL51 i071 2776 N.
Level IV Ecoregion Drainage Area (mil) ) Stream Width (m) Stream Depth (in)
Amohibolite Mountains 12.6 5 0
Upstream NPDES Dischargers (i 1 MGD or < 1 MGD and within 1 mile)
NPDES Number
Volume (MGD)
None
-
Landuse (%)
Forest
Developed
Impervious
Cultivation
GrasslHerb/Shrub
Wetland
Water
Barren
1992
94.8
0.2
no data
4.8
no data
0.0
0.0
0.2
2001
86.3
2.1
0.1
8.5
2.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
2006
86.5
2.1
0.1
8.4
2.7
0.4
0.0
0.0
2011
86.3
2.3
0.1
8.1
3.0
0A
0.0
0.0
Water Quality Parameters
2008
2013
2018
Site Photograph
Temperature (`C)
1Z0
17.2
17.5
.�. r' ..
-
l '(•''! r
_ ;+
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
9.3
9.0
9.2�'A
Specific Conductance (pS/cm)
62
64
64
pH (s.u.)
6.9
7.1
7.3
Habitat Assessment Scores (max score).
2018
Channel Modification (5)
5
Instream Habitat (20)
18
Bottom Substrate (15)
13
Pool Variety (10)
6
Riffle Habitat (16)
16
Bank Erosion (7)
7
Bank Vegetation (7)
5
Light Penetration (10)
8
Left Riparian Score (5)
4
Right Riparian Score (5)
5
Total Habitat Score (100)
87
Water Clarity IClear, Substrates lCobtale, boulder, rip/rap, gravel, and sand.
Sample Date
Sample ID
Species Total
NCIBI Score
NCIBI Rating
07/12/18
2018-42
13
38
Not Rated (Fair)
06/27/13
2013-46
14
44
Good -Fair
05/19/08
200842
15
40
Good -Fair
Data Analysis
Watershed - Drains central Ashe County and is a tributary to the North Fork New River. Site is located about 3.6 miles upstream from the creek's confluence
with the river. Habitat - Fairly good riparian (mix of trees, shrubs, and grasses), and canopy shading here, given that the sample reach is bordered for most of
it's length by Buffalo Road on the left. Some boulder and rip rap armoring of the steep left bank where the road is nearest to the creek. Instream habitats
include sw10 cobble/boulder riffles and runs, with fast chutes, and boulder pools of various sizes. 2018 fish community - A slight increase in abundance since
the 2013 assessment (n=622 in 2018 vs. 521 in 2013), yet the total taxa count decreased by 1 in 2018. The trophic structure also shifted slightly to a higher
percentage of insectivores (42% decline in Bluehead Chub, intermediately tolerant omnivore). However, had just 1 specimen of the intolerant Kanawha
Minnow been collected again (Phenacobius teretulus, state listed - Special Concern), the 2018 NCIBI score would have retained 2 points, and the site would
have rated Good -Fair for a third time. For this reason, and since the overall taxa list (as well as species abundance proportions) remained nearly unchanged,
the site is Not Rated for 2018. This site is managed as NCW RC Hatchery Supported Trout Waters, yet only wild specimens of Brown and Rainbow Trout were
collected in 2018. Species with young -of -year in 2018 - Brown Trout (n=12), Bluehead Chub (n=1), and Western Blackness Dace (n=7). 2008.2018 - The slight
decline in NCIBI score and change in rating does not accurately reflect the seemingly unchanged water quality in this catchment. Rather, this high gradient,
moderately diverse site exists on the margin between Good -Fair and Fair ratings, and may also be on the fringe of ratability with the NCIBI. Overall, these fish
community data (and water quality parameters) continue to suggest no substantial changes in water quality in this mostly forested watershed. This site may be
resampled to confirm its 2018 rating.
Most Abundant Sp.
Mottled Sculpin (n=270, 43%), and Fantail Daner
(n=218, 35 % ).
Non -Native Sp.
Mountain Rectally Dace (n=1), Rainbow Trout
(n=1), and Brown Trout (n=6).
Species Change Since Last Cycle
Species gained since 2013 - Creek Chub (n=1, new record). Species lost since 2013 - White Sucker (1 collected in 2013), and Kanawha Minnow (1
collected in 2013, state listed - Special Concern). Saffron Shiner were collected in 2008 (n=25), but not in 2013 or 2018.

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Report Date: 04/25/23 Page 1 of 2
Permit: nc0020451
MRS Between 1 - 2018 andl2 - 2022
Region: "%
Violation Category:%
Program Category: %
Facility Name: %
Param Nam(%
County: %
Subbasin: %
Violation Action: %
Major Minor. %
PERMIT: NCO020451
FACILITY: Town of West Jefferson -West Jefferson WWTP
COUNTY: Ashe REGION: Winston-Salem
Limit Violation
MONITORING
OUTFALL
LOCATION PARAMETER
VIOLATION
FREQUENCY
UNIT OF
LIMIT
CALCULATED %
VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATION ACTION
REPORT
DATE
MEASURE
08-2020
001
Effluent
BOD. 5-Day (20 Deg. C) -
08/22/20
Weekly
mgA
7.5
8.5
13.3
Weekly Average
Proceed to NOD
Concentration
Exceeded
10-2018
001
Effluent
Copper, Total (as Cu)
10/02/18
Monthly
ugA
52
61
17.3
Daily Maximum
Proceed to NOD
Exceeded
10-2018
001
Effluent
Copper, Total (as Cu)
10/31/18
Monthly
ug/I
37
48.5
31.1
Monthly Average
Proceed to NOD
Exceeded
10-2019
001
Effluent
Copper, Total (as Cu)
10/02/19
Monthly
ugA
52
98
88.5
Daily Maximum
Proceed to NOV
Exceeded
04-2020
001
Effluent
Copper, Total (as Cu)
04/15/20
Monthly
ugA
52
53
1.9
Daily Maximum
Proceed to
Exceeded
Enforcement Case
04-2020
001
Effluent
Copper, Total (as Cu)
04/30/20
Monthly
ugA
37
53
43.2
Monthly Average
Proceed to
Exceeded
Enforcement Case
D4-2020
001
Effluent
Solids, Total Suspended -
04/18/20
Weekly
mg/I
15
19
26.7
Weekly Average
Proceed to
Concentration
Exceeded
Enforcement Case
04-2020
001
Effluent
Solids. Total Suspended -
04/25/20
Weekly
mg/I
15
16
6.7
Weekly Average
Proceed to
Concentration
Exceeded
Enforcement Case
Monitoring Violation
MONITORING
OUTFALL
LOCATION
PARAMETER
VIOLATION
FREQUENCY
UNIT OF
LIMIT
CALCULATED
VALUE
%
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATIONACTION
REPORT
DATE
MEASURE
12-2018
001
Effluent
Annual Pollutant Scan [126
12/31/18
Annually
yes=1 no=0
Frequency Violation
No Action, BPJ
parameters]
12-2019
001
Effluent
Annual Pollutant Scan [126
12/31/19
Annually
yes=1 no=0
Frequency Violation
No Action. Facility
parameters]
Reporting Error
Reporting Violation
MONITORING
OUTFACE
LOCATION
PARAMETER
VIOLATION
FREQUENCY
UNIT OF
MEASURE
LIMIT
CALCULATED
VALUE
Over
VIOLATION TYPE
VIOLATION ACTION
REPORT
DATE
05-2018
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
05/31/18
Quarterly
pass/fail
Parameter reported with
None
7Day Chronic Ceriodaphnia
invalid Unit of Measure
07-2018
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
07/31/18
Quarterly
pass/fail
Parameter reported with
None
7Day Chronic Ceriodaphnia
invalid Unit of Measure

MONITORING REPORT(MR) VIOLATIONS for:
Permit: nc0020451 MRS Between 1 - 2018 and12 - 2022 Region: %
Facility Name: % Param Namm% County: %
Major Minor: %
Report Date: 04/25/23 Page 2 of 2
Violation Category:% Program Category: %
Subbasin: % Violation Action: %
PERMIT: MC0020451 FACILITY: Town of West Jefferson -West Jefferson WWTP COUNTY: Ashe REGION: Winston-Salem
Reporting Violation
MONITORING VIOLATION UNIT OF CALCULATED %
REPORT OUTFACE LOCATION PARAMETER DATE FREQUENCY MEASURE LIMIT VALUE Over VIOLATION TYPE VIOLATIONACTION
09-2018
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
09/30/18
Quarterly
pass/fail
70ay Chronic Cedodaphnia
12-2018
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
12/31/18
Quarterly
pass/fail
7Day Chronic Cedodaphnia
01-2019
001
Effluent
Pass/Fall Static Renewal
01/31/19
Quarterly
pass/fail
7Day Chronic Cedodaphnia
03-2019
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
03/31/19
Quarterly
pass/fail
7Day Chronic Cedodaphnia
04-2019
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
04/30/19
Quarterly
pass/fail
I
7Day Chronic Cedodaphnia
05-2019
001
Effluent
Pass/Fail Static Renewal
05/31/19
Quarterly
pass/fail
7Day Chronic Cedodaphnia
Parameter reported with
None
invalid Unit of Measure
Parameter reported with
None
invalid Unit of Measure
Parameter reported with
No Action, BPJ
invalid Unit of Measure
Parameter reported with
No Action, BPJ
invalid Unit of Measure
Parameter reported with
No Action, BPJ
invalid Unit of Measure
Parameter reported with
No Action, BPJ
invalid Unit of Measure

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing and Self Monitoring Summary
Waynesville WWFP
NOD0253211001
County:
Haywood
Cer17dPF
Begin:
11/1/2021 chr lim: 9%
NonComp:
Single
J
F M
A
M
2019
-
Pass -
Pass
2019
Pass
6 41Fi Pass
2020
-
>12.7IPI Pass -
Pass
2021
-
Pass
Pass
2022
Pass
-
Pass
Weldon WWTP
N00025721/001
County:
Halifax
Fthd24PF
Begin:
8/1/2012 24hr p/f ac lim: 9D%
NonComp:
Single
J
F M
A
M
2019
Pass
-
Pass
-
2019
Pass
-
Pass
202D
Pasz
Pass
2021
Pass
Pass
-
2022
Pass
- -
Pass
-
Wells Fargo Bank- Duke Energy
Center NCO088226/001
County:
Mecklenburg
Ceri7dPF
Begin:
9/1/2020 Chr Lim: P/F 90%
NonComp:
J
F M
A
M
2018
-
- Pass
-
2019
- Fail
»OD
>100
2020
-
Pass
-
M21
.451n
.45 in Fail
as (F)
55.1 IFI
2022
- Pasz
West Carteret WTP
NCD077143/001
County:
Carteret
Mysd24PF
Begin:
11/1/2017 24hr p/f ac monit 90
NonComp:
J
F M
A
M
2018
Pass
-
Pass
2019
Pass
- -
Pass
-
7020
Pass
Pass
2021
Pass
-
Pass
-
2o72
Pass
-
Pas
West Jefferson WWTP
NOD020451/001
County:
Ashe
Ceri7dPF
Begin:
3/1/2018 chr lim: 56%
NonComp:
Single
J
F M
A
M
2018
Pass
-
Pas
'
N19
Pass
Pass>1001P)
-
M20
» DO Pass
- -
Pass
-
2021
Pass
-
Pas.
2022
Pass
-
Pass
-
Region:
ARO
Basin:
FRB05
Feb May Aug Nov
SOC JOC:
7Q10:
95.0
PF: 6.0
IWC:
8.91 Freq: Q
J
J
A
S
O
N
Pass
Pass
3.21Fi Fail
6.41F)
>36
>361PI Pass
-
Pass
-
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
-
-
Fall
>36
>36
Pass
Region:
FRO
Basin:
ROA08
Jan Apr Jul Oct
SOCJOC:
7Q30:
1000
PF: 1.2
IWC:
0.19 Freq: Q
J
J
A
S
O
N
Pass
Pass
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
Fail
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
Pass
-
Pass>100
Region:
MRO
Basin:
CTB34
Mar Jun Sep Dec
SOC JOC:
7Q30:
1.25
PF: Var
IWC:
N/A Freq: Q
J
J
A
S
O
N
Pass
Pais
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
Pass
-
Region:
WIRO
Basin:
WOK01
Jan Aprlul Oct
SOC JOC:
7Q10:
Tidal
PF: 0.084 IWC:
NA Freq: Q
J
J
A
S
O
N
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
Pass
-
-
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
-
Pazs
-
Pass
-
0
O
Pass
Pa Ss
Fall
Pais
C
Region: WSRO Basin: NEW02 Jan Apr Jul Oct SOC JOC:
7Q10: 0.6 PF: 0.5 IWC: 56.32 Freq: Q
J J A S O N D
Pass - - Pass
Pass - Pass
Pass - Pax -
Pass - - Pass
- Pau Pass
Legend: P= Fathead minnow IPIr les oromelas), H=No Flow (facility is activel, s = Split test between Certified Labs Page 114 of 118 la

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 u 3 1 NCO020451 111 121 19/07/03 117 181 C I 19 I s 1 20H
Lfj
21111111 1111111111111111111111111 11111111111 166
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating 61 QA --------- -------- —Reserved ----------- --------
67 701 I 711 I 72 I ti I 73L J J475� I I 1 1 I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
11:00AM 19/07/03
18/04/01
West Jefferson WWTP
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
US Hwy 221
West Jefferson NC 28694
12:00PM 19/07/03
22/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Ttles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
111
Brandon Lee Patrick/ORC/336-246-3558/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Brantley Price, /Town Manager// Contacted
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenar Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Progran N Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Wate Laboratory
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Kelli A Park DWR/WSRO WQ/336-776-9689/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type (Cont.)
NCO020451 I11 12 19/07/03 17 18 I C I
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
On July 2, 2019, Kelli Park and Mike Turner of this office, met with Brandon Patrick, Operator in
Responsible Charge (ORC), to perform a Compliance Evaluation Inspection at the West Jefferson
wastewater treatment plant. This type of inspection consists of two basic parts: an in -office file review
and an on -site inspection of the treatment facility. The attached EPA inspection form details the areas
that were evaluated during this inspection.
The inspection of the facility was satisfactory. If you have any questions regarding the inspection or
this report, please contact Kelli Park or me at [phone] or by email at [e-mail] or
[e-mail].
Page#

Permit: NCO020451
Inspection Date: 07/03/2019
Owner - Facility: West Jefferson VWVTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
Permit
Yes
No
NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new
❑
❑
❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
❑
❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
M
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Record Keeping
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
❑
❑
❑
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
■
❑
❑
❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
0
❑
❑
❑
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified
❑
❑
M
❑
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
❑
❑
❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
❑
❑
❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility
0
❑
❑
❑
classification?
Page# 3

Permit: NCO020451 Owner - Facility: West Jefferson WWTP
Inspection Date: 07/03/2019 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? N ❑ ❑ ❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: ORC is a Grade 4. BORC is a Grade 1
Laboratory
Yes
No
NA NE
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is the facility using a contract lab?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?
❑
❑
❑
M
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/- 1.0 degrees?
❑
❑
❑
Comment: Field Lab certification number 5284
Water Quality Labs is the contract lab.
Bar Screens
Yes
No
NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Grit Removal
Yes
No
NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
0
❑
❑ ❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
N
❑
❑ ❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
0
❑
❑ ❑
Comment:
Page# 4

Permit: NCO020451 Owner - Facility: West Jefferson WWTP
Inspection Date: 07/03/2019 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Influent Sampling
Yes
No
NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
0
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: 200 mL are sampled per 9900 gallons of flow.
Oxidation Ditches
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are the aerators operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
M
❑
❑
❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
0
❑
❑
❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% Of the basin's surface?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
N
❑
❑
❑
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
M
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier
Yes
No
NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
❑
❑
❑
Are weirs level?
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of weir blockage?
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is scum removal adequate?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the drive unit operational?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately % of the sidewall depth)
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Page# 5

Permit: NCO020451 Owner - Facility:
Inspection Date: 07/03/2019 Inspection Type:
West Jefferson VW TP
Compliance Evaluation
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Yes
No
NA NE
Type of operation:
Down flow
Is the filter media present?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
❑
❑
❑
Is the filter free of growth?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the air scour operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the scouring acceptable?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Disinfection - UV
Yes
No
NA NE
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are UV bulbs clean?
■
❑
❑
❑
Is UV intensity adequate?
❑
❑
❑
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
❑
❑
❑
Is there a backup system on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Pipe
Yes
No
NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
M
❑
❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
M
❑
❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
❑
❑
0 ❑
Comment: Effluent was clear the day of inspection.
Effluent Sampling
Yes
No
NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
M
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
❑
❑
❑
representative)?
Page# 6

_i Permit: NCO020451
Inspection Date: 07/03/2019
Effluent Sampling
Owner - Facility: West Jefferson VWVTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Comment: 200 mL are sampled per 9900 gallons of flow.
Flow Measurement - Effluent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment: SCADA used for continuous recording.
Meter was calibrated 11/19/2019
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
■❑❑❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
• ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The generator is used to power the influent pipes, aerators in the oxidation ditch, and
UV lights.
Tested once a month.
Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, N ❑ ❑ ❑
and sampling location)?
Comment:
Page# 7

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 U 3 I NC0020451 111 121 20/03/24 117 18I D J 19 I C I 201 I
211III I I I I I III 111 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l III 1 11 11 r 6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating 61 QA -------- ------------Reserved-----------_--_--
67 70I I 71I I 72 I N I 73]74 79 I I I I I I I80
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES uermit Number)
10:30AM 20/03/24
18/04/01
West Jefferson WWTP
US Hwy 221
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
West Jefferson NC 28694
11:30AM 20/03/24
22/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)Mtles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Brandon Lee Patrick/ORC/336-246-3558/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Brantley Price, /Town Manager//
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Pretreatment
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Paul DiMatteo DWR/WSRO WQ/336-776-9691/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3+ NCO020451 121 20/03/24 17 18 U
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page#

Permit: NC0020451 Owner - Facility: West Jefferson WWiP
Inspection Date: 03/24/2020 Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance +
Yes No NA NE
Page#

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 15 1 3� NCO020451 111 121 21 /02/23 (17 181 D I 19 I s I 201 I
21111111 1111111 11 11 1 11 1111 1 1 11 111 1111111 11 1 1 r6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating 61 QA ---------- ----------Reserved---- ------ ---------
67 70 U 71 I-72 1 �, 1 73IL1 _I—IJ74 71 I I I I I I I80
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
09:50AM 21/02/23
18/04/01
West Jefferson WWTP
Exit Tme/Date
Permit Expiration Date
US Hwy 221
West Jefferson NC 28694
10:50AM 21/02/23
22/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)[Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
111
Brandon Lee Patrick/ORC/336-246-3558/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Brantley Price, [Town Manager//
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit Records/Reports Self -Monitoring Progran
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Alex Lowe DWR/WSRO WQ1336-776-9689/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3� NCO020451 (11 12 21/02/23 17 18 ( o I
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
On February 23, 2021, WSRO DWR inspector Alex Lowe conducted a Pretreatment Compliance
Inspection at West Jefferson WVVfP (permit no. NC0020451). ORC Brandon Patrick was present.
The review of the POTW demonstrated a well -organized pretreatment program, with consistent
communication between the one SIU (Ashe County Cheese) and the POTW. This program
demonstrates compliance with all expectations and requirements of the associated DWR permit.
Page#

Permit: NCO020451 Owner - Facility: West Jefferson WVVrP
Inspection Date: 02/23/2021 Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Permit
Yes
No
NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new
❑
❑
❑
0
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
❑
❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
❑
❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Yes
No
NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
❑
❑
❑
■
representative)?
Comment:
Influent Sampling
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
❑
❑
❑
0
Is proper volume collected?
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0
❑
❑
❑
degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
❑
❑
❑
• 11711T-1
Record Keeping
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
N
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
❑
❑
❑
Page# 3

Permit: NCO020451
Inspection Date: 02/23/2021
Record Keeping
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Owner - Facility: West Jefferson VWVTP
Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility
classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
■❑❑❑
❑❑ ❑■
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Page# 4

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 15 1 3 I NCO020451 111 121 21 /12/06 117 18 I o I 191 S I 201 I
211111 I I I I I I II I I I 11 III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I r6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 CIA ---------- -----------Reeserved-------------------
67 70711 I 72 I ti I 73I jJ4 71 I I( I I I I80
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:OOAM 21/12/06
18/04/01
West Jefferson WWTP
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
US Hwy 221
West Jefferson NC 28694
10:45AM 21/12/06
22/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
I!1
Brandon Lee Patrick/ORC/336-246-3558/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Brantley Price, !Town Manager// Contacted
No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Pretreatment
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Alex Lowe DWR/WSRO WQ/336-776-9689/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type (Cont.) 1
NCO020451 I11 12 21 /12/06 17 18 I ' _I
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
On Monday, December 6, 2021, Alex Lowe of the Winston-Salem Regional Office conducted a
routine Pretreatment Compliance Inspection at the Town of West Jefferson WWTP. ORC Brandon
Patrick was present for the inspection.
Lowe reviewed the pretreatment program elements and found all were up to date and properly
documented with letters from the DWR. See table (item number 28 on PC[ Report) for dates of latest
element approvals and dates of required renewal.
A file review of the only SIU in the program, Ashe County Cheese, was conducted. This SIU is a
non -categorical industrial user which passes cheese production wash water onto the POTW. Mr.
Patrick stated that the SIU has maintained satisfactory communication and delivers permit -required
data in a timely manner. Lowe confirmed that all data appears to have been collected and reported
properly, both by the SIU and by the POTW. This SIU has received notice of violation in the last
semi-annual period for limit exceedances of BOD, TSS, silver, and cyanide. This violation did not
result in the user being placed in SNC per the ERP.
Mr. Patrick was particularly helpful in accessing and sharing this information with Mr. Lowe. No areas
of concern were uncovered during this inspection, and the program should be considered
satisfactory.
Page#

..o Permit: NC0020451 Owner - Facility: West Jefferson WWTP
Inspection Date: 12/06/2021 Inspection Type: Pretreatment Compliance
Yes No NA NE
Page#

NH3/TRC WLA Calculations
West Jefferson WWTP
PermitNo. NC0020451
Prepared By: Gary Perlmutter
Enter Design Flow (MGD): 0.5
Enter s7Q10 (cfs): 0.6
Enter w7Q 10 cfs : 0.9
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC)
Ammonia (Summer)
Daily Maximum Limit (ug/1)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
s7Q10 (CFS) 0.6
s7Q10 (CFS)
0.6
DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 0.5
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.5
DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 0.775
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.775
STREAM STD (UG/L) 17.0
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.0
Upstream Bkgd (ug/1) 0
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%) 56.36
IWC (%)
56.36
Allowable Conc. (ug/1) 30
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
1.6
Ammonia (Winter)
Monthly Average Limit (mg NH3-N/1)
Fecal Coliform
w7Q10 (CFS)
0.9
Monthly Average Limit: 200/100ml
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
0.5
(If DF >331; Monitor)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
0.775
(If DF<331; Limit)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
1.8
Dilution Factor (DF) 1.77
Upstream Bkgd (mg/1)
0.22
IWC (%)
46.27
Allowable Conc. (mg/1)
3.6
Total Residual Chlorine
1. Cap Daily Max limit at 28 ug/I to protect for acute toxicity
Ammonia (as NH3-N)
1. If Allowable Conc > 35 mg/l, Monitor Only
2. Monthly Avg limit x 3 = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals); capped at 35 mg/1
3. Monthly Avg limit x 5 = Daily Max limit (Non-Munis); capped at 35 mg/I
Fecal Coliform
1. Monthly Avg limit x 2 = 400/100 ml = Weekly Avg limit (Municipals) = Daily Max limit (Non -Muni)

Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1.
Project Information
Q CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS
Facility Name
West Jefferson W WTP
WWTP/WTP Class
Grade II
NPDES Permit
NCO020451
Outfall
001
Flow, Qw (MGD)
0.500
Receiving Stream
UT to Utle Buffalo Creek
HUC Number
05050001
Stream Class
C: Tr,+
❑ Apply WS Hardness WQC
701 Os (cfs)
0.60
7010w (cfs)
0.90
30Q2 lots)
CIA (cfs)
4.00
1 Q1 Os (cfs)
Effluent Hardness
86.93 ni (Avg)
Upstream Hardness
70.35 mg/L (Avg)
Combined Hardness Chronic I
_ _ _79.7 mg/L_
Combined Hardness Acute
80.35 mg/L.
Data Source(s)
Data from submited DMRs and PPAs.
❑ CHECK TO APPLY MODEL
Par01
Par02
Par03
Par04
Parris
Par06111111
Par07
ParOa
Par09
Par10
Part
Par12
Par13
Par14
Paris
Par16
PaW
Parts
Parts
Par20
Par21
Par22
Par23
Par24
Table 2. Parameters of Concern
Name wos Type Chronic Mod;i Acute PQL Units
Arsenic
Aguaaic Life
C
150
340
ug/L
Arsenic
Homan Hearth
Water Supply
C
10
H
N/A
ug/L
Beryllium
Aquatic Lde
NC
6.5
JFW
65
ug/L
Cadmium
Aquatic Lne
NC
1.4161
8.9699
ug/L
Chlorides
Aquatic Life
NC
230
mg/;_11
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
water supply
NC
1
uglL
Total Phenolic Compounds
Aqi Lde
NC
300
ug/L
Chromium III
Aquatic Lae
NC
304.2698
FW
2354.8346
ugIL
Chromium VI
Aquatic Lire
NC
11
FW
16
pg/L
Chromium, Total
Aci Lae
NC
N/A
FW
N/A
pg/L
Copper
Aquatic Life
NC
21.2226
FW
31.4608
ug/L
Cyanide
Aquatic Lne
NC
5
FW
22
10
ug/L
Fluoride
Acmue Lne
NC
1.800
FW
ug/L
Lead
Aquatic Life
NC
10.6795
FW
276,5232
ug/L
Mercury
Aquatic lute
NC
12
FW
0.5
ng/L
Molybdenum
Huri Hequh
NC
2000
HH
ug/L
Nickel
Aquatic Life
NC
99.2808
FW
900.0739
pg/L
Nickel
water supply
NC
25.0000
WS
N/A
pg/L
Selenium
Aquatic Lae
NC
5
FW
56
1
Silver
Aquatic Lit.
NC
0.06
FW
2.2080
ua/L
Zinc
Aquatic Life
NC
338.4562
FW
338.0456
ug/L
Toluene
Trout
NC
0.31
TR
pg/L
20451 RPA. input
4/25/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Effluent Hardness vawna-innn-coPY-.
plaxinnom data points
= sa
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results 1
7/52018
71.8
71.8
Still Dev.
40.2496
10/22018
106
106
Mean
86,9333
1122019
56.1
56.1
C.V.
0.4630
22/2019
56.1
56.1
n
21
4/2/2019
170
170
10th Per value
4570 mg/L
7/1/2019
69.3
69.3
Average Value
86.93 mg1L
7/10/2019
62
62
Max. Value
195.D0 mg0.
10/15/2019
107
107
1/29/2020
82.4
82.4
3/10/2020
103.9
103.9
4/15/2020
74.1
74.1
7R2020
28.4
284
10/6/2020
34.6
34.6
115/Z021
66.4
66.4
4162021
90.4
90A
7182021
96.8
96.8
10/52021
91.6
916
11312022
195
195
4/5/2022
45.7
45.7
7/6a022
101
101
10/10/2022
117
117
Hardness
= se
Data
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results �{
7152018
45.5
45.5
Still Dev.
34.5789
10/22016
108
108
Mean
70.3471
1/22019
38.7
38.7
C.V.
0.4915
4=019
175
175
n
17
7/12019
35.4
35.4
10th Per value
42.72 mg/L
10/152019
45.9
45.9
Average Value
70.35 ri
11292020
74.3
74.3
Max. Value
175.00 mg/L
7/7/2020
45A
454
10/642020
102.6
102.6
1/52021
48
48
4/6/2021
54.2
54.2
7/W021
62.5
62.5
10152021
65.3
65.3
1/3112022
70.3
70.3
4152022
52.8
52.8
7/612022
86
86
10/102022
86
86
20451 RPA. data
3 - 4/252023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
8 Par02
uv "rnsTE 6PEMAt.
Arsenic
v.e�.-m.�-corn.
rna.i...o.. a.0 noun:
= 50
Date
Date
BDL-12DL
Results
6/132018
<
10
5
Stol Dev.
00000
8!7/2018
<
10
5
Mean
5.0000
10/22018
<
10
5
C V. (defaul0
0.6000
7/102019
<
10
5
n
5
3/102020
<
10
5
Mull Factor =
2.32
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
Max. Pmd Cw
11.6 uglL
ME
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
7/102019 < 1 0.5 Sto Dev.
3/102020 < 1 0.5 Mean
C.V. (defaul0
n
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Use"PASTE SPECIAL-
v.I.W uu. roavr'.
0,0000
0.5000
0.6t100
2
3.79
0.50 ug7L
1.90 ug4.
20451 RPA. data
4/2512023

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Cadmium
Date
Dam
BDL=1/2DL
Results
6/132018
<
0.2
0.1
Sid Dev.
8!7/2018
<
0.2
0.1
Mean
101=018
<
0.2
0.1
C.V. (default)
7/102019
<
2
1
n
3/102020
<
0.2
0.1
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Use'PASTE SPECIAL
WNW tpen'COPY-
m u m Im. Pant,
02800
0,6000
5
2.32
1.000 ug/L
2.320 ug/L
U, PASTEESPECIAL-
CM1IOrideS i 1alues'IM1en"COPY".
new Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
1
Sid Dev.
NO DATA
2
Mean
NO DATA
3
CV.
NO DATA
4
n
0
5
6
Mult Factor =
N/A
7
Max. Value
N/A rng/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
N/A rn911-
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
2N51 RPA. data
-5- 4/252023

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
u,. -r nstr sr[CIA i.
Par07
W lu¢'
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Men -Copy .
. ...... I'Total Phenolic Compounds
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
Sta De,
Mean
C.V.
n
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
NIA
NIA u9IL
NIA u9IL
-6-
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
Sttl Dev
Mean
C.V.
n
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
NIA
NIA u9IL
NIA u9IL
20451 RPA. data
4/25/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Chromium III
..'.e.,a.. _�,.,-.
Chromium VI
.,.
m.xtn.m 4.ro nanrs
M
= SB
Date Data BDL=1120L Results
_
Date
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Std Dev.
NO DATA
1
Sul De,
NO DATA
2 Mean
NO DATA
2
Mean
NO DATA
3 C.V.
NO DATA
3
C.V.
NO DATA
4 n
0
4
n
0
5
5
6 Mull Factor =
N/A
6
Mull Factor =
N/A
7 Max. Value
N/A pg/L
7
Max. Value
N/A pg/L
8 Max. Pred C.
N/A pglL
8
Max. Pred C.
N/A pg/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20451 RPA, data
-7. 4/25/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
U11-PA.TE .PECIAL.
Chromium,
SB
Date
Data
BDL-1/2DL
Result.
6/132018
<
7 0.5
Std Dev.
0.2236
8n2016
i 1
Mean
0.6000
10/22018
<
1 0.5
C.V.Idefaul0
0.6000
7/10/2019
<
1 0.5
n
5
3110/2020
<
1 0.5
Mull Factor =
2.32
Max. Value
1.0 p9/L
Max. Fred Cw
2.3 p9/L
LL.e -vnslE s"enAL.
Copper
Corr.
Man m d.14. P.,in.
SB
Date
Data
BDL=7/2DL
Results
1
192020
22
22
Sid Dev.
4.5303
2
2/42020
<
1
05
Mean
64829
3
3/102020
<
1
0.5
C.V.
0.0988
4
4/15/2020
n
35
5
5/4/2020
5
5
6
612/2020
1
0.5
Mutt Factor=
1A7
7
7/7/2020
<
1
0.5
Max. Value
22.00 uplL
8
802020
9
9
Max. Prel Cw
25.74 ug/L
9
9/1/2020
8
8
10
10/6/2020
4.7
4.7
11
11/22020
9
9
12
12172020
8
8
13
1/52021
7
7
14
2/32021
7.9
7.9
15
3112021
7
7
16
4/6/2021
9
9
17
5/3/2021
14
14
18
6112021
12
12
19
7MI2021
4.3
45
20
8/18/2021
5.4
54
21
91IM021
9.2
9.2
22
10/112021
4.4
4.4
23
11/12021
7
7
24
12IW2021
12
12
25
1/10/2022
3.8
3.8
26
2/23/2022
T9
7.9
27
3n2022
43
43
28
4/5/2022
2.1
2.1
29
502022
2.5
25
30
6/6/2022
<
2
1
31
7162022
4
4
32
8/22/2022
6
6
33
917P2022
<
2
1
34
10/42022
10
10
35
1tn12022
11
11
36
12/52022
6
6
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
20451 RPA, data
- 8 - 4125/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Use "PASTE SPECIAL
Cyanide
vawar'maA-Copv .
Fluoride
vam..th.A^Corr'
Maximum dam points
Maximum data points
= se
= sa
Date
Data
BDL=112DL
Resulls
Date Data
BDL=112DL Results
1 6/132018
<
5
5
Sid Dev.
0.0000
1
Sid Dev,
NO DATA
2 8212018
<
5
5
Mean
5.00
2
Mean
NO DATA
3 10/2/2018
5
5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
C.V.
NO DATA
4 7/10/2019
<
5
5
n
5
4
n
0
5 3/10/2020
<
5
5
5
6
Mull Factor=
2.32
6
Mull Factor=
NIA
7
Maz. Value
5,0 ug/L
7
Maz. Value
NIA ug/L
8
Maz, Pred Cw
11.6 uglL
8
Max. Pred Cat
NIA ug/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20451 RPA, data
-9- 4252023

Date
1 6113/2016 <
2 a772018 <
3 10/22018
4 7/102019 <
5 3/102020 <
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Use'PASTESPE6UL
Lead
vnwes',nen-copP
Ma.rmum 4ma points
54
BDL=1/2DL
Results
10 5
Sid Dev.
0.0000
10 5
Mean
50000
10 5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
10 5
n
5
10 5
Mutt Factor =
2.32
Max. Value
5.000 ug/L
Max- Fred Cw
11.600 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
4B
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
to -
Mercury
Dale Data BDL=112DL Results
Sid Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mull Factor=
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
use`PASIESPEciAL-
vanietniee
M eun ntlala po)
- SS
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
NIA
N/A nglL
N/A nglL
20451 RPA, data
4252023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
iA 8
Par17 8 Par18
"PASILSPECIAL-
Uae'PASTE SPECIAL
ECr.inls39Date
Mol bdenumlue
'mea' covr''
Nickel
vmv's^1neP -c..YLSMaa
4U%t,
WlEata
Data
BDL=1/2DL
R
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
6/132018
<
1 0.5
Sid Dev.
0.0000
1
6/13/2018
1
0.5
Sid Dev.
0.0000
2
BR2018
<
1 0.5
Mean
0.5000
2
877/2018
<
1
0.5
Mean
0.5000
3
10/2/2018
<
1 0.5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
3
10122D18
<
1
0.5
C.V. (default)
0.6000
4
n
3
4
7/10/2019
<
1
0.5
n
5
5
5
3/102020
<
1
0.5
6
Mult Factor =
300
6
Mull Factor =
2.32
7
Max. Value
0.5 ug/L
7
Max. Value
0.5 pg/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
1.5 ug/L
8
Max. Fred Cw
1.2 pg/L
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
48
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
20451 RPA. data
- 11 - 425/2023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Selenium x
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 6/132018 < 10 5 Std Dev.
2 817/2018 < 10 5 Mean
3 1012/2018 < 10 5 C.V.
4 1212019 < 10 5 n
5 212/2019 < 10 5
6 4212019 10 5 Mult Factor=
7 7/112019 < 10 5 Max. Value
8 7/10/2019 < 10 5 me.. Fred Cw
9 10/22019 < 10 5
10 1/7/2020 < 10 5
11 3/10/2020 < 10 5
12 4/15/2020
13 717/2020 < 10 5
14 10/6/2020 < 1 0.5
15 1/5/2021 < 2 1
16 4/612021 1 0.5
17 7/82021 < 1 0.5
18 10/11/2021 < 1 0.5
19 1/10/2022 < 2 1
20 4/5/2022 < 1 0.5
21 7M/2022 < 1 0.5
22 10/4/2022 < 1 0.5
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
laen-COPY
m data pomla
= 58
3.1190
07149
21
1.41
5.0 uglL
7.1 ug1L
12-
Silver
Date
Data
BDL-112DL
Results
6/13/2018
< 1
0.5
Std Dev.
817/2018
< 1
0.5
Mean
1012/2018
1
0.5
C.V.(detaulll
7/1012019
0 1
0.5
n
3/102020
< 1
0.5
Mull Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
th-n "COPy'.
an data paints
= 58
0.5000
0.6000
5
2.32
0.500 u9IL
1.160 u81L
20451 RPA. data
4/2512023

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Zinc
Dale Data
BDL=112DL
Results
1
6/132018
23
23
Sid Dev.
2
W7/2018 <
1
0.5
Mean
3
10/212018
5
5
CV. (default)
4
7/102019
28
28
n
5
3/102020
68
68
6
Mult Factor =
7
Max. Value
6
Max. Fred Cw
Values" @..'COPY'.
Mai... d.l. points
5a
24.9000
0.6000
5
2,32
68.0 ug/L
157.8 ug/L
13-
Toluene vale.,-.... -cony.
Mau maau Pol.ts
mu_
Dale Data
BDL=112DL
Results 1
10/1/2018
1 0.5
Sid Dev.
114752
7/12019
21.3 21.3
Mean
8.1000
3/1/2020 <
5 2.5
CV. (default)
0.6000
n
3
Mult Factor= 300
Max. Value 21.300000 49/1-
Max. Pred Cw 63 900000 491L
20451 RPA, data
425/2023

West Jefferson WWTP 2
NCO020451 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw, (MOD) = 0.5000 W WTPAVTP Class: Grade II
I Q 1051 cfsl= 0.51 IWC-. IQI05 = 60.31128405
7QIOS(cfs)= 0.60 IWC°o 6,17Q10S= $6.36363636
7QIOWIcfs1= 0.90 IWC%Q)7Q10W= 46.26865672
30Q2(xlst• NO 30Q2 DATA IWCoa 30Q2=NIA
AvgStream Flow. CA Icfst= 4.00 IW%C@QA= 16.23036649
Receivinn Stream: UT to Litle Buffalo Creek HUC 05050001 Stream Class: C; Tr; +
Outfal 1001
Qw=0.5 MGD
YOU HAVE DESIGNATED THIS RECEIVING
STREAM AS HOW OR ORW
COMBINED HARDNESS (mg/L)
Acute = 80.35 mg/L
Chronic = 79.7 mg/L
PARAMETER
NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE
0.
n
Chronic Applied Acute
It9 Det Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Standard
Acute (F'A' ): 281.9
Arsenic
C
75 FW(7QIOs) 170
ug/L
__
_______
5 0
11.6
____
Chronic(FW) 133.1
CV (defaulO
Max _MDL =10 _ _ —
---------------------
Arsenic
C
5 HH/WS(Qavg)
ug/L
Note: n < 9
NO In. 11.Cls
Chronic (Ht11----30.8
No Oetetls-no monitoring equired
Limited dam set
Max MDL = 10
Acute: 53.89
Beryllium
NC
3.25 FW(7QIOs) 32.5
ugiL
_ 0
1.90
___ _ ___-___
Now n<D
CV. (default)
---------------------------------
Chronic: 5.7
No detects- no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
I AO DETE(7S
Max MDL = I
Acute: 7.436
Cadmium
NC
0.7081 FW(7Q I Os) 4.4850
ug/L
5 0
2.320
___ _ _______ _ __
_______________-_________
Note: n<_9
CV(default)
Chronic. 1256
No detects- no monitoring or fmlts required
Limited data set
NO 1)ETE(7S
Max MDL = 2
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorides
NC
115 FW(7Q10si
mg%L
0 II
N/A
-- _ __
--Chrome- _
_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _____ ___ -
204.0
Acute: NO WQS
Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds
NC
0.5 A(3OQ2)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
__ __ _ _ __
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: /NC?
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds
NC
150 A(30Q2)
ugfL
0 0
N/A
-----------------------------------------------
Chronic: /RC?
Acute: 1.951'
Chromium 111
NC
152.1349 FW(7Q1Ds) 1177AI73
pg/L
0 O
N/A
_
--Chronic
Acute: 13_3
Chromium Vl
NC
h FW(7QIOs) 8
µg/L
0 0
VA
___ _ _ _________
___
Chronic 98
Tol Cr�,iio Cr VI Allowable C%,
Chromium, Total
NC
ue I.
> I _ . Max reported value= I
a: No monitoring required i(allTotal Chromium
samples are < 5 pgr- or Pmd. max for Toml Cris <
NOlc:n59 C \% tdcfaulH
allowable Cw for Cr Vl.
LimiteA Aafa scr
Page 14 of 15
20451 RPA. rpa
425/2023

West Jefferson WWTP
NCO020451 Freshwater RPA - 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
Outfall 001
Qw = 0.5 MGD
Acute: 26.08
Copp',
NC
10.6113 FW(7QIOs) 157304
ug'L
35 29
25.74
_ _ ____________
__________________________
Chronic: 18.83
RP shown - apply Monthly Monitoring Wit Limit
I value s) - Allowable Cw
Acute: 18.2
Cyanide
NC
2.5 FW(7QIOs) II
10
ug/L
5 0
11.6
_____________-____________
Note: n <9
C V. (default)
_ _ __-________
Chronic: 4.4
No detects -rro monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO 71%PE('7N
Max MDL=10
Acute: NO WQS
Fluoride
NC
900 FW(7QIOs)
ug/L
0 0
N/A
___ __ _ _ _
_ ____________________
Chronic 96.8 e. 1.5
Acute 229.247
Lead
NC
5.3398 FW(7QIOs) 138.2616
ug/L
5 0
11600
_ _ ___ _ _ ____
_ _ _ _________-__________
Note: n < 9
CV (default)
Chmnic: ii 4
No detects- no monitoring or limits required
Limited data net
NO DETECIN
Max MDL = 10
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury
NC
6 FW(7QIOs)
0.5
ng/L
0 0
WA
___ _ __ --------------------------------
Chronic: 10.6
Acute: NO WQS
Molybdenum
NC
1000 HH(7Q10s)
ug/L
3 0
1.5
-------------------------------------------
Note: n < 9
C. V. idel'ault)
Chronic: 1.7742
No date=- no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
NO DE77.('7N
Max MDL = 1
Acute (FW ): 746.2
Nickel
NC
49,6404 FW(7QIOs) 450.0369
pg/L
_ _ --
___-_-_________________-_
5 (I
1.2
_
Chronic (PW I SS.I
Note: n<9
< V. Idefaultl
M-ax MDL - I ___ ___
_ _________-___________-__
Nickel
NC
12.5000 WS(7QI0s)
pg/L
Limited dala vi
4'O DA'7'ECTS
Chronic(WS): 22.2
No detects- no monitoring or limits required
Max MDL = I
Acute: 46.4
Selenium
NC
2.5 FW(7Q10s) 28
ug/L
^_I 0
7.1
--_ _ __ _ __
-_
_____-___________-___-___ _
44
Chronic: .
NO 1)L'Y'12'7:S
Max MDL - 10
Acute: 1.830
Silver
NC
0.03 FW(7QIOs) 1.1040
ug/L
5 0
1.160
___ _ _______ _ __
_________-_____-_-_-___-_
Note: n < 9
C. V. idelhult)
Chronic: 0.053
Nodetects - no monitoring or limits required
Limited data set
A DET7i('7N
Max MDL = I
Acute: 280.3
Zinc
NC
1692281 FW(7QIOs) 169.0228
ug/L
5 4
1578
_ __-__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Note: n < 9
CV.(defaul0
Chronic: 300.2
No- RP(Iimiteddatase0-no monitoring orlimita
Limited data set
No value > Allowable Cw
required
Acute. NO WQS
Toluene
NC
o IS TR(7QI0si
pg/L
3 1
63.90000
___
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Note:n<9
C.V.(default)
Chronic: 0.31935
Onedetectionat21.3uglLand2nwndet-d-at<18
Limited doa set
3values)-Allowable Cw.
< 5 ug/L. Apply quartets monitoring.
Acute:
l) 0
N/A
_-_-___-_-_-_-___-___-_-_
_ _ _
Chronic: __-_-_-_-__
I --
Page 15 of 15
20451 RPA, me
425/2023

Permit No. NCO020451
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards - Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard (WQS) Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 13, 2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6, 2016, with some exceptions. Therefore, metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6, 2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards - as
approved.
Table 1. NC Dissolved Metals Water Quality Standards/Aquatic Life Protection
Parameter
Acute FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Chronic FW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Acute SW, µg/l
(Dissolved)
Chronic SW, µg/1
(Dissolved)
Arsenic
340
150
69
36
Beryllium
65
6.5
---
---
Cadmium
Calculation
Calculation
40
8.8
Chromium III
Calculation
Calculation
---
---
Chromium V1
16
11
1100
50
Copper
Calculation
Calculation
4.8
11
Lead
Calculation
Calculation
210
8.1
Nickel
Calculation
Calculation
74
8.2
Silver
Calculation
0.06
1.9
0.1
Zinc
Calculation
Calculation
90
81
Table 1 Notes:
l . FW= Freshwater, SW= Saltwater
2. Calculation = Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns (as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
213.0200 (e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/I for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and Fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2. Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness -Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER) is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph (l 1)(d)
Metal
NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium, Acute
WER*{ 1.136672-[!n hardness] (0.041838)) - e^{0.9151 [hi hardness]-3.1485)
Cadmium, Acute Trout waters
WER* { 1.136672-[hi hardness] (0.041838)) • e^{0.9151 [hi hardness] -3.6236)
Cadmium, Chronic
WER* { 1.101672-[/n hardness](0.041838)) • e^{0.7998[hi hardness]-4.4451)
Chromium III, Acute
WER*0.316 a^{0.8190[/n hardness]+3.7256)
Chromium 111, Chronic
WER*0.860 a^{0.8190[!n hardness] +0.6848)
Copper, Acute
WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[!n hardness]-1.700)
Copper, Chronic
WER*0.960 - e^{0.8545[hi hardness]-1.702)
Lead, Acute
WER*{ 1.46203-[hi hardness](0.145712)) • e^{ 1.273[In hardness]-1.460)
Lead, Chronic
WER*{ 1.46203-[hi hardness](0.145712)) - e^{ 1.273[hi hardness]-4.705)
Nickel, Acute
WER*0.998 • e^{0.8460[hi hardness]+2.255)
Nickel. Chronic
WER*0.997 • e^{0.8460[hr hardness]+0.0584)
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO020451
Silver, Acute
WER*0.85 - e^{ 1.72[In hardness]-6.59}
Silver, Chronic
Not applicable
Zinc, Acute
WER*0.978 - e^{0.8473[hi hardness] +0.8841
Zinc, Chronic
WER*0.986 - e^{0.8473[hr hardness]+0.884}
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However, application of
the dissolved and hardness -dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness -based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream (upstream) hardness
and so must be calculated case -by -case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge -specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations. We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal (more on that
below), but it is also possible to consider case -specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WOBELs for Hardness -Dependent Metals - Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations, based on applicable
standards and the critical low -flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value (chronic or acute), the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard, which warrants a permit limit in most cases. if
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present (i.e. consistently below
detection level), then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
1. To perform a RPA on the Freshwater hardness -dependent metals the Permit Writer compiles the
following information:
• Critical low flow of the receiving stream, 7Q 10 (the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1 Q 10 using the formula 1 Q 10 = 0.843 (s7Q 10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site -specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness -dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge, the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream) hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values, upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available, the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L (CaCO3 or (Ca + Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L, respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness -dependent metal showing reasonable
potential, the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site -specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO020451 _
The overall hardness value used in the water quality calculations is calculated as follows:
Combined Hardness (chronic)
_ (Permitted Flow, cfs *Avg. Effluent Hardness, mg/L) + (s7010, cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness, mg/L)
(Pennitted Flow, cfs + s7Q 10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the 1 Q10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal, using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients (DPCs) or site -specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the "Fraction Dissolved" converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in -stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance f6r Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-13-96-007, June 1996) and the
equation:
Cdiss - 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [ss(14n)] [10,6] }
Where:
ss = in -stream suspended solids concentration [mg/I], minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a = constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals. A list of constants used for each hardness -dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient (or
site -specific translator) to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases, where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist (ie. silver), the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals. For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca = (s7Q 10 + Qw) (Cwcls) — (s7Q 10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca = allowable effluent concentration (µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs = NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria (µg/L or mg/L)
Cb = background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH_;* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw = permitted effluent flow (cfs, match s7Q 10)
s7Q 10 = summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish, and shellfish from noncarcinogens (cfs)
* Discussions are on -going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
IQ 10 = used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Q
Permit No. NC0020451
_ QA = used in the equation to protect hurnan health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2 = used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application (40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. if the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations, the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit (Total allowable
concentration) is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality -Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate, permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10, 2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
8. The Total Chromium NC WQS was removed and replaced with trivalent chromium and
hexavalent chromium Water Quality Standards. As a cost savings measure, total chromium data
results may be used as a conservative surrogate in cases where there are no analytical results
based on chromium III or VI. In these cases, the projected maximum concentration (95th %) for
total chromium will be compared against water quality standards for chromium III and
chromium V1.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling, upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness -dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter
Value
Comments (Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness, mg/L
86.9
Permittee submitted DAIRs
(Total as CaCO3)
Average Upstrearn Hardness, mg/L
70.3
Perruittce submitted DMRs
(Total as CaCO3)
7Q 10 summer (cfs)
0.6
Reported in previous permit Fact
Sheet
IQ 10 (efs)
0.51
Calculated in RPA spreadsheet
Permitted Flow (MGD)
0.5
Design. low
Date: February 1.2023
Permit Writer: _Gary Perlmutter _
Page 4 of 4

4/25/23 WQS =
6
ng/L
MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION V:2013-6
Facility Name
No Limit Required
West Jefferson
WWTP /
NC0020451
/Permit No.
No MMP Required
Total Mercury 1631E PQL = 0.5
ng/L
7Q10s = 0.600 cfs WQBEL = 10.65 ng/L
Date Modifier
Data Entry
Value
Permitted Flow = 0.500 47 ng/L
6/13/18
0.687
0.687
8/7/18
0.585
0.585
10/2/18 <
0.5
0.5
0.6 ng/L- Annual Average for2018
7/10/19 <
1
0.5
0.5 ng/L- Annual Average for 2019
3/10/20 <
1
0.5
0.5 ng/L- Annual Average for 2020
r

EPA Identification Number NPDES Number Facility Name Outfall Number
NCO20451 Town of West Jefferson 1
-Method Number ^ - �EstiriiatedConentration (if
Pollutant Re ulred CAS number (if AP licable) Reason Pollutant Believed Present in Dischar a Known)
Based on influent makeup of mostly domestic with one industrial user
that makes cheese, we do not anticipate additional pollutants
entering the stream.

SOUTHERN 48 Patton Avenue, Suite 304 Telephone [phone]
ENVIRONMENTAL Asheville, NC 28801 Facsimile 828 258-2024
LAW
CENTER
May 24, 2022
Via Email
Richard Rogers
N.C. Dept. of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Permitting Section
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[e-mail]
Re: Application of the trout waters temperature standard in draft NPDES Permit
Nos. NC0020451, NC0023281, NC0032115, NC0061930, and NCO079561
Dear Mr. Rogers:
Please accept the following comments submitted on behalf of MountainTrue, North
Carolina Trout Unlimited State Council, North Carolina Wildlife Federation, Watauga
Riverkeeper, and the Southern Environmental Law Center related to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality's ("DEQ") failure to apply the required trout waters
temperature standard in five recently noticed draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System ("NPDES") permits: Draft Permit Nos. NCO020451 (West Jefferson WWTP),
NCO023281 (Tapoco Lodge & Village WWTP), NCO032115 (Town of Banner Elk WWTP),
NCO061930 (Mark Laurel WWTP), and NCO079561 (Town of Elk Park WWTP). All five
permits would authorize discharges into designated trout waters.' Proper application of the trout
waters temperature standard is critical to protecting trout populations in North Carolina.
Unfortunately, the draft permits leave the affected populations at risk by failing to ensure trout
streams remain sufficiently cool. We also point out several additional shortcomings in Draft
Permit No. NCO020451 (West Jefferson WWTP).
I. Trout require cold, clean water to survive.
Keeping water temperature in designated trout waters below certain thresholds is
critically important because North Carolina's three species of trout —brook trout, brown trout,
and rainbow trout —require cold, clean, oxygen -rich water to survive and thrive. Water
1 See NPDES Draft Permit Nos. NCO020451, West Jefferson WWTP (Feb. 22, 2023), at 2 (indicating discharge into
"an unnamed tributary to Buffalo Creek" in the New River basin, classified as Class C trout water and North Fork
New River Outstanding Resource Water Area); NCO023281, Tapoco Lodge & Village WWTP (May 2, 2023), at 2
(indicating discharge into the Little Tennessee River, a Class C trout water in the Little Tennessee River basin);
NC0032115, Town of Banner Elk WWTP (March "xx" [sic] 2023), at 2 (indicating discharge into the Elk River, a
Class C trout water in the Watauga River basin); NC0061930, Mark Laurel WWTP (Apr. 5, 2023), at 2 (indicating
discharge into the East Fork Overflow Creek, a Class C trout water and an Outstanding Resource Water in the
Savannah River basin); and NCO079561, Town of Elk Park WWTP (Mar. 22, 2023), at 2 (indicating discharge into
the Little Elk Creek, a Class C trout water in the Watauga River basin).
Charlottesville Chapel Hill Atlanta Asheville Birmingham Charleston Nashville Richmond Washington, DC

F-
temperature for these trout generally needs to be kept below 20 °C (68 °F).2 Unfortunately, past
and ongoing land management practices threaten trout habitats, including by increasing stream
temperatures. As we explained in our comments on North Carolina's draft 2022 Clean Water Act
Section 303(d) list, numerous trout streams routinely exceed safe water temperatures for trout.3
Climate change is exacerbating this problem. By 2060, western North Carolina is
predicted to see 10-20 more days each year with air temperatures above 35 °C (95 °F), increasing
the potential for water temperatures to rise above 21.1 °C (70 °F) —levels that can be lethal to
trout.' This combination of past habitat loss, ongoing poor land management practices, and
climate change poses an existential threat to many western North Carolina trout populations.
Declines in trout populations —driven by increasing stream temperatures or otherwise —
will hurt local economies. The total economic benefit of trout fishing in North Carolina is
estimated at $383.3 million annually, supporting nearly 3,600 jobs.s If trout habitats are fiuther
reduced, these economic benefits will be at risk. Overall, stream temperatures in North Carolina
are increasing, and this trajectory is predicted to continue under a changing climate. To protect
trout populations and the businesses that rely on them, North Carolina must take proactive steps
to ensure trout waters remain sufficiently cold.
H. North Carolina promulgated a temperature water quality standard to protect
trout.
Recognizing that trout require cold water, North Carolina exercised its authority under
the Clean Water Act to develop a temperature water quality standard designed to keep trout
streams cold. The Clean Water Act requires states to designate "uses" of waterbodies and
promulgate standards to protect those uses. See 33 U.S.C. § 1313; 40 C.F.R. § 131.10; N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 143-214.1. All waterbodies in North Carolina are subject to a temperature standard to
protect their associated designated use. 15A N.C. Admin. Code 2B.0211(18). Some North
Carolina waterbodies have been assigned a "trout waters" use. See 15A N.C. Admin. Code
2B.0301(b)(3) (explaining trout waters classification); 40 C.F.R. § 131.10(c) ("States may adopt
sub -categories of a use and set the appropriate criteria to reflect varying needs of such sub-
categories of uses, for instance, to differentiate between cold water and warm water fisheries.").
The temperature standard —for both trout waters and non -trout waters —provides that water
temperature is:
2 Trout Species of North Carolina, Fly Fishing NC (accessed Dec. 16, 2022), https://www flyfishingnc.com/trout-
species-of-north-Carolina.
3 S. Envtl. L. Ctr., Comments on North Carolina's Draft 2022 § 303(d) List (Feb. 28, 2022).
4 Emma Johnson, Climate Change Challenges Trout Industry in North Carolina, Carolina Public Press (Feb. 17,
2021), https://carolinapubHcpress.org/42527/climate-change-challenges-trout-industry-in-north-carolina/. See also
Kunkel, K.E., et al., North Carolina Climate Science Report (2020), available at
https://ncics.org/wpcontent/uploads/2020/1O/NC_Climate Science_Report FullReport Final revised September20
20.pdf.
5 N.C. Wildlife Res. Comm'n, Mountain Trout Fishing: Economic Impacts on and Contributions to North Carolina's
Economy (2015), available at https://www ncwildlife.org/Portals/0/Fishing/documents/Economic-Impacts-Trout-
Fishing.pdf.
2

not to exceed 2.8 degrees C (5.04 degrees F) above the natural water temperature,
and in no case to exceed 29 degrees C (84.2 degrees F) for mountain and upper
piedmont waters and 32 degrees C (89.6 degrees F) for lower piedmont and coastal
plain waters; the temperature for trout waters shall not be increased by more than
.5 degrees C (0.9 degrees F) due to the discharge of heated liquids, but in no case
to exceed 20 degrees C (68 degrees F).
15A N.C. Admin. Code 02B .0211(18).
The standard has two parts —a delta limit and an absolute limit. In non -trout waters, the
delta limit prohibits an increase attributable to a discharger of more than 2.8 °C above the natural
water temperature. The absolute limit provides that temperature shall "in no case" exceed 29 °C
in mountain and upper piedmont waters and 32 °C in lower piedmont and coastal plain waters
regardless of the presence of permitted dischargers.
The trout waters standard follows this same structure: Stream temperature may not be
increased "by more than .5 degrees C ... due to the discharge of heated liquids" but "in no case"
shall stream temperature exceed 20 'C. This makes sense because keeping trout waters below
20 "C—regardless of the presence of permitted dischargers —is critical to sustaining healthy trout
populations.
North Carolina's temperature standard, including for trout waters, is implemented in part
through NPDES permits that regulate point source discharges by setting limits and monitoring
requirements for a variety of water quality characteristics. 33 U.S.C. § 1342(a). State agencies
with delegated authority to administer the NPDES program, such as DEQ, are responsible for
ensuring NPDES permits identify and apply the correct water quality limits for the waterbody
into which the permittee will be discharging effluent.
In issuing a recent NPDES permit for a discharge into a designated trout water without
the required temperature standards, DEQ explained it had concluded that "effluent from 100%
domestic WWTPs [is] not a `heated liquid' as reference[d] in the rule" and, presumably, that the
trout waters temperature standard therefore did not apply.' This conclusion is unsupported by the
text and the purpose of the rule; it is also irrelevant to the absolute limit set by the standard.
Temperature in trout waters shall "in no case ... exceed 20 degrees C." 15A N.C. Admin. Code
2B.0211(18) (emphasis added). DEQ must include limitations in permits to ensure that
discharges do not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the 20°C standard, even if that
discharge is not a "heated liquid."
M. DEQ must ensure all five draft NPDES permits comply with the trout waters
temperature standard.
To comply with the Clean Water Act and state water quality standards, DEQ must ensure
all five draft NPDES permits facilitate compliance with the temperature limits necessary to
protect trout waters. The draft permits out for comment currently contain no language to prevent
exceedances of those standards, despite in two cases newly including in -stream monitoring
6 Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit No. NCO067318 (Jan. 13, 2023).
3

requirements for temperature.' We applaud DEQ for taking notice of the importance of
monitoring water temperature for the protection of trout waters. But it must also include permit
limits to prevent violations of water quality standards, including the trout waters temperature
standard.
The draft permit for the West Jefferson W WTP (Draft Permit No. NCO020451)
exemplifies why permit limits are necessary. West Jefferson's application materials list an
estimated maximum effluent temperature of 23.5 °C, exceeding the 20-degree maximum set for
trout waters.8 The application also incorrectly refers to the applicable temperature standard as
29 °C instead of the 20 °C limit required for trout waters.' Further, the effluent is expected to
constitute 56 percent of the receiving stream's total flow.10 This indicates a substantial risk that
the discharge will violate both the delta and absolute temperature limits applicable to discharges
to trout waters.
This is particularly problematic because temperature is a "parameter of concern for
aquatic life" for this facility and DEQ has documented a "statistically significant difference" in
temperature between monitoring stations upstream and downstream of the discharge point.' t In
other words, it appears the discharge is increasing stream temperature. The receiving stream is
also listed as impaired on North Carolina's Section 303(d) list due to effects to "benthos" and the
"fish community."12 Taken together, DEQ is aware that this facility is causing impacts to stream
temperature in an impaired waterbody. Nevertheless, the draft permit includes no limit on this
facility's ability to affect stream temperature. The limited discussion of temperature in the draft
permit materials applies the wrong standard —the 29 °C standard applicable to mountain waters
generally instead of the 20 °C limit required for trout waters.
To be clear, DEQ has no authority to issue NPDES permits that do not ensure compliance
with water quality standards, including the trout waters temperature standard. See 33 U.S.C. §
1311(b)(1)(C) (requiring NPDES permits to include limitations "necessary to meet water quality
standards"); 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1). Where draft permits fail to ensure compliance --as is the
case with the West Jefferson W WTP draft permit —those permits must be revised.
Incorporating the trout waters temperature standard into permits is also important because
DEQ has failed to correctly apply this standard when preparing its Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list. Section 303(d) requires states to identify waterbodies that are not meeting water
quality standards, investigate the reasons for noncompliance, and develop a plan to remediate
those problems. For several years, DEQ has wrongly applied in the Section 303(d) context the
water quality temperature standard for mountain waters (29 °C) to designated trout waters
r Letter from Emily Richards, N.C, Dep't of Env't Qual., to Paul Isenhour, Water Qual. Labs & Operations, Inc.
(March "xx" [sic] 2023), at 1; Letter from Siying Chen, N.C. Dept of Env't Qual., to Kevin Bailey, Tapocw
Partners, LLC (May 2, 2023), at 1.
s Fact Sheet for draft NPDES Permit No. NC 0020451, West Jefferson W WTP (Feb. 16, 2023), at 3.
s Id. at 4, 5 ("Temperatures in both [instream monitoring] sites were below the standard of 29 °C for upper piedmont
and mountain waters.').
o Id. at 2.
Id. at 5.
12 See generally North Carolina 2022 Integrated Report at 1035, available at
httos://edocs.dea ne.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=2361713&cr—l.
4

ER
protected by the 20 °C standard.' 3 DEQ has committed that error with respect to at least one of
the receiving streams at issue here. Tapoco Lodge & Village WWTP (Draft Permit No.
NC0023281) discharges into Cheoah Lake, a designated trout water, but in the Section 303(d)
context DEQ assesses compliance with a temperature standard of 29 °C.14 The 2022 303(d)
Integrated Report does not disclose which standard DEQ applied to other receiving waters at
issue in the draft NPDES permits. But the combination of these two errors —failure to include
temperature standards in NPDES permits and failure to assess compliance with the correct
temperature standard in the Section 303(d) context —generally risks jeopardizing trout
populations.
In summary, before finalizing any of these five permits, DEQ must ensure they facilitate
compliance with the water quality temperature standard for trout waters. The most
straightforward and thorough approach is to include language DEQ has already properly applied
to other trout water discharge permits:
"The instream temperature shall not be increased by more than 0.5 degrees C (0.9
degrees F) due to the discharge of heated liquids, but in no case to exceed 20
degrees C (68 degrees F). If the stream temperature exceeds 20 degrees C due to
natural background conditions, the effluent cannot cause any increase in instream
water temperature."
This expression of the temperature standard, found in the most recent draft NPDES
permit for the Buffalo Meadows WWTP, NPDES Permit No. NCO030325 (and others), correctly
requires permittees to cause no further increase in temperature when stream temperature already
exceeds trout water standards. Apparently, the Tapoco Lodge & Village WWTP permit used to
include similar language —in each of the 1998, 2003, 2007, and 2012 permits but it was
removed in 2018.11 To meet its obligations under the Clean Water Act, DEQ should add this
language back.
IV. DEQ must correct additional problems in Draft Permit No. NCO020451 (West
Jefferson WWTP)
In addition to the trout waters temperature standard issue discussed above, DEQ must
address several additional shortcomings in Draft Permit No. NCO020451 (West Jefferson
WWTP).
First, the total suspended solids limit in the draft permit runs afoul of the Clean Water
Act's anti -backsliding provision, which EPA has interpreted to require that "when a permit is
renewed or reissued, interim effluent limitations, standards or conditions must be at least as
stringent as the final effluent limitations, standards, or conditions in the previous permit." 40
C.F.R. § 122.44(1)(1). Here, the previous permit limited total suspended solids to 10 mg/L
13 See supra note 3.
14 See supra note 12, at 538.
15 Compare Fact Sheet for draft NPDES Permit No. NC0023281, Tapoco Lodge & Village WWTP (April 25, 2018),
at 2 with NPDES Permit No. NC0023281 (March 30, 1998), at 3 n.2; NPDES Permit No. NC0023281 (Jan. 27,
2003), at 4 n.1; NPDES Permit No. NC0023281 (Oct. 8, 2007), at 4 n.1; NPDES Permit No. NC0023281 (Aug. 22,
2012), at 4 n.l .

monthly average and 15 mg/L weekly average. II The draft permit attempts to increase those
limits to 30 mg/L and 45 mg/L, respectively. DEQ must impose the earlier total suspended solids
limit to remain in compliance with the Clean Water Act.
Second, the compliance schedule for copper in the draft permit also falls short of the
Clean Water Act's requirements. Regulations implementing the Clean Water Act require a
compliance schedule, for example, to impose "an enforceable sequence of interim requirements"
leading to compliance. 40 C.F.R. § 122.2. Compliance must be achieved "as soon as possible."
40 C.F.R. § 122.47(a), see also 40 C.F.R. § 123.25 (requiring permitting authorities to administer
delegated state programs in conformance with this and other specified regulatory provisions).
EPA's guidance to permit writers reinforces that schedules of compliance to meet state water
quality standards must meet certain minimum criteria." Echoing the regulatory requirements,
permit writers must " U]ustify and demonstrate that compliance with the final WQBEL is
required as soon as possible."
Here, the compliance schedule for copper appears to have been copied and pasted from
another permit —indeed, the compliance schedule repeatedly refers to achievement of zinc and
silver limits even though the schedule is purportedly about copper limits.18 There is no indication
that DEQ is attempting to achieve water quality limits "as soon as possible" as required under the
Clean Water Act. To the extent a compliance schedule is permissible here at all, DEQ has not
carried its burden to show how the proposed schedule meets Clean Water Act requirements.
Third, we understand that DEQ has also added a monitoring condition for PFAS to the
draft permit.19 If DEQ suspects that the West Jefferson facility discharges PFAS, it must demand
sampling information in the permit application process and evaluate whether technology -based
and water quality -based limits are necessary. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 125.3, 122.44(d)(1)(i); see also
Piney Run Pres. Assn v. Cty. Commis of Carroll Cty., Maryland, 268 F.3d. 255, 268 (4th Cir.
2001). The monitoring condition is also too lenient. As EPA made clear in guidance issued last
December, monitoring should "be conducted at least quarterly to ensure that there are adequate
data to assess the presence and concentration of PFAS in discharges.i20 This requirement should
be applied to all wastewater plants, including those without industrial users.21 Moreover, EPA
has stressed that these requirements should be implemented immediately and that agencies need
not wait for Draft Method 1633 to be finatized.22
6 See NPDES Permit No. NCO020451, West Jefferson W WTP (Feb. 16, 2018), at 2.
See U.S. EPA, NPDES Writers Manual § 9.1.3, available at httos•//www epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
09/documents/pwm 2010.mdf
s See NPDES Draft Permit No. NCO020451, West Jefferson W WTP (Feb. 22, 2023), at 10.
9 See id. at 3; Fact Sheet for NPDES Draft Permit No. NCO020451, West Jefferson W WTP, at 9.
20 Memorandum from Radhika Fox, Assistant Administrator, U.S. Env't Prot. Agency, Addressing PFAS
Discharges in NPDES Permits and Through the Pretreatment Program and Monitoring Programs (Dec. 5, 2022), at 4
(emphasis added).
zi Id.
22 Id.

V. Conclusion
North Carolina has some of the best and most at -risk trout habitat in the eastern United
States. Ensuring viable trout populations persist in the future requires keeping trout streams clean
and cold. To that end, DEQ must forthrightly apply the trout waters temperature standard in the
final versions of NPDES Permit Nos. NCO020451, NCO023281, NC0032115, NC0061930, and
NC0079561.
Please notify Henry Gargan at hgargan@,selcnc.org or 828-258-2023 when DEQ issues
final versions of these NPDES permits. We remain available as always to discuss our concerns.
Sincerely,
Henry Gargan
Associate Attorney
Southern Environmental Law Center
hearean(a.selcnc.ore
Patrick Hunter
Managing Attorney
Southern Environmental Law Center
Cc: Charles Weaver ([e-mail])
Gary Perlmutter ([e-mail])
Emily Richards ([e-mail])
Siying Chen ([e-mail])
7

Winston-Salem Journal
Advertising Affidavit Account Number
3376309
Date
April 27, 2023
NCDENRIDWOIPOINT SOURCE BRANCH
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH, NC 27699-1617
PO Number Order Category Description 771
0000833025 Legal Notices Public Notice Stale of North CamlinalEnvironmental Management Commission
Publisher of the
Winston-Salem Journal
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public duly commissioned, qualified, and
authorized by law to administer oaths, personally appeared the Publisher's
Representative who by being duly swom deposes and says: that he/she is
authorized to make this affidavit and swom statement; that the notice or
other legal advertisement, a copy of which is attached hereto, was
published in the Winston-Salem Journal on the following dates:
OW712023
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper document, or legal
_— advertisement was published, was.at,tpe time of each and every such
publication, a newspaper meeting all -the requirements -and qualifications of
Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North arolina.
(signature of person ranking nf/idavit)
Sworn to and subscribed bclhre me the 27th
,,n unrrr I ,
ON R. C (Notary Public)
State of Virginia '�Z.P,•"•••••.,•S,pS.,'
County of Hanover c O p07ARv
UBLIMy commission expired + REG. _Z
3 : EXPIMISS/pN ? Q
•'•.. July 31, 2025
q�TH OFJ ,
THIS IS NOT A BILL. PLEASE PAY FROM INVOICE. THANK YOU

Public Notice
Slate of North
Carolina/Environmental
Management Commission
1617 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC 27699.1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES
wastewater permit
The North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission proposes
to issue a NPDES wastewater dis-
charge permit to the persons) listed
below. The Town of West Jefferson
requested renewal of permit
NCO020451 for the West Jefferson
WWTP in Ashe County. This permit-
ted discharge is treated municipal
wastewater to an unnamed tributary
to Little Buffalo Creek in the New
River Basin.
The Town of Wilkesboro has applied
for a new NPDES permit
(NC0090034) for the Wilkesboro
WTP in Wilkes County. This facility
would discharge to an unnamed trib-
utary to Moravian Creek/Yadkin-Pee
Dee River Basin. Written comments
regarding the proposed permit will
be accepted until 30 days after the
publish date. The Director or the NC
Division of Water Resources may
hold a public hearing should there be
a significant degree of public TdtR-
est Interested peons may visit (he
DWR at 512 N. Salisbury Street, Ra-
leigh, NC, 27699. Please mail mm.
ments and/or information requests
to DWR at the address listed above.
Additional information on NPDES
permits and this notice may be
found on our website: httpzt/deq.nc.
gov/about/divisions/water.
resources/water-resources.
permits/wastewater-branch/npcies-
wastewater/public-notices, or by
calling [phone].
WSJ: Apra 27, 2023.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
ROY COOPER
Govemor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Seawary,
RICHARD E. ROGERS, JR.
Director
Mr. Brandon Patrick, Town Manager
Town of West Jefferson
PO Box 490
West Jefferson, NC 28694-0490
Dear Mr. Patrick:
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
February 22, 2023
Subject: Draft NPDES Permit Renewal
Permit NCO020451
West Jefferson WWTP
Ashe County
Grade II Biological WPCS
SIC Code 4952
Enclosed with this letter is a courtesy copy of the Draft NPDES permit renewal for your facility
to review for the next ten (10) days. Please review this draft carefully to ensure thorough
understanding of the requirements and conditions it contains. There are several changes from the
existing permit, including the following:
• Based on numerous decreases of downstream dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations compared
to concurrent upstream concentrations, the effluent DO limit has been adjusted to daily average
minimum of 7.0 mg/L [see A. (I.)].
• To provide more information regarding effluent nutrient concentrations in light of trends of
increasing nutrient concentrations downstream, Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus
monitoring has been increased from 2/year to quarterly. In addition, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN) and Nitrate -Nitrite Nitrogen (NO3-N +NO2-N) quarterly monitoring and reporting have
been added to the. permit_-- z_ --
• Based on the reasonable potential analysis (RPA) showing reasonable potential to violate state
water quality standards using recent hardness data, Total Copper limits have been revised [See
A.(1.)].
• To provide an opportunity for the Town to develop a plan to assess sources of Total Copper in
order to come in compliance with the revised limits in Section A. (1.), a 3-year schedule of
compliance with the option to conduct a Water Effect Ratio (WER) study has been added to
the permit [See Special Condition A. (5.) Schedule of Compliance].
• Based on the RPA showing no reasonable potential to violate state water quality standards
using recent hardness data, Total Selenium monitoring requirements have been removed from
the permit [See A. (L)].
• Based on the RPA showing reasonable potential to violate state water quality standards using
limited data (n < 8 samples) with one result greater than the allowable concentration, quarterly
monitoring for Toluene has been added to the permit [See A.(l.)].
D � North Carolina Deparoncnt dEnvvomnental Quality I Division o(Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919.707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
• To provide more information regarding the PFAS chemicals in POTW effluents statewide,
2/year monitoring with delayed implementation has been added to the permit [See A.(1.) and
Special Condition A.(5.) PFAS Monitoring Requirements].
• Language in Footnote 3 has been modified to read "The facility shall monitor TRC when using
chlorination for disinfection." for clarity [See A.(l.)].
• Instream monitoring requirements have been placed as a separate section [See A.(2.)].
• To provide more information regarding effluent nutrient impacts on the receiving stream,
instream monitoring for Total Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Nitrate -Nitrite Nitrogen and
Total Phosphorus has been added to the permit at a quarterly frequency [See A.(2.)].
• A footnote was added to the instream monitoring section [A.(2.)] to provide the Permittee a
provisionary waiver for membership in a monitoring coalition. However, the waiver would not
apply to upstream Hardness as monitoring coalitions do not sample for this parameter.
• Some of the wording has changed in Special Condition A.(3.) Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit.
Please review the condition carefully.
• Special Condition A.(4.) has been modified to include the specific three years in which the
Effluent Pollutant Scan shall be performed (2025, 2026, and 2027). In addition, some wording
and structure of the condition have changed. Please review the condition carefully.
• A notation was made concerning the Electronic Reporting Rule —NPDES Electronic Reporting
Rule — Phase 2 Extension. EPA extended the Phase 2 deadline to December 21, 2025.
• Federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs)
and program reports. The requirement to continue reporting discharge monitoring data
electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) internet
application has been added to your NPDES permit [See Special Condition A.(6.)].
The NPDES standard conditions (Parts 11, 111, and IV) that are a part of the permit are not included
in this draft document (cover, map, and Part 1). The conditions are the same as in your current
permit except that agency and division names have been updated. The latest version is available at
https://bit.ly/3k5NFaL and can be viewed online or downloaded as a PDF file.
Concurrent with this notification the Division is publishing a notice in a newspaper having
circulation in the general Pender County area, soliciting public comments on this draft permit.
Please provide any writ,Len comments you may have to the following: NCDE-QLDWR,,NPDES
Permitting Braflcit, 1617'Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 rid -later tha» 30 days after -
receipt of this draft permit.
Following the 30-day public comment period, the Division will review all pertinent comments
and take appropriate action prior to issuing a final permit. If you have questions concerning this
draft permit, please call me at [phone] or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
C�Do<uSignatl by.
952DFU+ua,
BFBB CBSIDFB0.55
Gary Perlmutter, Environmental Specialist II
NPDES Municipal Permitting Unit
.110 D w ` North Carolina Depamnent of EnviroMmnlal Quality I Division of Water Resources`\\—C"/L_`'" 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1611
919,707.9000

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Hardcopy: NPDES Files
eCopy: US EPA Region 4
DWR / Winston-Salem Regional Office / Water Quality / Lon Snider
DWR / Operator Certification Program / Maureen Kinney
DWR / Ecosystems Branch / Mark Vander Borg
DWR / Basin Planning / Nora Deamer
DWR / Aquatic Toxicology Branch / Cindy Moore
DWR / Municipal Permitting Unit / Keyes McGee
D 0 North Carolina Department of Env4ormmntal Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 Noah Salisbury Street 1 1611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919,707.9000

Dow&gn Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
PermitNCO023981
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
N( PDES)
In compliance with the provisions 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 West Jefferson
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
West Jefferson Wastewater Treatment Plant
335 Clearwater Drive
West Jefferson
Ashe County
to receiving waterA designated as the unnamed tributary to Little Buffalo Creek in the New River Basin in
accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other applicable conditions set forth in
Parts 1, II, 111, and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective mmm dd. 20yy.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on March 31, 2028.
Signed this day mmm dd, 20yy.
DRAFT
for Richard E. Rogers, Jr., Director
Division of Water Resources
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 14

DocuSlgn Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby revoked. As
of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer effective. Therefore, the
exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements,
terms, and provisions included herein.
The Town of West Jefferson
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate and maintain the wastewater treatment works identified on the Cover, an existing 0.5
MGD facility consisting of the following components:
• Mechanical bar screen
• Manual bar screen bypass channel
• Chain & bucket grit collector
• Influent pump station with three (3) 434 GPM pumps
• Dual channel concentric oxidation ditches with dual with four (4) 20 hp aerators
• Two (2) 45-foot diameter secondary clarifiers
• Dual traveling bridge tertiary filters
• In -channel ultraviolet disinfection with two banks of lamps
• Post aeration basin with diffused air
• Aerobic digestion basin with two (2) blowers
• Two 521 GPM return sludge pumps
• 50 KW standby generator
• Associated yard piping and site work electrical work
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map via Outfall 001 into an
unnamed tributary to Buffalo Creek, classified C; Tr; + (North Fork New River Outstanding Resource
Water area) waters in the New River Basin and 05050001 HUC.
Page 2 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
PART I
A.(1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS [0.5 MGD]
[l5A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 15A NCACO2B .0500 et seq.]
Grade II Biological Water Pollution Control System [15A NCAC 08G .0302]
(a.) During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until permit expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge treated municipal and industrial wastewater from Outfall 001. Such
discharges shall be limited and monitored' by the Permittee as specified below:
PARAMETER
Parameter Code
EFFLUENT LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location
Flow 50050
0.5 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 200C 2 C0310
(Apr 1 - Oct 31)
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Influent &
Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 200C 2 C0310
(Nov 1 - Mar 31)
10.0 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Influent &
Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 2 C0530
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Influent &
Effluent
NH3 as N (Apr 1 - Oct 31) C0610
1.6 mg/L
4.8 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (Nov 1 - Mar 31) C0610
3.6 mg/L
10.8 mg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) 00300
Daily Average >_ 7.0 mg/L
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH 00400
Between 6.0 and 9.0 Standard Uiuts
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Temperature, °C 00010
Monitor and Report
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity, µmhos/cm 00094
Monitor and Report
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 31616
200/100 mL
400/100 mL
Grab
Weekly
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) 3 50060
28 µg/L
2/week
Grab
Effluent
TKN, mg/L' 00625
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
NO3-N + NO2-N, mg/L ° 00630
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
-Total Nitrogen. mg/L° C0600
Monitor.and$eport.
Quarterly
Calculated
Effluent
Total Phosphorus, mg/L C0665
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Hardness (as CaCO3), mg/L 00900
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Copper, interim 5 01042
37.0 µg/L
--T-52.0
µg/L
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Total Copper, final 5 01042
18.8 µg/L
26.1 µg/L
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Toluene, µg/L 39100
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
PFAS 6 various
Footnote 6
2/year
Grab
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity' TGP3B
Monitor and Report
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Effluent Pollutant Scan $ NC01
Monitor and Report
Footnote 8
Footnote 8
Effluent
Footnotes on the next page.
Page 3 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
Footnotes:
1. The Permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR application system.
See Special Condition A. (7.).
2. The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective
influent value (85% removal).
3. The facility shall monitor TRC when using chlorination for disinfection. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC
values reported below 50 µg/L to be in compliance with the permit. However, the Permittee shall continue to record
and submit all values reported by a North Carolina -certified laboratory (including field -certified), even if these values
fall below 50 µg/L.
4. For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen, and NO3-N and NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen, respectively.
5. The Permittee shall shall follow the Total Copper compliance schedule detailed in Special Condition A. (5.). Starting on
the effective date of this permit, the Permittee shall continue to perform monthly effluent Monitoring and Reporting for
Total Copper and meet compliance with the interim limits.
6. See Special Condition A. (6.).
7. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) P/F at 56% with testing in January, April, July and October. See Special
Condition A. (3.).
8. The Permittee shall perform three effluent pollution scans during the term of this permit. See Special Condition A. (4.).
(b.) There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 4 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
A.(2.) INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS [15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.]
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until the expiration date, the Permittee shall perform
instream sampling upstream and downstream of Outfall 001 as specified below':
PARAMETER
SAMPLE
MONITORING FREQUENCY
SAMPLE
Paramder Code
PE
2
LOCATION
Jun 1— Sep 30
FOct 1— May 31
Total Hardness (as CaCO3),
mg/L 3
00900
Surface
Quarterly
Upstream
Temperature, °C
00010
Surface
3/week
Weekly
Upstream,
Downstream
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/L
00300
Surface
3/week
Weekly
Upstream,
Downstream
Conductivity, µmhos/cm
00094
Surface
3/week
Weekly
Upstream,
Downstream
TKN, mg/L 4
00625
Surface
Quarterly
Upstream,
Downstream
NO3-N + NO2-N, mg/L'
00630
Surface
Quarterly
Upstream,
Downstream
Total Nitrogen, mg/L4
C0600
Surface
Quarterly
Upstream,
Downstream
Total Phosphorus, mg/L
C0665
Surface
Quarterly
Upstream,
Downstream
Footnotes:
1. If the Penmittee is a member of a Monitoring Coalition Program, sampling for instream parameters listed may be waived
if the Monitoring Coalition agrees to sample the listed parameters at the nearest upstream and downstream location at a
minimum frequency of monthly, and the Permittee has obtained approval from DWR— NPDES Permitting Unit that the
upstream and downstream stations being monitored by the Coalition are representative of the receiving stream for this
discharge. If Coalition membership is cancelled or the Coalition terminates instream monitoring at the approved stations,
the Permittee will immediately notify the Division and resume sampling for the above listed parameters upstream and
downstream of its discharge.
2. Upstream is located approximately 50 feet above the discharge point; Downstream is located at the bridge off of Dogget
Road.
3.- The,Perniittee shall sampli instream Total Hardness, upstream of the-Tacility's-ft_charge.
4. For a given instream sample, TN = TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen, and NO3-N and NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen, respectively.
Page 5of14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
A.(3.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
[15A NCAC 02B .0200, 15A NCAC 02B .0500 et seq]
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to
Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 56%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," (Revised December 2010, or subsequent versions)
or "North Carolina Phase I1 Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised December 2010, or
subsequent versions). The tests will be performed during the months of January, April, July, and October.
These months signify the first month of each three-month toxicity testing quarter assigned to the facility. Effluent
sampling for this testing must be obtained during representative effluent discharge and 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 -December 2010, or subsequent versions).
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered electronically using the
Division's eDMR system for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter code TGP316 for the
pass/fail results and THP311 for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWR Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the
following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Or, results can be sent to the email, [e-mail].
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section 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, agd,.b,�,_cer.tified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved de.sigUte:signature.__=_
_= Total residual chlorine df the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported -ifthlorine 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 Pennittee 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 fonn. The report shall be submitted to the Water Sciences Section at the address
cited above.
Should the Pennittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, monitoring will be
required during the following month. Assessment of toxicity compliance is based on the toxicity testing quarter,
which is the three-month time interval that begins on the first day of the month in which toxicity testing is required
by this permit and continues until the final day of the third month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of Water
Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and modified to include
alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
Page 6 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NC0023981
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.
Page 7 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
A.(4.) ADDITIONAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR MUNICIPAL DISCHARGERS
[NCGS 143-215.1(b)]
(a.) Effluent Pollutant Scans. The Permittee shall perform a total of three (3) Effluent Pollutant Scans for all
parameters listed below. One scan must be performed in each of the following years: 2025, 2026, and
2027. Analytical methods shall be in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136 and shall be sufficiently sensitive
to determine whether parameters are present in concentrations greater than applicable standards and criteria.
Each annual sample shall coincide with one quarterly toxicity test each year [see Condition A. (3.) Chronic
Toxicity Permit Limit (Quarterly)], and each must be collected in a different calendar quarter to represent
seasonal variation [i.e., do not sample in the same quarter every year]. Unless otherwise indicated, metals
shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
C0610
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
34546
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
34273
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
50060
1, 1 -dichloroethylene
34501
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
34283
Dissolved oxygen
00300
1,2-dichloropropane
C0541
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
C0100
Nitrate / Nitrite
00630
1,3-dichloropropylene
77163
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
34636
Kjeldahl nitrogen
00625
Ethylbenzene
34371
Butyl benzyl phthalate
34292
Oil and grease
00556
Methyl bromide
34413
2-chloronaphthalene
34581
Phosphorus
C0665
Methyl chloride
34418
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
34641
Total dissolved solids
70295
Methylene chloride
34423
Chrysene
34320
Hardness
00900
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
81549
Di-n-butyl phthalate
39110
Antimony
01097
Tetrachloroethylene
34475
Di-n-octyl phthalate
34596
Arsenic
01002
Toluene
34010
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
34556
Beryllium
01012
1, 1, 1 -trichloroethane
34506
1,2-dichlorobenzene
34536
Cadmium
01027
1,1,2-trichloroethane
34511
1,3-dichlorobenzene
34566
Chromium
C0034
Trichloroethylene
39180
1,4-dichlorobenzene
34571
Copper
01042
Vinyl chloride
39175
3,3-diclilurubenzidine
34631
Lead
01051
Acid -extractable compounds:
Diethyl phthalate
34336
Mercury (Method 1631 E)
COMER
P-chloro-m-cresol
34452
Dimethyl phthalate
34341
Nickel
01067
2-chlorophenol
34586
2,4-dinitrotoluene
34611
Selenium
01147
2,4-dichlorophenol
34601
2,6-dinitrotoluene
C0626
Silver
0/077
2,4-d imethyl phenol
34606
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
34346
Thallium
01059
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
34657
Fluoranthene
C0376
Zinc
01092
2,4-dinitrophenol
34616
Fluorene
34381
Cyanide
00720
2-nitrophenol
34591
Hexachlorobenzene
C0700
-- - _ Total phenolic compounds
32730-
- 4-nitro$henul= =
34646
Hexachlorobutadiene _.
-CO702—
Volatile orearric compounds:
Pentachlorophenol
39032
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
34386
Acrolein
34210
Phenol
34694
Hexachloroethane
34396
Acrylonitrile
34215
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
34621
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
34403
Benzene
34030
Base -neutral compounds:
Isophorone
34408
Bromoform
32104
Acenaphthene
34205
Naphthalene
34696
Carbon tetrachloride
32102
Acenaphthylene
34200
Nitrobenzene
34447
Chlorobenzene
34301
Anthracene
CO220
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
34428
Chlorodibromomethane
34306
Benzidine
39120
N-nitrosodimethylamine
34438
Chloroethane
85811
Benzo(a)anthracene
C0526
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
34433
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
34576
Benzo(a)pyrene
34247
Phenanthrene
34461
Chloroform
32106
3,4 benzofluoranthene
34230
Pyrene
34469
Dichlorobromomethane
32101
Benzo(ghi)perylene
34521
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
C0551
1, 1 -dichloroethane
34496
Benzo(k)fluorantltene
34242
1,2-dichloroethane
32103
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
34278
(b.) Effluent Scan Reporting.
Test results shall be reported electronically via eDMR by December 31 st of
each designated sampling year,
except that, subject to prior written approval
by the Director, results can be
Page 8 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NC0023981
reported on DWR Form DMR-PPA-1 or other form approved by the Director. The permittee must at least
report completion of the test in the eDMR system by entering "I" or "Y" for parameter code NCO - Annual
Pollutant Scan. If written reports are approved, the report shall be submitted to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Or the form may be uploaded at: https://edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/NPDES—WW-EDMR-Supplemental-
Form
(c.) 2°` _Species Toxicity Testing and Reporting.
(i.) In addition to the quarterly toxicity tests required in Condition A. (3.) Chronic Toxicity Permit Limit
(Quarterly)], the Permittee shall perform and report the results of four (4) toxicity tests using the same
test methods using a second species of test organism suitable to the tests being conducted.
(ii.) The 2nd species toxicity tests shall be conducted either:
(A) Once per quarter in a single 12-month period (four samples); if this option is chosen, the sample
for each 2nd species test shall coincide with the quarterly samples collected for (tox condition
title); or
(B) Once per 12-month period in the four -and one-half year period prior to the scheduled
application for permit renewal (four samples); if this option is chosen, three of the sample for
the 2nd species test shall coincide with those for the annual effluent scans and the coincident
quarterly toxicity test, and each of the four annual samples shall be collected in a different
calendar quarter in order to represent seasonal variation.
(iii.) The results of the toxicity tests shall be submitted to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Or, results can be sent to the email. [e-mail].
(iv.) Results of the 2°d species tests shall also be summarized in Part E (Toxicity Testing Data) of EPA
Municipal Application Fonn 2&1 when submitting the permit renewal application to the Nf'DES .
- Wastewater Program-
The Permittee may contact the Division's Aquatic Toxicology Branch at 919-743-8401 for guidance
on conducting the additional toxicity tests and reporting of the results.
Page 9 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
Permit NCO023981
A. (5.) SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE FOR TOTAL COPPER LIMITATIONS [NCGS 143-215.1 (b)]
This compliance schedule includes the option for pursuing a Water Effect Ratio (WER) study for developing site -
specific limitations and compliance with the Total Copper limits.
1. If the Permittee wishes to conduct a WER study to develop site -specific metal limitations, within six (6)
months of the permit effective date, the Permittee shall submit to the Division of Water Resources a
Water -Effect Ratio (WER) study plan for approval.
a. Within eighteen (18) months of the WER study plan approval by the Division, the Permittee shall
submit to the Division a report summarizing the results of the WER study. If more than one metal
is included in the WER study, a synergistic WER shall be conducted.
b. If the WER study results in site -specific metal limits, the Permittee shall submit to the Division a
permit modification request to include the WER-derived limits subject to review and approval by
the Division and the appropriate permit modification process.
c. The final metal limits based on the WER-derived limits, if approved, will be placed into effect
immediately with the permit modification and all remaining schedule items will be removed.
2. If the Permittee does not submit a WER study plan within six (6) months of the permit effective date, then
the Permittee shall follow the Compliance Schedule outlined below (replacing the schedule in section
A.5.1. above) and substitute the dates for one, two and three years from the permit effective date:
a. Within one (1) year of the permit effective date, the Permittee shall submit to the Division of
Water Resources a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for Division approval, summarizing the strategy
or actions to be taken to achieve compliance with the Total Silver and Total Zinc limitations listed
in Section A. (1.). This plan will include specific dates for completion or implementation of each
action.
b. Within two (2) years of the permit effective date, the Permittee shall submit a report to the Division
summarizing actions taken in accordance with the Action Plan.
c. The Permittee shall achieve compliance with Total Silver and Total Zinc limitations specified in
Section A. (1.) within three (3) years of the permit effective date. .
Upon approval of the CAP by the Division, the report and actions become an enforceable part of this permit. The
Division can reopen this permit to implement interim or alternative limits based on studies that demonstrate an
interim or alternate limit is appropriate. Any modifications to the schedule shall be requested to the Division at
least ninety (90) days before the deadline. Modifications to the schedule in excess of four months will be subject
to public notice.
` The WER Study=Plan, CAP and all reports shall;include'the ownier'-s­name, NPDES-permit number and Permittee
contact person, and shall be submitted to:
(1) NCDEQ / Division of Water Resources (2) NCDEQ / Division of Water Resources
NPDES Permitting Asheville Regional Office
1617 Mail Service Center 2090 US 70 Highway
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Swannanoa, NC 28778-8211
Page 10 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
NC0020451
A.(6.) PFAS MONITORING REQUIREMENT [NCGS 143-215. 1 (b)]
This reporting requirement for the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) parameters listed under
Table I of the Final Method 1633 takes effect the first full calendar quarter following six (6) months after
EPA publishes a 40 CFR part 136 Final PFAS Method for wastewater in the Federal Register. Monitoring
will be at a 2/year frequency.
Find the current parameters listed under Table I of the 3`d Draft Method 1633 Analysis of Per- and
Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Aqueous, Solid, Biosolids, and Tissue Samples by LC-MS/MS at:
https://w ww.eRa. gov/system/fi I es/documents/2022-
12/3rd%20Draft%20Method%201633%20December%202022%2012-20-22 508 pdf
A.(7.) ELECTRONIC REPORTING - DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS
[NCGS 143-215.1 (b)]
Federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and program
reports. The final NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule was adopted and became effective on December 21,
2015.
NOTE: This special condition supplements or supersedes the following sections within Part II of this permit
(Standard Conditions for NPDES Permits):
• Section B. (11.) Signatory Requirements
• Section D. (2.) Reporting
• Section D. (6.) Records Retention
• Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
1. Reporting Requirements !Supersedes Section D. (2.) and Section E. (5) (a)1
The Pennittee shall report discharge monitoring data electronically using the NC DWR's Electronic
Discharge Monitoring Report (eDMR) internet application.
- Monitoring results obtained during the precious inonth(s) shall hd summarized for each month and
submitted monthly electronically using eDMR. The eDMR system allows permitted facilities to enter
monitoring data and submit DMRs electronically using the internet. The eDMR system may be
accessed at: https://deq.ne.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edmr.
If a permittee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a demonstrated hardship or due to the facility
being physically located in an area where less than 10 percent of the households have broadband access,
then a temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements may be granted and
discharge monitoring data may be submitted on paper DMR forms (MR 1, 1. 1, 2,3) or alternative forms
approved by the Director. Duplicate signed copies shall be submitted to the following address:
NC DEQ / Division of Water Resources / Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Page 11 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
NC0020451
See "How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting" section below.
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each month and
reported via the eDMR system no later than the last calendar day of the month following the completed
reporting period. Regardless of the submission method, the first DMR is due on the last day of the
month following the issuance of the permit or in the case of a new facility, on the last day of the month
following the commencement of discharge.
Starting on December 21, 2025, the penmittee must electronically report the following compliance
monitoring data and reports, when applicable:
• Sewer Overflow/Bypass Event Reports; and
• Pretreatment Program Annual Reports; and
• Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) Annual Reports.
The permittee may seek an electronic reporting waiver from the Division (see "How to Request a
Waiver from Electronic Reporting" section below).
2. Electronic Submissions
In accordance with 40 CFR 122.41(1)(9), the permittee must identify the initial recipient at the time of
each electronic submission. The Permittee should use the EPA's website resources to identify the initial
recipient for the electronic submission.
Initial recipient of electronic NPDES information from NPDES-regulated facilities means the entity
(EPA or the state authorized by EPA to implement the NPDES program) that is the designated entity
for receiving electronic NPDES data [see 40 CFR 127.2(b)].
EPA plans to establish a website that will also link to the appropriate electronic reporting tool for each
type of electronic submission and for each state. Instructions on how to access and use the appropriate
electronic reporting tool will be available as well. Information on EPA's NPDES Electronic Reporting
Rule is found at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/10/22/2015-24954/national-
pollutant-discharge-elim ination-system-npdes-electronic-reporting-rule
Electronic submissions must start by the dates listed in the "Reporting Requirements" section above.
3. How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting _
The Permittee may seek a temporary electronic reporting waiver from the Division. To obtain an
electronic reporting waiver, a permittee must first submit an electronic reporting waiver request to the
Division. Requests for temporary electronic reporting waivers must be submitted in writing to the
Division for written approval at least sixty (60) days prior to the date the facility would be required
under this permit to begin submitting monitoring data and reports. The duration of a temporary waiver
shall not exceed 5 years and shall thereupon expire. At such time, monitoring data and reports shall be
submitted electronically to the Division unless the Permittee re -applies for and is granted a new
temporary electronic reporting waiver by the Division. Approved electronic reporting waivers are not
transferrable. Only permittees with an approved reporting waiver request may submit monitoring data
and reports on paper to the Division for the period that the approved reporting waiver request is
effective.
Information on eDMR and the application for a temporary electronic reporting waiver are found on the
following web page:
Page 12 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
NC0020451
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edmr
4. Signatory Requirements [Supplements Section B. (11.) (b) and Supersedes Section B. (11.) (d)]
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in Part I1,
Section B. (I L)(a) or by a duly authorized representative of that person as described in Part II, Section
B. (I 1.)(b). A person, and not a position, must be delegated signatory authority for eDMR reporting
purposes.
For eDMR submissions, the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR user
account and login credentials to access the eDMR system. For more information on North Carolina's
eDMR system, registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account, please visit the following
web page:
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edmr
Certification. Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall make
the following certification [40 CFR 122.22]. NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION
WILL BE ACCEPTED:
`7 certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons
who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. 1 am
aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of
fines and imprisonment for knowing violations. "
5. Records Retention [Supplements Section D. (Q]
The Permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports, including eDMR submissions.
These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the report.
This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time [40 CFR 122.41 ].
Page 13 of 14

DocuSign Envelope ID: 19B26ED3-032E-4688-BDD6-927FA5EAFB9A
NCO020451
' • .�. yr- r'_ � 1 \., "�
On
Downstream Bridge +. _ . r_f (
Sampling Point
Out Doi
-
>.'.
\
/ Upstream Sampling Point
a
l 1S'•
tie
Town of West Jefferson
Facility
West Jefferson WWTP
Location
Whimic 36-24'35" N $%at. Gdd: ,eHenon 8135W
Lanthud. SW 29'26' W P..Iu.dn.wr 0.500 MW
not to Scale
R.ulvan.Stm.m: VUttleBuRelo Creek Oman.,* Basin New River Basin
Str..m C... C-Trout* B"Dadt NUC: 05050001
f
Nook
NPDES Pefmit No. NCO020451
Ashe County
Page 14 of 14