NC0039578_Final Fact Sheet_20240910

Fact Sheet
NPDES Permit No. NC0039578
Permit Writer/Email Contact: Saad Masood, [e-mail]
Date: April 25,2024
Division/Branch:NC Division of Water Resources/NPDES Municipal Permitting
Fact Sheet Template: Version 09Jan2017
Permitting Action:
❑X Renewal
❑ Renewal with Expansion
❑ New Discharge
❑ Modification(Fact Sheet should be tailored to mod request)
Note: A complete application should include the following:
• For New Dischargers,EPA Form 2A or 2D requirements,Engineering Alternatives Analysis,Fee
• For Existing Dischargers(POTW),EPA Form 2A, 3 effluent pollutant scans,4 2nd species WET
tests.
• For Existing Dischargers(Non-POTW),EPA Form 2C with correct analytical requirements based
on industry category.
Complete applicable sections below. If not applicable, enter NA.
1. Basic Facility Information
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility Name: Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority(TWSA)Plant#1
Applicant Address: 1246 West Main St, Sylva,NC 28779
Facility Address: 1871 North River Rd, Sylva,NC 28779
Permitted Flow: 3.5 MGD
Facility Type/Waste: MAJOR Municipal; 100%domestic
Facility Class: Grade IV Biological Water Pollution Control System(WPCS)
Treatment Units: Mechanical bar screen,Aerated grit removal system, Sequencing batch
reactors(SBR),Dual post equalization basins, chlorine contact basin
with liquid sodium hypochlorite chlorination system, liquid sodium
bisulfite dechlorination system,post aeration basin,two aerobic
digesters,belt filter press, sludge dryer system and emergency generator
Pretreatment Program(Y/N) N
County: Jackson
Region Asheville
Page 1 of 11

Briefly describe the proposed permitting action and facility background: The Tuckaseigee Water and
Sewer Authority(TWSA)has applied for an NPDES permit renewal at 3.5 MGD for the TWSA Plant#
1. The facility serves a population of approximately 10,000 residents. Treated wastewater is discharged
via Outfall 001 into Tuckasegee River, a class C; Tr water in the Lower Little Tennessee River Basin. The
Permittee's discharge is 100% domestic with no significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and no pretreatment
program. Outfall 001 is located approximately 38 miles above waters designated as WS-IV(Fontana
Lake).
Sludge disposal: The sludge management plan for Tuckaseigee Water& Sewer Authority Plant#1
involves the drying of biosolids using a dryer system.After drying,the biosolids are stored in a silo to
await further processing. Throughout this process, a baghouse operates to capture and control airborne
particulates and odors. The dried biosolids are then loaded onto specialized trucks for transportation to the
final disposal site.
Inflow and Infiltration(I/I—. In their NPDES permit renewal application,the Permittee noted average daily
volume of 1/1 to be 40,000 gpd. A program by TWSA collection system is in place to identify I/I source
and abatement.
2. Receiving Waterbody Information:
Receiving Waterbody Information
Outfalls/Receiving Stream(s): Outfall 001 —Tuckasegee River
Stream Segment: 2-79-(35.5)
Stream Classification: C, Tr
Drainage Area(mi2): 2861
Summer 7Q 10(cfs) 149.61
Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 184.11
30Q2 (cfs): 273.91
Average Flow(cfs): 6351
IWC(%effluent): 3.5%
20222 303(d)listed/parameter: Yes/Fecal Coliform
Subject to TMDL/parameter: Yes- State-wide Mercury TMDL implementation.
Basin/Sub-basin/HUC: Little Tennessee River/06010203
USGS Topo Quad: F6SW
'Based on information provided by USGS in 2015
22022 Integrated Report indicated the receiving stream is impaired for fecal coliform.
Page 2 of 11

3. Effluent Data Summary
Effluent data for Outfall 001 is summarized below for the period of September 2019 through March 2024.
Table 1. Effluent Data Summary Outfall 001
Parameter Units Average Max Min
Permit
Limit
Flow MGD 1.15 4.32 0.512 MA 3.5
BOD mg/l 6.89 174 2 WA 30.0
MA 45.0
NH3N summer mg/1 3.78 21.4 0.5 WA 35.0
MA 22.4
NH3N winter mg/l 3.27 26.2 0.5 WA 35.0
MA 22.4
TSS mg/l 3.66 33.2 2.5 WA 45.0
MA 30.0
pH SU 7.30 8.9 6.0 6.0>pH<
9.0
(geomean) 23300 2 (geometric)
Fecal coliform #/100 ml 11.4 WA 400
MA 200
DO mg/1 9.09 18.3 2.6 DA>5.0
TRC µg/l 23.60 26 20 DM 28
Temperature o C 18.34 25.5 10.2 Monitor&
Report
TN mg/l 7.96 23.9 2.90 Monitor&
Report
TP mg/l 0.88 3.5 0.20 Monitor&
Report
Total Silver µg/l 0.41 0.5 0.40 Monitor&
Report
MA-Monthly Average,WA-Weekly Average,DM-Daily Maximum,DA=Daily Average
4. Instream Data Summary
Instream monitoring may be required in certain situations, for example: 1)to verify model predictions
when model results for instream DO are within 1 mg/1 of instream standard at full permitted flow;2)to
verify model predictions for outfall diffuser; 3)to provide data for future TMDL;4)based on other
instream concerns. Instream monitoring may be conducted by the Permittee, and there are also
Monitoring Coalitions established in several basins that conduct instream sampling for the Permittee(in
which case instream monitoring is waived in the permit as long as coalition membership is maintained).
Page 3 of 11

If applicable, summarize any instream data and what instream monitoring will be proposed for this
permit action: Instream monitoring has historically not been required and is not required in the permit.
There are no AMS stations in the vicinity for data monitoring or comparison.
The stream segment to which the facility discharges is listed as impaired for fecal coliform.According to
the 2012 Little Tennessee River Basin Plan, fecal coliform levels throughout the two reaches of the
Tuckasegee River are elevated. The receiving stream is listed as impaired for fecal coliform in 2022
303(d) list. During the period reviewed for this permit renewal,the facility reported six effluent fecal
coliform violations. To track effluent impact on fecal coliform levels in the receiving stream, 1/week
upstream and downstream monitoring has been added.
Is this facility a member of a Monitoring Coalition with waived instream monitoring(YIN): NO
Name of Monitoring Coalition: NA
5. Compliance Summary
Summarize the compliance record with permit effluent limits (past 5 years): The facility reported one
BOD limit violations in 2021 and six Fecal Coliform violations with 2 in 2019, 3 in 2021 and 1 in 2022.
Summarize the compliance record with aquatic toxicity test limits and any second species test results (past
5 years): The facility passed 17 of 17 quarterly chronic toxicity tests, as well as all 4 second species
chronic toxicity tests.
Summarize the results from the most recent compliance inspection: The last facility inspection conducted
in August 2023 reported that the facility was well maintained and operated. The facility was in
compliance.
6. Water Quality-Based Effluent Limitations (WQBELs)
Dilution and MixingZones
ones
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0206,the following streamflows are used for dilution considerations
for development of WQBELs: 1Q10 streamflow(acute Aquatic Life); 7Q10 streamflow(chronic Aquatic
Life;non-carcinogen HH); 30Q2 streamflow(aesthetics); annual average flow(carcinogen,HH).
If applicable, describe any other dilution factors considered(e.g., based on CORMIX model results): NA
If applicable, describe any mixing zones established in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0204(b): NA
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/1 for Municipals)may be appropriate if deemed more stringent based on dilution and
model results.
If permit limits are more stringent than TBELs, describe how limits were developed: BOD limits are
Secondary TBEL limits(15A 2B .0400).No changes are proposed. Model runs used to develop
Page 4 of 11

speculative limits for the 3.5 MGD plant showed that secondary limits were protective of the 6.0 mg/L
DO standard. See the wasteload allocation in the attached speculative limits letter dated March 11,2006.
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/1(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 ug/1)and capped at 28 ug/l(acute impacts). Due to analytical issues,all TRC values
reported below 50 ug/l are considered compliant with their permit limit.
Describe any proposed changes to ammonia and/or TRC limits for this permit renewal: The facility's
total residual chlorine (TRC) limit of 28 ug/L is based on the results of a 2006 wasteload allocation
(WLA). TRC was reviewed in the attached WLA and the current limit was found to be adequate.No
changes are proposed for TRC.
The summer ammonia limits(monthly average of 22.4 mg/L and weekly average of 35 mg/L) and the
winter ammonia daily monitoring requirement were added to the permit in 2008 with the addition of an
effluent limitation page for expansion to 3.5 MGD based on the results of a 2006 wasteload allocation
(WLA). The facility completed expansion to 3.5 MGD in 2013.Ammonia was reviewed in the attached
WLA and the current summer limits and winter monitoring requirement were found to be adequate.No
changes regarding summer or winter ammonia are proposed.
Reasonable Potential Analysis(RPA) for Toxicants
If applicable, conduct RPA analysis and complete information below.
The need for toxicant limits is based upon a demonstration of reasonable potential to exceed water quality
standards, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during every permit renewal utilizing the most recent
effluent data for each outfall. The RPA is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44(d) (i). The NC
RPA procedure utilizes the following: 1) 95%Confidence Level/95%Probability;2) assumption of zero
background; 3)use of/2 detection limit for"less than"values; and 4) streamflows used for dilution
consideration based on 15A NCAC 2B.0206. Effective April 6,2016,NC began implementation of
dissolved metals criteria in the RPA process in accordance with guidance titled NPDES Implementation of
Instream Dissolved Metals Standards,dated June 10, 2016.
A reasonable potential analysis was conducted on effluent toxicant data collected between September
2019 and March 2024. Pollutants of concern included toxicants with positive detections and associated
water quality standards/criteria. Based on this analysis,the following permitting actions are proposed for
this permit:
• Effluent Limit with Monitoring. The following parameters will receive a water quality-based
effluent limit(WQBEL) since they demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed applicable
water quality standards/criteria: N/A
• 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: NA
Page 5 of 11

• No Limit or Monitoring: The following parameters will not receive a limit or monitoring, since
they did not demonstrate reasonable potential to exceed applicable water quality
standards/criteria and the maximum predicted concentration was<50%of the allowable
concentration: Silver
• POTW Effluent Pollutant Scan Review: Three effluent pollutant scans (2020, 2021 and 2022)
were evaluated for additional pollutants of concern.
o The following parameter(s)will receive a water quality-based effluent limit(WQBEL)
with monitoring, since as part of a limited data set,two samples exceeded the allowable
discharge concentration: N/A
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: N/A
o 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,
Beryllium, Cadmium, Total Phenolic Compounds, Total Chromium, Copper, Cyanide,
Lead,Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Zinc.
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.
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 Major POTW, and a chronic WET limit at 3.5%
effluent will continue on a quarterly frequency.
Mercury Statewide TMDL Evaluation
There is a statewide TMDL for mercury approved by EPA in 2012. The TMDL target was to comply with
EPNs mercury fish tissue criteria(0.3 mg/kg)for human health protection.The TMDL established a
wasteload allocation for point sources of 37 kg/year(81 lb/year), and is applicable to municipals and
industrial facilities with known mercury discharges. Given the small contribution of mercury from point
sources(-2%of total load),the TMDL emphasizes mercury minimization plans (MMPs) for point source
control. Municipal facilities>2 MGD and discharging quantifiable levels of mercury(>1 ng/1)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/1)and/or if any individual value exceeds a TBEL
value of 47 ng/l
Table. Mercury Effluent Data Summary
2020 2021 2022
Page 6 of 11

#of Samples 1 1 1
Annual Average Conc.n /L 2.8 1.4 1.5
Maximum Conc.,n /L 2.83 1.39 1.52
TBEL,n /L 47
WQBEL,n /L 342.9
Describe proposed permit actions based on mercury evaluation: Since no annual average mercury
concentration exceeded the WQBEL, and no individual mercury sample exceeded the TBEL,no mercury
limit is required. However, since the facility is>2 MGD and reported quantifiable levels of mercury(> 1
ng/1),the mercury minimization plan(MMP)requirement will remain in the permit.
Other TMDL/Nutrient Management Strategy Considerations
If applicable, describe any other TMDLs/Nutrient Management Strategies and their implementation
within this permit: NA
Other WQBEL Considerations
If applicable, describe any other parameters of concern evaluated for WQBELs: As required by Session
Law 2018-5, Senate Bill 99, Section 13.1(r),every applicant shall submit documentation of any additional
pollutants for which there are certified methods with the permit application if their discharge is
anticipated via a Chemical Addendum to NPDES Application table. TWSA provided the chemical
addendum on April 3,2024 and informed the Division that no additional sampling has been conducted
and thus no additional parameters have been identified.
If applicable, describe any special actions (HQW or ORW) this receiving stream and classification shall
comply with in order to protect the designated waterbody:NA
If applicable, describe any compliance schedules proposed for this permit renewal in accordance with
15A NCAC 2IL 0107(c)(2)(B), 40CFR 122.47, and EPA May 2007 Memo: NA
If applicable, describe any water quality standards variances proposed in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.3(e) and 15A NCAC 2B.0226 for this permit renewal: NA
7. Technology-Based Effluent Limitations (TBELs)
Municipals (if not applicable, delete and skip to Industrials)
Are concentration limits in the permit at least as stringent as secondary treatment requirements(30 mg/l
BODS/TSS for Monthly Average, and 45 mg/l for BODS/TSS for Weekly Average). YES
If NO,provide a justification for alternative limitations (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
Are 85%removal requirements for BODS/TSS included in the permit? YES
If NO,provide a justification (e.g., waste stabilization pond). NA
8. Antidegradation Review (New/Expanding Discharge):
Page 7 of 11

The objective of an antidegradation review is to ensure that a new or increased pollutant loading will not
degrade water quality. Permitting actions for new or expanding discharges require an antidegradation
review in accordance with 15A NCAC 213.0201. Each applicant for a new/expanding NPDES permit
must document an effort to consider non-discharge alternatives per 15A NCAC 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.
If applicable, describe the results of the antidegradation review, including the Engineering Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) and any water quality modeling results: NA
9. Antibacksliding Review:
Sections 402(o)(2)and 303(d)(4) of the CWA and federal regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(1)prohibit
backsliding of effluent limitations in NPDES permits.These provisions require effluent limitations in a
reissued permit to be as stringent as those in the previous permit,with some exceptions where limitations
may be relaxed(e.g.,based on new information, increases in production may warrant less stringent TBEL
limits, or WQBELs may be less stringent based on updated RPA or dilution).
Are any effluent limitations less stringent than previous permit(YES/NO): NO
If YES, confirm that antibacksliding provisions are not violated: NA
10. Monitoring Requirements
Monitoring frequencies for NPDES permitting are established in accordance with the following
regulations and guidance: 1) State Regulation for Surface Water Monitoring, 15A NCAC 213.0500; 2)
NPDES Guidance,Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances(7/15/2010 Memo); 3)NPDES Guidance,
Reduced Monitoring Frequencies for Facilities with Superior Compliance(10/22/2012 Memo); 4)Best
Professional Judgement(BPJ). Per US EPA(Interim Guidance, 1996),monitoring requirements are not
considered effluent limitations under Section 402(o) of the Clean Water Act,and therefore anti-
backsliding prohibitions would not be triggered by reductions in monitoring frequencies.
For instream monitoring,refer to Section 4.
To better understand the contribution of PFAS compounds from the TWSA Plant#1,which discharges
above Fontana Lake(WS-IV),monitoring of PFAS chemicals will be added to the permit at a frequency of
2/year. Since a published 40 CFR 136 EPA method for sampling and analyzing PFAS in wastewater is not
currently available,the PFAS sampling requirement in the Permit includes 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 facility is a
100% domestic with no pretreatment. This date may be extended upon request and if there are no NC-
certified labs.
For Calculation of Total Nitrogen,quarterly effluent monitoring for TKN and NO2+NO3 has been added
to the permit.
Current permit contains special condition A.(2.)regarding sewer line connections. The condition states,
Sewer lines serving more than one building, crossing property under separate ownership, or crossing
Page 8 of 11

rights of way, shall not be made tributary to the collection system serving this facility unless a permit for
the construction and operation of the tributary line has been issued by the Division. This condition
provides further clarity regarding projects that are deemed permitted. Condition has been maintained.
TWSA Plant91 has requested reduced monitoring for BOD5,N1-13-N, and TSS based on the 2012 DWR
Guidance Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for Exceptionally
Performing Facilities. The last three years of the facility's data for these parameters have been reviewed
in accordance with the criteria outlined in the guidance. Based on this review,TWSA Plant#1 has
demonstrated compliance with criteria outlined in the guidance.The monitoring requirements BOD5,
NH3-N, and TSS has been reduced to 2/week.
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. While NPDES regulated facilities would initially be required to submit additional
NPDES reports electronically effective December 21,2020,EPA extended this deadline from December
21,2020,to December 21,2025. The current compliance date, effective January 4,2021,was extended as
a final regulation change published in the November 2,2020 Federal Register This permit contains the
requirements for electronic reporting, consistent with Federal requirements.
12.Summary of Proposed Permitting Actions:
A.Table. Current Permit Conditions and Proposed Changes 3.5 MGD
Parameter Current Permit Proposed Change Basis for Condition/Change
Flow MA 3.5 MGD No change 15A NCAC 2B .0505
BOD5 MA 30.0 mg/l No change to limits. TBEL. Based on protection of DO
WA 45.0 mg/1 standard. 15A NCAC 2B.0200
Monitor Daily Monitor and report
Reduced to 2/week
NH3-N Summer: No change to limits. WQBEL. Based on protection of
MA 22.4 mg/1 State WQ criteria. 15A NCAC
WA 35 mg/1 Monitor and report 2B.0200
Winter: Reduced to 2/week
Monitor Dail
TSS MA 30 mg/1 No change to limits. TBEL. Secondary treatment
WA 45 mg/1 standards/40 CFR 133 / 15A NCAC
Monitor and report 2B .0406
Monitor Daily Reduced to 2/week
Fecal coliform MA 200/100ml No change to effluent. WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
WA 400/100ml Add instream NCAC 2B .0200; instream
monitoring 1/week monitoring-impaired water body
Page 9 of 11

DO Monitor Daily No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 02B .0508
PH 6.0<pH<9.0 No change WQBEL. State WQ standard, 15A
NCAC 213 .0200
Temperature Monitoring daily No change 15A NCAC 02B. 0508
TKN No requirement Monitor Quarterly For calculation of Total Nitrogen
NO2+NO3 No requirement Monitor Quarterly For calculation of Total Nitrogen
Total Nitrogen Monitor Quarterly No change 15A NCAC 02B. 0508
Total Phosphorus Monitor Quarterly No change 15A NCAC 02B. 0508
Total Hardness No requirement Add quarterly effluent For calculation of hardness-
and upstream dependent dissolved metals
monitoring allowable concentrations in RPA
Total Silver Monitor Quarterly Remove requirement RPA No RP, Predicted Max<50%
of Allowable Cw-No Monitoring
required
Toxicity Test Chronic limit, 3.5% No change WQBEL. No toxics in toxic
effluent amounts. 15A NCAC 2B.0200 and
15A NCAC 2B.0500
Effluent Pollutant Three times per cycle No change updated 40 CFR 122
Scan dates 2026,2027,
2028.
Mercury MMP special condition No change Consistent with 2012 Statewide
Minimization Plan Mercury TMDL Implementation.
(MMP)
Electronic No requirement Electronic Reporting In accordance with EPA Electronic
Reporting Special Condition Reporting Rule 2015.
MGD—Million gallons per day,MA-Monthly Average,WA—Weekly Average,DM—Daily Max
13. Public Notice Schedule:
Permit to Public Notice: 07/04/2024
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0109& .0111,The Division will receive comments for a period of 30 days following
the publication date of the public notice.Any request for a public hearing shall be submitted to the
Page 10 of 11

Director within the 30 days comment period indicating the interest of the party filing such request and the
reasons why a hearing is warranted.
14. NPDES Division Contact
If you have any questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit,please
contact Saad Masood at(919) 707-9064 or via email at saad.masoodkdeq.nc.gov.
15. Fact Sheet Addendum (if applicable):
The draft was submitted to the Jackson County,EPA Region IV, and the Division's Asheville Regional
Office,Aquatic Toxicology Branch and Operator Certification Program for review.No comments were
received from any party.
Were there any changes made since the Draft Permit was public noticed(Yes/No): YES
If Yes, list changes and their basis below:
• As the expiration date has been changed to October 31,2029 to reflect a 5-year permit term,
Special Condition A.(4.)has been modified to include the specific three years in which the
Effluent Pollutant Scan shall be performed(2026,2027, and 2028).
16. Fact Sheet Attachments (if applicable):
• Affidavit of Publication
• Applicable special correspondences
• RPA Spreadsheet Summary
• BOD&TSS Removal Rate Calculations
• Mercury TMDL Calculations
• Fact Sheet Hardness Memo
• Monitoring Reduction Spreadsheet
• Water Compliance Inspection Report
• 303d Listing
Page 11 of 11

( PUBLIC NOTICE L NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina Environmental Jackson County
Management Commission
/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Notice of Intent to Issue a
NPDES Wastewater Permit
NCO039578 TWSA Plant # 1 Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State,
WWTP The North Carolina Envi-
ronmental Management Commis- dulycommissioned qualified, and authorized b law to
sion proposes to issue a NPDESq y
wastewater discharge permit to
the person(s)listed below.Written
comments regarding the pro- administer oaths, personally appeared..............................................
posed permit will be accepted un-
til 30 days after the publish date of Betty Crawford
this notice.The Director of the NC
Divisionof Water Resources ........................................................................................................
(DWR)may hold a public hearing
should there be a significant de-
gree of public interest. Please who is first duly sworn, deposes and says: that he-she is
mail comments and/or informa-
tion requests to DWR at the above Authorized Employee
address.Interested persons may
visitthe DWR at 512 N.Salisbury .........................................................................................................
Street, Raleigh, NC 27604 to re- (Owner, partner, publisher,or other officer or employee authorized to make this affidavit)
view the information on file.Addi-
tional information on NPDES per-
mits and this notice may be found of The Sylva Herald and Ruralite, engaged in the publication of a
on our website:
https://deq.nc.gov/public-notices- newspaper known as The Sylva Herald and Ruralite published,
hearings,or by calling(919)707-
3601. Tuckaseigee Water and issued, and entered as second class mail in the Town of Sylva, in said
Sewer Authority[1246 West Main
St, Syiva, NC 287791 has re- County and State; that he-she is authorized to make this affidavit
quested renewal and expansion
of NPDES permit NCO039578 for and sworn statement; that the notice or other legal advertisement, a
its Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer
Authority (TWSA) Plant #1, lo- true copy of which is attached hereto, was published in The Sylva
Gated in Jackson County.This Herald and Ruralite on the following dates;
permitted facility discharges ;
treated municipal wastewater to July 4, 2024
theTuckasegee River,a class C,Tr y
water in the Little Tennessee
River Basin.Currently ammonia,
fecal coliform,dissolved oxygen,
and pH are water quality limited.
Thisdischarge may affect future ........................................................................................................
allocations in this segment of the
Tuckasegee River. 18e
........................................................................................................
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document,
or legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and
every such publication, a newspaper meeting all of the requirements
and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North
Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of
Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
4th
July
....... . Ju ly 2024
This da of ....... .................................. ....:.................
... ... 'J . g.. . . j................................
(Signat of person makin aff.idavit... .
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this.. .....................................
I
day of ........•.... ................. l_EY A. ANDERSON
N tar Public, North Carolina
Ar1d8r ............... y kson C.Qp.01y.....,........ .
Notary P lic C'ommission Expires
November 21,2026
November
My Commission expires: ..................................................................

Tuckaseigee Water & Sewer Authority
Serving Jackson County
1246 West Main Street
Sylva, NC 28779
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
June 11, 2024
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
1611 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1611
Attn: Saad Masood
Subject: Monitoring Frequency Reduction
TWSA Plant#1, NCO039578
Mr. Masood,
During our renewal process we recognize that we are eligible for a reduction of monitoring frequencies. We
have reviewed the 2012 DWR Guidance Regarding the Reduction of Monitoring Frequencies in NPDES Permits for
Exceptionally Performing Facilities and meet the criteria for this request.
This is a written request for a reduction of monitoring frequencies in NPDES Permit NCO039578 from our
current frequency to twice per week for the following:
• BOD
• Ammonia
• TSS
Should you have questions or comments or if I can provide you with any additional information, please don't
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ben Henson
WWTP #1 ORC &Wastewater Operations Superintendent
Tuckaseigee Water& Sewer Authority
xc: Mr. Daniel Manring
Executive Director
Tuckaseigee Water& Sewer Authority

Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS= 58
REQUIRED DATA ENTRY
Table 1. Project Information Table 2. Parameters of Concern
❑CHECK IF HQW OR ORW WQS Name WQs Type Chronic Modifier Acute PQL Units
Facility Name Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority Par01 Arsenic Aquactic Life C 150 FW 340 ug/L
WWTP/WTP Class IV Par02 Arsenic Human Health C 10 HH/WS N/A ug/L
Water Supply
NPDES Permit NCO039578 Par03 Beryllium Aquatic Life NC 6.5 FW 65 ug/L
Outfall 001 Par04 Cadmium Aquatic Life NC 1.0126 FW 3.0132 ug/L
Flow,Qw(MGD) 3.500 Par05 Chlorides Aquatic Life NC 230 FW mg/L
Receiving Stream Tuckasegee River ParO Chlorinated Phenolic Compounds Water supply NC 1 A ug/L
HUC Number 06010203 Par07 Total Phenolic Compounds Aquatic Life NC 300 A ug/L
Stream Class C ParaB Chromium III Aquatic Life NC 119.1523 FW 918.3810 ug/L
❑Apply WS Hardness WQC Par09 Chromium VI Aquatic Life NC 11 FW 16 pg/L
7Q10s(cfs) 149.60 Par10 Chromium,Total Aquatic Life NC N/A FW N/A pg/L
7Q10w(cfs) 184.10 Par11 Copper Aquatic Life NC 7.9798 FW 10.6492 ug/L
30Q2(cfs) 273.90 Par12 Cyanide Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 22 10 ug/L
QA(cfs) 635.00 Fluoride Aquatic Life NC 1,800 FW ug/L
1Q10s(cfs) 121.77 Par14 Lead Aquatic Life NC 2.9905 FW 77.0164 ug/L
_Effluent Hardness 35.53 mg/L(Avg) Par15 Mercury Aquatic Life NC 12 FW 0.5 ng/L
____
Upstream Hardness 25 mg/L(Avg) Par16 Molybdenum Human Health NC 2000 HH ug/L
— ---------- -- —
_Co_mbined H_ardn_ess Chromi .._———————25.37 mg/L ——————- I Par17 Nickel Aquatic Life NC 37.6952 FW 340.2978 pg/L
Combined Hardness Acute 25.45 mg/L I Par18 Nickel Water supply NC 25.0000 WS N/A pg/L
--------------------
Data Source(s) Par19 Selenium Aquatic Life NC 5 FW 56 ug/L
❑CHECK TO APPLY MODEL Par20 Silver Aquatic Life NC 0.06 FW 0.3056 ug/L
Par21 Zinc Aquatic Life NC 128.3150 FW 127.6166 ug/L
Par22
Par23
Par24
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA, input
6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
H1 Use"PASTE SPECIAL H2 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Effluent Hardness Values"then"COPY". Upstream Hardness Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 35.5 35.5 Std Dev. 5 3 1 8/4/2020 25 25 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 5/11/2021 34.1 34.1 Mean 35.5333 2 5/11/2021 25 25 Mean 25.0000
3 11/8/2022 37 37 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 25 25 C.V. 0.0000
4 n 3 4 n 3
5 10th Per value 34.38 mg/L 5 10th Per value 25.00 mg/L
6 Average Value 35.53 mg/L 6 Average Value 25.00 mg/L
7 Max.Value 37.00 mg/L 7 Max.Value 25.00 mg/L
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
210A 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
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
1- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par01$Par02 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par03 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Arsenic Values"then"COPY". Beryllium Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 < 10 5 Std Dev. 0.00 0 1 8/4/2020 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 5/11/2021 < 10 5 Mean 5.0000 2 5/11/2021 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000
3 11/8/2022 < 10 5 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 < 1 0.5 C.V.(default) 0.6000
4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5
6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6 Mult Factor= 3.00
7 Max.Value 5.0 ug/L 7 Max.Value 0.50 ug/L
8 Max.Pred Cw 15.0 ug/L 8 Max.Pred Cw 1.50 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
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-2- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par04 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par07 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Part i
Cadmium Values"then"COPY". Total Phenolic Compounds Values"then"COPY"..
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.00 0 1 8/4/2020 < 20 10 Std Dev. 0.0000 1
2 5/11/2021 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000 2 5/11/2021 < 20 10 Mean 10.0000 2
3 11/8/2022 < 1 0.5 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 < 20 10 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3
4 n 3 4 n 3 4
5 5 5
6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6
7 Max.Value 0.500 ug/L 7 Max.Value 10.0 ug/L 7
8 Max.Pred Cw 1.500 ug/L 8 Max.Pred Cw 30.0 ug/L 8
9 9 9
10 10 10
11 11 11
12 12 12
13 13 13
14 14 14
15 15 15
16 16 16
17 17 17
18 18 18
19 19 19
20 20 20
21 21 21
22 22 22
23 23 23
24 24 24
25 25 25
26 26 26
27 27 27
28 28 28
29 29 29
30 30 30
31 31 31
32 32 32
33 33 33
34 34 34
35 35 35
36 36 36
37 37 37
38 38 38
39 39 39
40 40 40
41 41 41
42 42 42
43 43 43
44 44 44
45 45 45
46 46 46
47 47 47
48 48 48
49 49 49
50 50 50
51 51 51
52 52 52
53 53 53
54 54 54
55 55 55
56 56 56
57 57 57
58 58 58
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-3- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
U Use"PASTE SPECIAL Pall Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Chromium,Total Values"then"COPY". Copper Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
8/4/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000 1 8/4/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 5. 2
5/11/2021 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000 2 5/11/2021 < 7 3.5 Mean 6.4000
11/8/2022 < 5 2.5 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 13.2 13.2 C.V.(default) 0.6000
n 3 4 n 3
5
Mult Factor= 3.00 6 Mult Factor= 3.00
Max.Value 2.5 Ng/L 7 Max.Value 13.20 ug/L
Max.Fred Cw 7.5 Ng/L 8 Max.Pred Cw 39.60 ug/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
4- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par12 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par14 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Cyanide Values"then"COPY". Lead Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 < 8 5 Std Dev. 0.00 0 1 8/4/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 5/11/2021 < 8 5 Mean 5.00 2 5/11/2021 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 11/8/2022 < 8 5 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 < 5 2.5 C.V.(default) 0.6000
4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5
6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6 Mult Factor= 3.00
7 Max.Value 5.0 ug/L 7 Max.Value 2.500 ug/L
8 Max.Pred Cw 15.0 ug/L 8 Max.Pred Cw 7.500 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
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-5- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par15 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par17&Par18 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Mercury Values"then"COPY". Nickel Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 2.83 2.83 Std Dev. 0.79 1 8/4/2020 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 5/11/2021 1.39 1.39 Mean 1.9167 2 5/11/2021 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.5000
3 11/8/2022 1.53 1.53 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/8/2022 < 5 2.5 C.V.(default) 0.6000
4 n 3 4 n 3
5 5
6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6 Mult Factor= 3.00
7 Max.Value 2.8 ng/L 7 Max.Value 2.5 Ng/L
8 Max.Pred Cw 8.5 ng/L 8 Max.Pred Cw 7.5 Ng/L
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
2111111116 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
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-6- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par19 Use"PASTE SPECIAL Par20 Use"PASTE SPECIAL
Selenium Values"then"COPY". Silver Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points Maximum data points
=58 =58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 8/4/2020 < 10 5 Std Dev. 0.00 0 1 5/7/2019 < 0.4 0.2 Std Dev. 0 39
2 5/11/2021 < 10 5 Mean 5.0000 2 8/6/2019 < 0.35 0.175 Mean 0.2015
3 11/8/2022 < 10 5 C.V.(default) 0.6000 3 11/5/2019 < 0.4 0.2 C.V. 0.0690
4 n 3 4 2/4/2020 < 0.4 0.2 n 17
5 5 5/5/2020 < 0.4 0.2
6 Mult Factor= 3.00 6 8/4/2020 < 0.4 0.2 Mult Factor= 1.05
7 Max.Value 5.0 ug/L 7 11/10/2020 < 0.4 0.2 Max.Value 0.250 ug/L
8 Max.Pred Cw 15.0 ug/L 8 2/9/2021 < 0.4 0.2 Max.Pred Cw 0.263 ug/L
9 9 5/11/2021 < 0.4 0.2
10 10 8/10/2021 < 0.4 0.2
11 11 11/2/2021 < 0.4 0.2
12 12 2/8/2022 < 0.4 0.2
13 13 5/3/2022 < 0.4 0.2
14 14 8/2/2022 < 0.5 0.25
15 15 11/1/2022 < 0.4 0.2
16 16 2/6/2023 < 0.4 0.2
17 17 5/2/2023 < 0.4 0.2
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
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-7- 6/25/2024

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Par21 Use'PASTE SPECIAL
Zinc Values"then"COPY".
Maximum data points
=58
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 5/7/2019 17 17 Std Dev. 25. 9 3
2 8/4/2020 58 58 Mean 53.2200
3 2/9/2021 87.3 87.3 C.V.(default) 0.6000
4 5/11/2021 43.5 43.5 n 5
5 11/8/2022 60.3 60.3
6 Mult Factor= 2.32
7 Max.Value 87.3 ug/L
8 Max.Pred Cw 202.5 ug/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,data
-8- 6/25/2024

Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority - Outfall 001
NCO039578 Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 3.5 MGD
MAXIMUM DATA POINTS = 58
Qw(MGD)= 3.5000 WWTP/WTP Class: IV COMBINED HARDNESS(ma/L)
1Q10S(cfs)= 121.77 IWC% @ 1Q10S = 4.26510476 Acute=25.45 mg/L
7Q10S(cfs)= 149.60 IWC% @ 7Q10S= 3.499435575 Chronic=25.37 mg/L
7Q10W(cfs)= 184.10 IWC%@ 7Q10W= 2.862419206
30Q2(cfs)= 273.90 IWC%@ 30Q2= 1.942182046
Avg.Stream Flow,QA(cfs)= 635.00 TW%C @ QA= 0.847093727
Receiving Stream: Tuckasegee River HUC 06010203 Stream Class: C
PARAMETER NC STANDARDS OR EPA CRITERIA J REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
TYPE Applied Chronic Standard Acute a ri #Det. Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Acute(FW): 7,971.7
Arsenic C 150 FW(7Q10s) 340 ug/L _ _ _ _ _
3 0 15.0 Chronic(FW): 4,286.4- --------------------- - -C.V.(default) Max MDL=-10
Arsenic C 10 HH/WS(Qavg) ug/L Note:n 5 9 NO DETECTS Chronic(HH): 1,180.5 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set Max MDL=10 Monitoring required
Acute: 1,524.00
Beryllium NC 6.5 FW(7Q10s) 65 ug/L 3 0 1.50 _ _
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 185.74 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=1 Monitoring required
Acute: 70.648
Cadmium NC 1.0126 FW(7Q10s) 3.0132 ug/L 3 0 1.500
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 28.937 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=1 Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Total Phenolic Compounds NC 300 A(30Q2) ug/L 3 0 30.0
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 15,446.5 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=20 Monitoring required
Chromium,Total NC µg/L 3 0 7.5 Max reported value=2.5 a:No monitoring required if all Total Chromium
Note n 5 9 C.V.(default) samples are<5 pg/L or Pred.max for Total Cr is<
allowable Cw for Cr VI.
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=5
Acute: 249.68
Copper NC 7.9798 FW(7Q10s) 10.6492 ug/L 3 1 39.60
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 228.03 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute: 515.8
Cyanide NC 5 FW(7Q10s) 22 10 ug/L 3 0 15.0 _ _
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 142.9 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=10 Monitoring required
Acute: 1,805.732
Lead NC 2.9905 FW(7Q10s) 77.0164 ug/L 3 0 7.500
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 85.457 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=5 Monitoring required
Acute: NO WQS
Mercury NC 12 FW(7Q10s) 0.5 ng/L 3 3 8.5 _ _
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 342.9 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set No value>Allowable Cw Monitoring required
Acute(FW): 7,978.7
Nickel NC 37.6952 FW(7Q10s) 340.2978 µgiL
3 0 7.5 Chronic(FW): --1_,077.2- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,rpa
Page 1 of 2 6/25/2024

Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority - Outfall 001
NCO039578 Freshwater RPA- 95% Probability/95% Confidence Using Metal Translators Qw = 3.5 MGD
Note:n 5 9 C.V.(default) Max MDL_=
Nickel NC 25.0000 WS(7Q10s) µg/L Limited data set NO DETECTS Chronic(WS): 714.4 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Max MDL=5 Monitoring required
Acute: 1,313.0
Selenium NC 5 FW(7Q10s) 56 ug/L 3 0 15.0
Note:n<9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 142.9 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set NO DETECTS Max MDL=10 Monitoring required
Acute: 7.166
Silver NC 0.06 FW(7Q10s) 0.3056 ug/L 17 0 0.263 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 1.715 No RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
NO DETECTS Max MDL=0.5 Monitoring required
Acute: 2,992.1
Zinc NC 128.3150 FW(7Q10s) 127.6166 ug/L 5 5 202.5 _ _ _ _ _ _tonitoring
Note:n<9 C.V.(default) Chronic: 3,666.7 o RP, Predicted Max<50%of Allowable Cw-No
Limited data set No value>Allowable Cw required
NCO039578 Jackson County WWTP RPA,rpa
Page 2 of 2 6/25/2024

NCO039578 TWSA WWTP 3/1/2024
BOD monthly removal rate TSS monthly removal rate
Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%) Month RR(%)
March-19 97.57 September-21 95.75 March-19 98.49 September-21 98.99
April-19 95.65 October-21 95.96 April-19 98.85 October-21 98.96
May-19 94.62 November-21 97.66 May-19 98.14 November-21 99.30
June-19 95.66 December-21 97.73 June-19 98.59 December-21 99.08
July-19 92.75 January-22 97.65 July-19 98.66 January-22 98.68
August-19 94.16 February-22 97.03 August-19 98.47 February-22 98.84
September-19 95.95 March-22 95.03 September-19 98.71 March-22 98.67
October-19 99.07 April-22 92.68 October-19 99.60 April-22 98.39
November-19 99.36 May-22 93.93 November-19 99.53 May-22 98.57
December-19 98.93 June-22 98.46 December-19 99.30 June-22 99.37
January-20 98.04 July-22 98.53 January-20 98.83 July-22 98.85
February-20 97.06 August-22 97.78 February-20 97.96 August-22 98.98
March-20 97.61 September-22 98.14 March-20 97.66 September-22 99.29
April-20 97.73 October-22 98.42 April-20 98.42 October-22 99.23
May-20 98.66 November-22 98.12 May-20 98.87 November-22 98.96
June-20 98.64 December-22 98.83 June-20 98.90 December-22 99.11
July-20 98.35 January-23 97.62 July-20 98.61 January-23 98.24
August-20 96.24 February-23 98.84 August-20 98.93 February-23 99.08
September-20 94.72 March-23 99.30 September-20 99.30 March-23 99.32
October-20 94.54 April-23 99.37 October-20 99.12 April-23 99.53
November-20 97.37 May-23 99.43 November-20 99.16 May-23 99.51
December-20 98.04 June-23 99.45 December-20 98.91 June-23 99.51
January-21 97.94 July-23 99.17 January-21 98.94 July-23 99.25
February-21 97.89 August-23 98.67 February-21 98.36 August-23 99.02
March-21 96.31 September-23 97.65 March-21 99.12 September-23 98.97
April-21 96.12 October-23 April-21 99.13 October-23
May-21 95.87 November-23 May-21 99.07 November-23
June-21 98.70 December-23 June-21 99.22 December-23
July-21 98.97 January-24 July-21 99.24 January-24
August-21 92.54 February-24 August-21 98.78 February-24
Overall BOD removal rate 97.20 Overall TSSD removal rate 98.86

i

6/25/24 WQS = 12 ng/L MERCURY WQBEL/TBEL EVALUATION V:2013-6
Facility Name
TWSA WWTP/NC0039578 No Limit Required
/Permit No.
MMP Required
Total Mercury 1631E PQL= 0.5 ng/L 7Q10s= 149.600 cfs WQBEL= 342.91 ng/L
Date Modifier Data Entry Value Permitted Flow= 3.500 47 ng/L
8/4/20 2.83 2.83 2.8 ng/L-Annual Average for 2020
5/11/21 1.39 1.39 1.4 ng/L-Annual Average for 2021
11/8/22 1.53 1.53 1.5 ng/L-Annual Average for 2022

TWSA WWTP/NC0039578
Mercury Data Statistics (Method 1631E)
2020 2021 2022
#of Samples 1 1 1
Annual Average, ng/L 2.8 1.4 1.5
Maximum Value, ng/L 2.83 1.39 1.53
TBEL, ng/L 47
WQBEL, ng/L 342.9

Permit No. NC0039578
NPDES Implementation of Instream Dissolved Metals Standards-Freshwater Standards
The NC 2007-2015 Water Quality Standard(WQS)Triennial Review was approved by the NC
Environmental Management Commission(EMC)on November 13,2014. The US EPA subsequently
approved the WQS revisions on April 6,2016,with some exceptions. Therefore,metal limits in draft
permits out to public notice after April 6,2016 must be calculated to protect the new standards- as
approved.
Table 1.NC Dissolved Metals Water Q ality Standards/A uatic Life Protection
Parameter Acute FW, µg/l Chronic FW, µg/1 Acute SW, µg/1 Chronic SW, µg/l
(Dissolved) (Dissolved) (Dissolved) (Dissolved)
Arsenic 340 150 69 36
Beryllium 65 6.5 --- ---
Cadmium Calculation Calculation 40 8.8
Chromium III Calculation Calculation --- ---
Chromium VI 16 11 1100 50
Copper Calculation Calculation 4.8 3.1
Lead Calculation Calculation 210 8.1
Nickel Calculation Calculation 74 8.2
Silver Calculation 0.06 1.9 0.1
Zinc Calculation Calculation 90 81
Table 1 Notes:
1. FW=Freshwater, SW=Saltwater
2. Calculation=Hardness dependent standard
3. Only the aquatic life standards listed above are expressed in dissolved form. Aquatic life
standards for Mercury and selenium are still expressed as Total Recoverable Metals due to
bioaccumulative concerns(as are all human health standards for all metals). It is still necessary
to evaluate total recoverable aquatic life and human health standards listed in 15A NCAC
2B.0200 (e.g., arsenic at 10 µg/l for human health protection; cyanide at 5 µg/L and fluoride at
1.8 mg/L for aquatic life protection).
Table 2.Dissolved Freshwater Standards for Hardness-Dependent Metals
The Water Effects Ratio (WER)is equal to one unless determined otherwise under 15A
NCAC 02B .0211 Subparagraph(11)(d)
Metal NC Dissolved Standard, µg/I
Cadmium,Acute WER*11.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9789 [In hardness]-3.443}
Cadmium,Acute Trout waters WER*11.136672-[ln hardness](0.041838)} e^{0.9789[ln hardness]-3.866}
Cadmium,Chronic WER*{1.101672-[1n hardness](0.041838)} •e^{0.7977[ln hardness]-3.909}
Chromium III,Acute WER*0.316 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+3.7256}
Chromium III,Chronic WER*0.860 e^{0.8190[ln hardness]+0.6848}
Copper,Acute WER*0.960 e^{0.9422[ln hardness]-1.7001
Copper,Chronic WER*0.960 eA(0.8545[ln hardness]-1.702}
Lead,Acute WER*(1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)) • e^{1.273[In hardness]-1.460}
Lead,Chronic WER*(1.46203-[ln hardness](0.145712)} • eA(l.273[In hardness]-4.705}
Nickel,Acute WER*0.998 eA10.8460[ln hardness]+2.255)
Nickel,Chronic WER*0.997 e^{0.8460[ln hardness]+0.0584)
Page 1 of 4

Permit No. NCO039578
Silver,Acute WER*0.85 • e^{1.72[ln hardness]-6.59}
Silver,Chronic Not applicable
Zinc,Acute WER*0.978 eA f O.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
Zinc,Chronic WER*0.986 eA f O.8473[ln hardness]+0.884}
General Information on the Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA)
The RPA process itself did not change as the result of the new metals standards. However,application of
the dissolved and hardness-dependent standards requires additional consideration in order to establish the
numeric standard for each metal of concern of each individual discharge.
The hardness-based standards require some knowledge of the effluent and instream(upstream)hardness
and so must be calculated case-by-case for each discharge.
Metals limits must be expressed as `total recoverable' metals in accordance with 40 CFR 122.45(c). The
discharge-specific standards must be converted to the equivalent total values for use in the RPA
calculations.We will generally rely on default translator values developed for each metal(more on that
below),but it is also possible to consider case-specific translators developed in accordance with
established methodology.
RPA Permitting Guidance/WOBELs for Hardness-Dependent Metals -Freshwater
The RPA is designed to predict the maximum likely effluent concentrations for each metal of concern,
based on recent effluent data, and calculate the allowable effluent concentrations,based on applicable
standards and the critical low-flow values for the receiving stream.
If the maximum predicted value is greater than the maximum allowed value(chronic or acute),the
discharge has reasonable potential to exceed the standard,which warrants a permit limit in most cases. If
monitoring for a particular pollutant indicates that the pollutant is not present(i.e. consistently below
detection level),then the Division may remove the monitoring requirement in the reissued permit.
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, 7Q10(the spreadsheet automatically calculates
the 1 Q 10 using the formula 1 Q 10=0.843 (s7Q 10, cfs) 0.993
• Effluent hardness and upstream hardness, site-specific data is preferred
• Permitted flow
• Receiving stream classification
2. In order to establish the numeric standard for each hardness-dependent metal of concern and for
each individual discharge,the Permit Writer must first determine what effluent and instream
(upstream)hardness values to use in the equations.
The permit writer reviews DMR's, Effluent Pollutant Scans, and Toxicity Test results for any
hardness data and contacts the Permittee to see if any additional data is available for instream
hardness values,upstream of the discharge.
If no hardness data is available,the permit writer may choose to do an initial evaluation using a
default hardness of 25 mg/L(CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)). Minimum and maximum limits on the
hardness value used for water quality calculations are 25 mg/L and 400 mg/L,respectively.
If the use of a default hardness value results in a hardness-dependent metal showing reasonable
potential,the permit writer contacts the Permittee and requests 5 site-specific effluent and
upstream hardness samples over a period of one week. The RPA is rerun using the new data.
Page 2 of 4

Permit No. NCO039578
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)+s7Q10,cfs *Avg. Upstream Hardness,mg/L)
(Permitted Flow, cfs+s7Q10, cfs)
The Combined Hardness for acute is the same but the calculation uses the IQ 10 flow.
3. The permit writer converts the numeric standard for each metal of concern to a total recoverable
metal,using the EPA Default Partition Coefficients(DPCs) or site-specific translators, if any
have been developed using federally approved methodology.
EPA default partition coefficients or the"Fraction Dissolved"converts the value for
dissolved metal at laboratory conditions to total recoverable metal at in-stream
ambient conditions. This factor is calculated using the linear partition coefficients
found in The Metals Translator: Guidance for Calculating a Total Recoverable
Permit Limit from a Dissolved Criterion (EPA 823-B-96-007,June 1996)and the
equation:
Cdiss - 1
Ctotal 1 + { [Kpo] [ss(I+a)] [10-6] }
Where:
ss=in-stream suspended solids concentration [mg/1],minimum of 10 mg/L used,
and
Kpo and a=constants that express the equilibrium relationship between dissolved
and adsorbed forms of metals.A list of constants used for each hardness-dependent
metal can also be found in the RPA program under a sheet labeled DPCs.
4. The numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the default partition coefficient(or
site-specific translator)to obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions.
In some cases,where an EPA default partition coefficient translator does not exist(ie. silver),the
dissolved numeric standard for each metal of concern is divided by the EPA conversion factor to
obtain a Total Recoverable Metal at ambient conditions. This method presumes that the metal is
dissolved to the same extent as it was during EPA's criteria development for metals.For more
information on conversion factors see the June, 1996 EPA Translator Guidance Document.
5. The RPA spreadsheet uses a mass balance equation to determine the total allowable concentration
(permit limits) for each pollutant using the following equation:
Ca=(s7010+Qw)Cwgs)—(s7Q10) (Cb)
Qw
Where: Ca=allowable effluent concentration(µg/L or mg/L)
Cwqs=NC Water Quality Standard or federal criteria(µg/L or mg/L)
Cb=background concentration: assume zero for all toxicants except NH3* (µg/L or mg/L)
Qw=permitted effluent flow(cfs,match s7Q 10)
s7Q 10=summer low flow used to protect aquatic life from chronic toxicity and human
health through the consumption of water, fish,and shellfish from noncarcinogens(cfs)
*Discussions are on-going with EPA on how best to address background concentrations
Flows other than s7Q 10 may be incorporated as applicable:
IQ 10=used in the equation to protect aquatic life from acute toxicity
Page 3 of 4

Permit No. NC0039578
QA=used in the equation to protect human health through the consumption of water,
fish, and shellfish from carcinogens
30Q2=used in the equation to protect aesthetic quality
6. The permit writer enters the most recent 2-3 years of effluent data for each pollutant of concern.
Data entered must have been taken within four and one-half years prior to the date of the permit
application(40 CFR 122.21). The RPA spreadsheet estimates the 95th percentile upper
concentration of each pollutant. The Predicted Max concentrations are compared to the Total
allowable concentrations to determine if a permit limit is necessary. If the predicted max exceeds
the acute or chronic Total allowable concentrations,the discharge is considered to show
reasonable potential to violate the water quality standard, and a permit limit(Total allowable
concentration)is included in the permit in accordance with the U.S. EPA Technical Support
Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control published in 1991.
7. When appropriate,permit writers develop facility specific compliance schedules in accordance
with the EPA Headquarters Memo dated May 10,2007 from James Hanlon to Alexis Strauss on
40 CFR 122.47 Compliance Schedule Requirements.
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 VI.
9. Effluent hardness sampling and instream hardness sampling,upstream of the discharge, are
inserted into all permits with facilities monitoring for hardness-dependent metals to ensure the
accuracy of the permit limits and to build a more robust hardness dataset.
10. Hardness and flow values used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis for this permit included:
Parameter Value Comments(Data Source)
Average Effluent Hardness(mg/L) 35.53 Effluent pollutant scans—2020,
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)] 2021, 2022
Average Upstream Hardness(mg/L)
[Total as, CaCO3 or(Ca+Mg)] 25.0 Default value
7Q10 summer(cfs) 149.60 Previous Fact Sheet
1Q10(cfs) 121.77 RPA calculation
Permitted Flow(MGD) 3.5 Previous permit/Fact Sheet
Date: A ril/22/2024
Permit Writer: Saad Masood
Page 4 of 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 u 3 I NCO039578 111 121 23/08/22 I17 18 I C I 19 I G I 201 I
21111I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I r6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ----------------------Reserved-------------------
67 70 J 71 Ity 72 L-J 73 1 74 79 I I I I 80
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) 10:00AM 23/08/22 19/08/01
Jackson County WWTP
1871 N River Rd Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
Sylva NC 28779 12:OOPM 23/08/22 23/10/31
Name(s)of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data
Stan D Bryson/ORC/828-586-9318/
Name,Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Daniel Manring,1246 W Main St Sylva NC 28779//828-586-5189/
No
Section C:Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations&Maintenar Records/Reports
Self-Monitoring Progran 0 Sludge Handling Dispo: Pollution Prevention Facility Site Review
Effluent/Receiving Wate 0 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
Mara G Chamlee DWR/ARO WQ/828-296-4500/
Rachel Rose DWR/ARO WQ/828-296-4500/
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
31 NCO039578 I11 12I 23/08/22 117 18 i c i
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Mara Chamlee and Rachel Rose, with the Asheville Regional Office, conducted a Compliance
Evaluation Inspection of the TWSA Jackson County WWTP on August 22, 2023. This inspection was
conducted to determine whether the facility is being operated and maintained in compliance with
NPDES Permit No. NC0039578. Mr. Stan Bryson (ORC)was present and assisted with the inspection.
This facility is a dual Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) plant. Overall, it is very well maintained and
being operated in compliance with the NPDES Permit. No major findings were noted during the
inspection.
The following items were noted during the inspection:
1) Pump Station-Influent: The facility primarily uses transducers as level alarms; however, floats are
used as back-ups. Since the previous inspection report's recommendation of recording the routine
float checks, Mr. Bryson has begun to document the routine checks for reference.
2) Influent Sampling: Mr. Bryson indicated that since the previous inspection, they have begun to
check the aliquot volumes annually to ensure that the proper 100 mL volume is dispensed with each
sample pull.
3) Effluent Sampling: The tubing for the composite sampler was dirty. It is recommended that the
tubing be replaced regularly to maintain clean tubing.
4) Effluent Flow Measurement: As noted during previous inspections, the effluent flow is turbulent
directly below the flow meter, which produces somewhat inaccurate measurements. This is due to an
issue with the flume length and flow meter location which was noted after the prefabricated flume was
installed during previous plant upgrades. TWSA is aware of the situation and it is not an issue that
can be easily fixed. A stilling well would need to be installed and/or the length of the flume would need
to be increased to allow for quiescent area flow measurements. This should be addressed in future
plans for TWSA#1 to provide the facility and permitting unit with more accurate daily flows.
Page# 2

Permit: NCO039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
#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:
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment: The process control parameters analyzed include MLSS, MLVSS, ZSV, MCRT, and
sludge age.
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the chain-of-custody complete? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Dates, times and location of sampling ■
Name of individual performing the sampling ■
Results of analysis and calibration ■
Dates of analysis ■
Name of person performing analyses ■
Transported COCs ■
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
(If the facility is = or> 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
classification?
Page# 3

Permit: NCO039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Pump Station - Influent Yes No NA NE
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the wet well free of excessive grease? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps present? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps operable? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Are float controls operable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: At the time of the inspection, one pump was not operational and was out for repair.
SCADA system is the primary means of notification. A transducer is used for primary
level control with float-backups. Mr. Bryson indicated that since the previous
inspection, they have begun recording and documenting float checks as per the
recommendations.
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Is sample collected above side streams? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
# 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? M ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The influent composite sampling is time-based. At the time of the inspection, the
refrigerated sample read 5 degrees Celsius. Mr. Bryson indicated that the flow meter is
calibrated quarterly. He also stated that since the previous inspection, they have been
checking the accuracy of the sample aliquot volumes annually as per the previous
inspection recommendations.
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual ❑
b.Mechanical
Page# 4

Permit: NC0039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Grit Removal Yes No NA NE
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Mr. Bryson stated that the grit debris is hauled away every two weeks.
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the unit in good condition? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The facility has an initial manual bar screen and a secondary mechanical bar screen.
Sequencing Batch Reactors Yes No NA NE
Type of operation: Duplex
Is the reactor effluent free of solids? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does minimum fill time correspond to the peak hour flow rate of the facility? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is aeration and mixing cycled on and off during fill? ❑ ❑ ❑
The operator understands and can explain the process? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: There are two SBRs and one SBR is filling while the other is reacting. The cycling time
consists of 75 minutes of filling and 75 minutes of settling. Both SBRs waste to the
digesters at the end of a cycle. Each reactor cycles five times per day. Mr. Bryson
indicated that SBR#1 was down for approximately one month earlier that year because
the mixer was down. He also stated that they had sent out a quote for replacement of
the variable frequency drive unit (VFD).
Equalization Basins Yes No NA NE
Is the basin aerated? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Is the basin free of bypass lines or structures to the natural environment? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the basin free of excessive grease? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps present? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are all pumps operable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are float controls operable? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 5

Permit: NCO039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Equalization Basins Yes No NA NE
Are audible and visual alarms operable? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is basin size/volume adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: These are post-EQ basins. The high level sensors are connected to SCADA.
Pumps-RAS-WAS Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are pumps operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Comment: Mr. Bryson indicated that the WAS rates are estimated. They do not have spare parts
on site.
Aerobic Digester Yes No NA NE
Is the capacity adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the mixing adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive foaming in the tank? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the odor acceptable? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is tankage available for properly waste sludge? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The facility has two digesters. One digester is used for thickening and the other
digester is pumped out three times per week.
Disinfection-Liquid Yes No NA NE
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
(Sodium Hypochlorite) Is pump feed system operational? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is bulk storage tank containment area adequate? (free of leaks/open drains) ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable? ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The two, 5,500-gallon chlorine tanks are maintained in a warehouse on site.
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ? Liquid
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is storage appropriate for cylinders? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
# Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 6

Permit: NCO039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Are the tablets the proper size and type? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Comment: The 1,000-gallon dechlorination tank is maintained in a separate warehouse from the
chlorine tanks.
Are tablet de-chlorinators operational? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Effluent Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the flow meter operational? M ❑ ❑ ❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The effluent flow meter is calibrated quarterly. The last calibration was performed on
June 30, 2023 by Instrumentation Services Inc. The facility has had issues with
accurate flow measurements. See summary for details.
Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
# 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: At the time of the inspection, the tubing appeared somewhat dirty. Mr. Bryson indicated
that they replace the sampler tubing approximately every six months. The refrigerated
sample was 3 degrees Celsius at the time of the inspection. Additionally, they have
begun checking the sample aliquot volumes yearly as per the previous inspection
recommendations. See summary for details.
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Page# 7

Permit: NC0039578 Owner-Facility: Jackson County WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/22/2023 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Solids Handling Equipment Yes No NA NE
Is the equipment operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the chemical feed equipment operational? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is storage adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
The facility has an approved sludge management plan? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The solids are aerobically digested before being fed to a belt filter press, sent to a
rotary drum dryer, and distributed under their Class A Residuals Permit.
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is automatically activated standby power available? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested under load? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: The generator is tested weekly under load. At the time of the inspection, the fuel gauge
read approximately 3/4 full. Mr. Bryson indicated that although they do not have an
emergency agreement with a fuel vendor, they would easily be able to obtain fuel from
a nearby vendor in case of an emergency.
Page# 8

NORTH CAROLINA 2022 303(D) LIST
Tuckasegee Little Tennessee River Basin
AU Name AU Number Classification AU_LengthArea AU—Units
AU ID Description
Tuckasegee River 2-79-(38) C 0.7 FW Miles
8607 From Dillsboro Dam to Mack Town Branch
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY CRITERIA STATUS REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Fecal Coliform (GM 200/400 5 in 30, REC, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Pathogen Indicator Standards
Exceedance
Savannah Creek 2-79-36 C;Tr 13.4 FW Miles
8736 From source to Tuckasegee River
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY CRITERIA STATUS REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Fecal Coliform (GM 200/400 5 in 30, REC, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Pathogen Indicator Standards
Exceedance
Scott Creek 2-79-39 C;Tr FW Miles
8758 From source to Tuckasegee River
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY CRITERIA STATUS REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Fecal Coliform (GM 200/400 5 in 30, REC, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Pathogen Indicator Standards
Exceedance
Sugarloaf Creek 2-79-39-5-1 C FW Miles
8783 From source to Soapstone Creek
PARAMETER IR CATEGORY CRITERIA STATUS REASON FOR RATING 303D YEAR
Benthos(Nar,AL, FW) 5 Exceeding Criteria Fair, Poor or Severe Bioclassification
6/7/2022 NC 2022 303d List-Approved by EPA 4/30/2022 Page 53 of 192