NC0090247_Hearing Officer's Report_20240506

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
RICHARD E. ROGERS, JR.
Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Richard E. Rogers
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
May 6, 2024
Director, Division of Water Resources
From: Lon Snider, Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources, Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Subject: Hearing Officer's Report and Recommendations
Henderson County - Clear Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NCO090247
Henderson County
I served as the Hearing Officer for the subject public hearing held at North Henderson High
School, Hendersonville, NC on February 5, 2024, at 6 pm. The purpose of this public hearing
was to allow the public to comment on the draft NPDES permit NCO090247 for the proposed
Clear Creek WWTP in Hendersonville, NC.
In addition to listening to oral comments at the public hearing, I have reviewed all written
comments received prior, during and after the public comment period. In preparation of this report,
I have considered all the public comments and the public record.
The report has been prepared using the following outline:
I. Introduction
II. Draft Permit Background
III. Public Hearing
IV. Public Comments with Reponses
V. Additional Information
VI. Recommendations
VII. Appendices
cc: NPDES Program Files [Laserfiche]
DWR - Julie Grzyb [[e-mail]]
DWR NPDES Permitting Branch - Michael Montebello [[e-mail]]
DWR Water Quality Regional Operations - John Hennessy [e-mail]]
DWR Asheville Regional Office - Andrew Moore [[e-mail]]
DWR Asheville Regional Office - Daniel Boss [[e-mail]]
DWR Public Information Office - Laura Oleniacz [[e-mail]]
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
NORTH CAROLINAD Q 919.707.9000
OeparMent of Eoalromoe,tal Oual,ty

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
HEARING OFFICER REPORT
for
NPDES Permit NCO090247
Henderson County - Clear Creek WWTP
Henderson County
This report is presented to the Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
I. INTRODUCTION
Henderson County has applied to the Division of Water Resources (DWR) for a National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the proposed Clear Creek WWTP
on April 17, 2023 (Appendix A). The proposed sanitary sewer collection system will be
composed of both gravity and pumped systems to serve the existing residential and commercial
properties in the unincorporated community of Edneyville as well as three other nearby package
plants in Henderson County, NC. The proposed plant will be a package style plant and have the
capacity to treat up to 200,000 GPD. Henderson County had also proposed planning to allow for
future capacity expansion for up to 500,000 GPD. The proposed discharge will be at the
confluence of Clear Creek and Laurel Branch with a plant site footprint of around 0.5 acres. The
new plant will allow three existing minor WWTPs (Western Justice Academy WWTP
NC0086070, Blacksmith Run WWTP NC0088056, and Camp Judaea WWTP NC0033430) in
the area to be abandoned. The treated effluent will be discharged to Clear Creek, which is a class
C stream in the French Broad River Basin. Clear Creek was listed in the 2022 NC 303(d) list as
impaired for benthos community. Upon technical review of the application and supporting
materials, a draft permit was written (Appendix B). To accompany the draft permit, a Fact Sheet
was prepared to explain permit conditions and changes made to permit conditions in accordance
with 15A NCAC 02H .0108 (Appendix Q.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H .0109(2), DWR provided a public notice of the tentative
determination to issue the permit and accepted public comment on the draft permit from
September 12, 2023 until October 12, 2023 (Appendix D). A total of 81 comments were received
during this period; 21 requested a public hearing; and 7 additional comments were received after
the public comment period ended (Appendix E).
Based on public input, and in accordance with General Statute 143-215.1(c)(3), the Director of
DWR determined that a public hearing was warranted. In accordance with 15A NCAC
02H .0109(1), notice of the public hearing was published in the Hendersonville Times -News
(newspaper with circulation in the County of Henderson) on December 28, 2023 (Appendix F)
and posted to the DWR's Website. In addition, a press release was issued for the scheduled
public hearing, and copies of the press release were e-mailed to requestors. A public hearing was
held on February 5, 2024, as described below. After the hearing, the public comment period
remained opened until 5 pm on February 6, 2024.
Page 2 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
II. DRAFT PERMIT BACKGROUND
The draft permit is crafted to protect all appropriate water quality standards based on Division
review of the receiving stream.. Limits are proposed for Flow, Total Residual Chlorine (TRC),
5-Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5), Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Total Suspended Solids
(TSS), pH, and Fecal Coliform. Chronic toxicity pass fail test and special condition for instream
assessment of biological integrity also included.
Treatment Units: A 0.2 MGD wastewater treatment facility consisting of, but not limited to;
• Influent pump station
• Bar screens
• Flow equalization tank
• Two (2) activated sludge trains
• Two (2) secondary clarification tanks
• Sludge holding tank
• Chlorine contact basin
Engineering Alternative Analysis (EAA: An Engineering Alternatives Analysis (EAA) is
required with any NPDES application for a new or expanding wastewater treatment plant
discharge, in accordance with 15A NCAC 21-1.0105(c)(2). In order for an NPDES application to
be approved, the EAA must provide complete justification for a direct discharge to surface water
alternative and demonstrate that direct discharge is the most environmentally sound alternative
selected from all reasonably cost-effective options [per 15A NCAC 2H.0105(c)(2)].
The EAA was reviewed on July 21, 2023. The following alternatives were discussed (Appendix
G):
• Connection to an existing wastewater treatment system: Hendersonville WWTP is
approximately 3.6 miles away from the proposed facility and indicated that they will be
able to accept the flows with no capital improvement. To connect, an additional 11,000 ft
gravity sewer line as well as easement acquisition will be needed to connect to a tie-in
point that conveys the flows to the Hendersonville WWTP, the Present Value Cost
Analysis (PVCA) is $12.3 million.
• Land application: A soil evaluation for the surrounding area indicated that the soils are
unfavorable for land application of wastewater. PVCA for the county -owned land
application option is $17.2 million, and $13.3 million for the agricultural land application
option. Land application is not favorable due to the high cost, limited land available, and
unstable demand.
• Wastewater reuse: PVCA is $15.8 million. This option is not favorable due to the high
cost and limited demand.
• Direct discharge: PVCA is $9.8 million.
• A combination of land -based disposal and surface water discharge is also feasible, but
would incur a higher cost and also face the limitations stated above.
Page 3 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
III. PUBLIC HEARING
The hearing was held at North Henderson High School Auditorium (35 Fruitland Rd,
Hendersonville, NC 28792) on February 5, 2024 at 6pm. The public hearing was held under the
authority of 15A NCAC 02H .0111. The purpose of the hearing was for DWR to receive public
comment and additional information relevant to DWR's NPDES permit decision for the
Henderson County — Clear Creek WWTP. Comments received during the public hearing process
will be incorporated into the final analysis and decision -making process.
Lon Snider, Regional Supervisor of the Winston-Salem Regional Office within the Water Quality
Regional Operations, Division of Water Resources served as the Hearing Officer. The permit writer,
Siying Chen, Environmental Specialist II, gave a presentation on the draft permit (Appendix H).
Around one hundred and twenty-one (121) people attended the hearing, not counting Department staff.
Twenty (20) people registered in advance of the hearing to provide oral comments, and nineteen (19) of
them spoke at the hearing and provided comments on the permit being considered. (See Appendix I for
Sign -In Sheets and Speakers, See Appendix J for link to the audio recording of the public hearing).
Two hundred and twenty-five (225) written comments were received before the close of the hearing
comments at 5pm on February 6, 2024 (Appendix K). There were an additional seven (7) comments
received after the close of public comment for the hearing. A summary of the oral and written
comments, along with detailed responses that have a direct impact on the permit decision making
process, are included below in Section IV.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS WITH RESPONSES
The following is a summary of the comments received during the public hearing and during the
public comment periods. The discussion below organizes and summarizes the public comments
received and provides the agency's response. Comments focused on the two discharge
alternatives: direct discharge or connection to Hendersonville WWTP. All comments received
for both comment periods are included in Appendix E and Appendix K. It should be noted that
all the comments received outside of the public comment period were also made part of the
public record.
Comment: Clear creek is already impaired, and a new source of pollution is cause for concern.
Response: Clear Creek is listed as impaired for benthos in the 2022 North Carolina 303(d) list.
The receiving stream of Hendersonville WWTP, Mud Creek, is also listed as impaired for
benthos and fish communities in the 2022 North Carolina 303(d) list. Past benthos samplings at
Clear Creek indicated that the stream likely suffers from a combination of agricultural nonpoint
source runoff and point source dischargers (Appendix L). DWR's Biological Assessment Branch
also indicated that it is difficult to identify the specific cause of the benthos impairment in Clear
Creek due to the limited sampling data available, but the lack of long-lived stoneflies was
consistent with the pesticides impacts in the Mills River study. The effluent limits in the permit
are developed in accordance with the NC Surface Water Standards, 15A NCAC 02B.
Page 4 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
In addition, upon commencement of the Clear Creek WWTP, Henderson County is required to
connect the three other WWTPs in the area. This regionalization effort can help improve the
overall wastewater treatment capacity in the watershed.
Comment: There is no plan in place for addressing the impaired status with a Total Maximum
Daily Load (TMDL), DEQ may not authorize a new NPDES discharge into Clear Creek without
first allocating pollution loads through a TMDL.
Response: The effluent limits in the permit are developed in accordance with the NC Surface
Water Standards, 15A NCAC 02B, by evaluating the receiving stream conditions. The absence
of TMDL does not preclude new discharge.
Comment: Connection to the Hendersonville WWTP rather than construction of an entirely new
county -operated wastewater treatment plant, will lead to better environmental protections and
cost savings in the long term. DEQ has not selected the most environmentally sound, reasonably
cost-effective treatment option.
Response: As indicated in the EAA, the present value cost analysis (PVCA) for the connection to
Hendersonville WWTP is $12.3 million, and $9.8 million for the direct discharge option. With
the more stringent limits, the updated PVCA states that the cost for connection to Hendersonville
WWTP is $13.1 million, while the cost for direct discharge is $11.8 million. The Division
considers the cost difference between the two alternatives is significant, and with the more
stringent limits imposed, it's protective for the downstream water quality at both Clear Creek and
Mud Creek.
Comment: The draft permit violates North Carolina's antidegradation policy.
Response: In accordance with NC Antidegradation Policy 15A NCAC 2B .0201, Henderson
County did consider other discharge alternatives pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0105(c), and
concluded that a direct discharge to surface waters was the most environmentally sound
alternative given the reasonably cost-effective options. The Division concurs with Henderson
County's assessment that a surface water discharge to Clear Creek is the most environmentally
sound alternative given the reasonably cost-effective options.
Comment: The draft permit does not ensure compliance with narrative water quality standards.
Response: The effluent limits were developed in accordance with the NC Surface Water
Standards 15A NCAC 02B and comply with the standards established for Class C Waters.
Comment: Concerns regarding urban sprawl/existing flooding issue of the land/City and County
should be working together/Henderson County's 2045 Comprehensive Plan/the failing plants
should work out their own issues.
Response: The permit application review is in accordance with the NC Surface Water Standards
15A NCAC 02B, these concerns are outside the purview of this NPDES wastewater permit.
There are also comments in support of the issuance of the permit. Supporters stated that the proposed
Clear Creek WWTP will further protect the water quality in the region as the existing treatment systems
Page 5 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
in the area consist of old and failing treatment plants and septic systems. It will also support community
growth and development.
V. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The speculative limits (Appendix M) developed for Clear Creek WWTP were based on a Level B
model and were developed based on the review of receiving stream, in accordance with the NC Surface
Water Standards 15A NCAC 02B. After further review of permit history for the Hendersonville WWTP
permit (NC0025534), it was found that the current limits established in the permit were based on a
QUAL2E model ran on Mud Creek and Clear Creek. The limits for 5-Day Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (BOD5) [BOD5 = 10.0 mg/L] and Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3 as N) [NH3 as N = 2.0 mg/L]
were Water Quality -Based Effluent Limits, developed based on protection of Dissolved Oxygen
standards.
Based on this information, the Division determined that more information was needed to ensure that the
proposed discharge would be protective of the downstream water quality at both Clear Creek and Mud
Creek, and sent an additional information request letter (Appendix N) to Henderson County on March
19, 2024. In the letter, the Division asked Henderson County to either 1) perform a QUAL2K model for
the proposed discharge that also include downstream of the discharge point of Hendersonville WWTP,
or 2) provide a revised Present Value Cost Analysis (PVCA) in Engineering Alternative Analysis for
the Direct Discharge option to base effluent limits on BOD5 = 10.0 mg/L and NH3 as N = 2.0 mg/L.
Henderson County decided to go with option 2 and provided an updated PVCA on April 15, 2024
(Appendix O) , the result is summarized as follows:
• The Clear Creek WWTP was already being designed for full nitrification. In order to meet the
more stringent effluent limits noted in the additional information request letter, the only unit
process that would need to be added would be tertiary filtration. No other unit process presented
in the Engineering Alternatives Analysis would need to be altered.
• The updated cost for connection to the Hendersonville WWTP is $13.1 million.
• The updated cost for direct discharge is $11.8 million.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the review of public comments and additional information received, the North Carolina
General Statutes and Administrative Code, and discussions with DWR staff, I offer the following
comments and recommendations on the criteria for issuance of an NPDES Permit for Henderson
County — Clear Creek WWTP (NC0090247).
Based upon the information available, I recommend that the final NPDES Permit for Henderson County
— Clear Creek WWTP (NC0090247) be issued subject to the conditions included below:
Page 6 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
• Incorporate more stringent limits for both BOD5 and Ammonia Nitrogen to ensure the
protection of downstream water quality. These limits are based on the effluent limits established
in the NPDES Permit for Hendersonville WWTP (NC0025534), and are considered protective
for water quality downstream at both Clear Creek and Mud Creek.
• Only permitting 0.2 MGD for flow. After further review of the flow projection provided in the
EAA, it is determined that only the 0.2 MGD flow is justified, not the expansion up to 0.5
MGD. As a result, the 0.5 MGD flow phase will be removed in the final permit, and so are the
special conditions (Chronic Toxicity Pass/Fail Monitoring) that are related to the 0.5 MGD flow
phase.
• Update Special Conditions for Notification of Start -Up to pursue the connections of the three
other WWTPs: Western Justice Academy WWTP (NC0086070), Blacksmith Run WWTP
(NC0088056), and Camp Judaea WWTP (NC0033430).
DocuSiigg�ned by:
�/�
1-4cJ/�I�Gt
5B-4 F 2--,C2 F A
Lon Snider, Hearing Officer
VIL APPENDICES
Date
5/6/2024
A. NC0090247_Application_20230417
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView. aspx?id=2 8 84103 &dbi d=0&repo=Water
Resources
B. NC0090247_Draft Permit_20230906
hgps:Hedocs.deq.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=2949245&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
C. NC0090247_Fact Sheet (Draft)_20230919
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView. aspx?id=2967189&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
D. NC0090247_Affidavit_20230919
hgps:Hedocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=2978471 &dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
E. NC0090247_Comments (Draft Permit)_20230921
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3281908&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
Page 7 of 8

DocuSign Envelope ID: E6F2A1D1-EE09-4BD9-AEC3-C7D8B8945D3D
F. NC0090247_Affidavit (Public Hearing)_20231228
hgps:Hedocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3086952&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
G. NC0090247_Engineering Alternatives Analysis_20230417
hgps:Hedocs.deq.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3153715&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
H. NC0090247_Public Hearing Presentation_20240205
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3203368&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
I. NC0090247_Sign in sheets_20240205
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView. aspx?id=3281693 &dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
J. NC0090247_Public Hearing Recording_20240205
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3203366&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
K. NC0090247_Comments (Public Hearing)_20240114
hgps:Hedocs.deg.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3281918&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
L. Clear Creek Benthos Sampling
hqps://www.ncwater.org/?page=672&SitelD=EB073
M. NC0090247_Speculative Limits _20220805
https:Hedocs.deq.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3283022&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources,
N. NC0090247_Additional Information Request _20240319
https:Hedocs.deq.nc. gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3203359&dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources
O. NC0090247_More Information (Received)_20240415
https:Hedocs.deq.nc.gov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?id=3275921 &dbid=0&repo=Water
Resources,
Page 8 of 8