NC0004308_Hearing Officer Report_20151005

RECEIVED/DENR/DWR
HEARING OFFICER REPORT OCT 0 5 2015
for Water Quality
Renewal of NPDES Permit NC0004308 Permitting Section
Alcoa- Badin Works
This report is presented to the Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
INTRODUCTION
Based on public comment requesting a public hearing on the Draft NPDES Permit renewal for
Alcoa Badin Works in Stanly County, a subsequent public notice announcing a public
hearing/public comment was published on May 13, 2015 in the Stanly News and Press and on
May 23, 2015 in the Charlotte Observer.
A public hearing was held on July 1, 2015, at the Stanly County Commissioner's Commons
Meeting room in Albemarle,NC. Oral and written comments became part of the public record,
which was closed at the end of the hearing. W. Corey Basinger with the Division of Water
Resources' Winston-Salem Regional Office served as the Hearing Officer.
This Hearing Officer Report summarizes the major issues raised through the public hearing
process, as well as the Hearing Officer recommendations for the NPDES permit renewal. The
Director of the Division of Water Resources will take final action on these recommendations,
and a revised permit will then be re-noticed for public comment.
FACILITY BACKGROUND
Alcoa Badin Works is a closed aluminum smelting plant that was in operation between 1917 and
2007. The plant completed the shutdown in 2010 and operation and supporting equipment were
dismantled and removed from the site. Groundwater and stormwater are still discharged through
10 permitted outfalls to Badin Lake (classified WS-IV, B CA waters) and an unnamed tributary
to Little Mountain Creek (classified WS-IV waters) in the Yadkin River Basin. Little Mountain
Creek is listed on the 303(d) list of impaired waters for benthos and Badin Lake is impaired for
PCB. The following table shows the outfalls ID# along with a description of wastewater sources
and receiving stream name.
Table 1. Outfalls Description
Outfall ID Wastewater Sources Receiving Stream
002 Stormwater Badin Lake(Yadkin River)
004 Stormwater Unnamed Tributary(UT)to
Little Mountain Creek
005 Stormwater, groundwater and fire protection water UT to Little Mountain Creek
011 Outfall 012 overflow- Stormwater, groundwater and Badin Lake (Yadkin River)
fire protection water.
1

Outfall ID Wastewater Sources Receiving Stream
012 Stormwater, groundwater and fire protection water. Badin Lake(Yadkin River)
(diffuser)
Stormwater, spring water, and groundwater drainage
013 from an area that includes a former Alcoa landfill site Badin Lake(Yadkin River)
(SWMUs#1 &22).
017 Stormwater UT to Little Mountain Creek
018 Stormwater Little Mountain Creek
019 Pond overflow from the landfill cover drainage system Badin Lake(Yadkin River)
collection pond. (No contact with the landfill material)
020 Stormwater Badin Lake(Yadkin River)
The site includes two closed landfills, the Alcoa-Badin Landfill (Solid Waste Management Unit
(SWMU) #2), and the old Brick Landfill (SWMU#3). The Division of Waste Management
(DWM) is involved in ongoing Corrective Measures Studies and CERCLA investigations to
address groundwater contamination. The main area of concern is the Alcoa Badin Landfill area,
just to the south of the plant site. Seepage from the landfill is collected in a seepage collection
system and pumped to the Badin WWTP. An investigation is ongoing to determine if seeps and
groundwater are migrating to Little Mountain Creek.
PUBLIC RECORD
The Division held a public hearing in Albemarle,NC on July 1, 2015. Approximately 81 people
attended the public hearing, of which 14 attendees provided oral comments. Attendees and
speakers included representatives from environmental interest groups and concerned citizens.
The Division also received 84 written comments.
Listed below is a summary of issues raised, Division staff response to those comments, and staff
recommendations on permit language based on the comment.
1) Compliance Schedule. The 3-year compliance schedule to comply with new cyanide and
fluoride limits is too long.
Response: Based on public concern, the Department has decided to withdraw the
compliance schedule for Outfalls 005, 011, 012, and 013.
2) Alcoa Badin Landfill (SWMU No. 2). More contaminant characterization is needed
around the Alcoa Badin Landfill
Response: The Division of Waste Management (DWM) is the lead agency involved in
ongoing waste characterization studies and remediation efforts focused on the Alcoa
Badin landfill. Prior RCRA interim corrective actions have included installation of a
landfill cover system. The DWM is currently evaluating leachate, emergent groundwater,
surface water and sediment between the Alcoa Badin Landfill and Little Mountain Creek;
the data will be used to determine if there has been a release of hazardous constituents
2

attributable to the landfill at the interface between the landfill and surface water pathway,
in order to evaluate the site's future disposition under CERCLA. The Division of Water
Resources (DWR) has complimentary studies to evaluate potential impacts to surface
waters. Based on public concern, DWR staff recommends that monthly instream
monitoring for pollutants of concern be added for various locations along Little
Mountain Creek to enable determination of whether surface water quality
standards are being violated.
3) TCE Limit. The permit should include effluent limits for trichloroethene (TCE) at
Outfalls 011 and 012.
Response: TCE was detected in groundwater at concentrations ranging from 19 to 86
ug/1, in areas draining towards Outfalls 011 and 012. TCE quarterly monitoring was
included in the draft permit. Based on public concern, DWR staff recommends that
the TCE monitoring-only requirement be changed to a permit limit with monthly
monitoring at Outfalls 011 and 012.
4) Wastewater Characterization. The permit should include analysis for other potential
contaminants such as arsenic, lead, PCBs, and PAHs.
Response: Based on public concern, DWR staff recommends that a full effluent
priority pollutant analysis be added to each wastewater outfall (005, 011, 012, 013)
with results submitted to the Division during the first year of the permit term.
5) Environmental Justice. The permit is likely to have an adverse and disproportionate
impact on the local community on the basis of race.
Response: This facility began aluminum smelting operations in 1917, and the site
location was based on availability of nearby hydropower supplied by dams on the Yadkin
River. The NPDES permit is based on protection of surface water quality standards. The
permit limits are designed to protect for human health and the environment. The
proposed new permit limits for cyanide will reduce potential human health impacts. The
removal of the compliance schedule will also expedite compliance with surface water
quality standards. A public notice of the public hearing was placed in a local newspaper,
and a public hearing was held on this draft permit to obtain input from local citizens. The
Division of Waste Management has also held public meetings in the past to discuss
RCRA activities at this site. DWR staff does not recommend changes to the permit
result from this comment.
6) Don't treat site as a Stormwater Permit. This permit should be treated as a
groundwater remediation discharge permit and not a stormwater permit. Some of the
Stormwater-Only outfalls are commingled with massively polluted groundwater, and
should be permitted as such.
Response: Based on the contaminated groundwater, this permit is indeed a wastewater
permit issued by DWR, and not a stormwater permit issued by DEMLR. The outfalls
with identified contaminated groundwater include effluent limitations, based on
protection of human health and aquatic life. There are also a few stormwater-only
outfalls that do not contain effluent limitations, but are based upon stormwater
3

benchmark values and best management practices. In both the 2008 permit as well as this
2015 draft permit, there is a requirement for the Permittee to evaluate the stormwater-
only outfalls for the presence of non-stormwater discharges, and re-certify annually that
the stormwater outfalls have been evaluated. Based on public concern, Division staff
recommends that the stormwater language in B(2)1(e) be updated to require
additional investigation and sampling if non-stormwater flow is detected in
stormwater outfalls.
7) Permit Not Protective and Less Stringent. The proposed permit is not sufficient to
protect water quality, and is less stringent than the previous 2008 permit.
Response: Division staff does not concur. The proposed permit is more stringent than
the previous 2008 permit. New cyanide limits have been added to Outfalls 005, 011, 012, •
and 013. New fluoride limits have been added to Outfalls 005 and 011. These limits are
based on surface water quality standards for protection of human health and environment.
DWR staff does not recommend changes to the permit result from this comment.
8) Antidegradation. The draft permit conflicts with the antidegradation policy.
Response: Division staff does not concur. Antidegradation analysis is reserved for new
and expanding discharges, while this permit action is for a renewal. There are more
limits imposed in this permit renewal compared to the previous permit, so surface water
quality should improve. There is also no basis for statements claiming that this permit is
likely to increase pollutant loading to the waterbodies. DWR staff does not recommend
changes to the permit result from this comment.
9) Antibacksliding. The reductions in effluent limitations and monitoring requirements
violates the Clean Water Act anti-backsliding provisions.
Response: Division staff does not concur: The proposed permit includes more water
quality-based effluent limitations than the previous 2008 permit(refer to Response#7).
The only toxicant limit removed from the previous permit was fluoride at Outfall 013
based on lack of reasonable potential. The need for toxicant limits is based upon a
demonstration of reasonable potential, a statistical evaluation that is conducted during
every permit renewal utilizing the most recent effluent data for each outfall. The
reasonable potential analysis is conducted in accordance with 40 CFR 122.44 (d)(i).
Monitoring frequencies for these toxicants are in accordance with the Division's
"Monitoring Frequency for Toxic Substances" guidance dated July 15, 2010. The
monitoring frequencies (monthly or quarterly) will provide sufficient data to perform a
reasonable potential analysis at the next permit renewal. Outfalls identified as
"Stormwater-Only Outfalls"will be monitored semi-annually in accordance with
NCDEMLR stormwater permitting practices, and similar to the stormwater monitoring
requirements during the previous 2008 permit. DWR staff does not recommend
changes to the permit result from this comment.
10)Deny Permit. The DWR should deny Alcoa's NPDES permit, complete a waste
characterization study of the landfill before making further permitting decisions, and
4

instead institute an enforcement action to ensure that Alcoa takes necessary steps to
remediate its sources of pollution.
Response: Division staff disagrees. There is significant public concern about the Alcoa
Badin Landfill and its potential impacts to Little Mountain Creek. A revised NPDES
permit containing effluent limits for cyanide/fluoride with immediate'compliance
required at Outfall 005 (which discharges to Little Mountain Creek) along with instream
monitoring requirements through Little Mountain Creek is a preferable option for surface
water protection. This information will be shared with DWM, which is the lead agency
for ongoing RCRA/CERCLA characterization and remediation activities at the landfill
sites. DWR staff does not recommend changes to the permit result from this
comment.
11)EPA Cyanide Loading Estimate. The Alcoa Badin Works discharged 16,309 pounds of
cyanide to Badin Lake/Little Mountain Creek in 2014, according to an EPA website.
Response: EPA has corrected their website, which contained an error in concentration
units. The website now states a discharge of 26 pounds of cyanide in 2014. DWR staff
does not recommend changes to the permit result from this comment.
12)Alcoa Badin Landfill/Outfall 005. The detections of cyanide at Outfall 005 indicate that
the Alcoa Badin landfill is contributing to violations of surface water quality standards in
Little Mountain Creek.
Response: Division staff concur that Outfall 005 is contributing cyanide to Little
Mountain Creek. However, according to the facility's drainage map it appears that
Outfall 005 does not receive drainage from the landfill. DWR staff does not
recommend changes to the permit result from this comment.
5

HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on review of the public record and written/oral comments received during the public hearing
process, I recommend to the Division Director that the Alcoa Badin Draft NPDES Permit
(NC0004308) be revised as follows:
1. The three (3) year compliance schedule should be withdrawn for Outfalls 005, 011, 012
and 013.
2. Monthly instream monitoring for pollutants of concern be added for locations along Little
Mountain Creek. These sampling locations should be consistent with current sampling
locations utilized by the Mooresville Regional Office while conducting an ongoing
sampling regimen to determine if and to what extent surface water quality standards are
being violated. The pollutants of concern should include at a minimum Arsenic, Fluoride
and Cyanide.
3. Trichloroethene (TCE) monthly monitoring with permit limit should be added to Outfalls
011 and 012.
4. Stormwater language found in B.(2)1(e)be modified to require additional investigation and
sampling (for priority pollutant parameters) if non-stormwater flows/discharges are
detected in the stormwater outfalls.
5. UP Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) should be requested to issue a jurisdictional
determination for all seeps/drainages from landfill to Little Mountain Creek.
6. Recommend that a full priority pollutant analysis be added to outfalls 005, 011, 012, and
013 with a report submitted to the Division the first year of permit.
7Ic
W. Corey Basin er, Hearing Officer Date
APPENDICES
A. Draft Permit and Fact Sheet
B. Announcement of the Draft Permit and Public Hearing
C. Hearing Registration Sheets
6