NC0024406_Comments_20180730

•
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER
Telephone [phone] 601 WEST ROSEMARY STREET,SUITE 220 Facsimile 919-929-9421
CHAPEL HILL,NC 27516-2356
•
July 30, 2018
VIA U.S. MAIL AND E-MAIL
VEDIDENWD\NR
North Carolina Department of EnvironmentalQuality RECE
Wastewater Permitting pUG 0 2 2018
Attn: Belews Creek Permit
1617 Mail Service Center Water Resources
Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 perrnittm9 Section
[e-mail]
Re: Draft NPDES Permit NC0024406
Belews Creek Steam Station
Dear Sir or Madam:
On behalf of itself, Appalachian Voices, the Stokes County Branch of the NAACP, and
the Sierra Club, the Southern Environmental Law Center("SELC") submits these comments on
the proposed National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit for Duke
Energy's Belews Creek Steam Station, noticed for public comment by the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality. Some of us previously submitted comments on the 2016
and 2017 draft NPDES permits for this site, and those comments remain applicable and are
incorporated by reference here, except as set out below.
Although this draft permit improves upon previous drafts in some ways-crucially,
recognizing that Little Belews Creek is a water of the United States requiring Clean Water Act
protection—it takes a step backward in others. It still does not adequately protect North Carolina
or its water resources from the serious coal ash pollution by Duke Energy. The Dan River, Little
Belews Creek, and the community around Belews Creek have suffered more than enough from
Duke Energy's coal pollution. They will continue to suffer from this pollution as long as Duke
Energy keeps burning coal at Belews Creek, and as long as the coal ash remains in the unlined
basin. As outlined in these comments, DEQ must do better to.protect this community and clean
water.
I. INTRODUCTION
As Duke Energy prepares to shut down its coal ash lagoons at Belews Creek and other
sites across the state,North Carolina waters and communities face an enormous and historic
pollution event: the final flush of contaminated wastewater discharges from nearly every Duke
Energy coal ash lagoon. In the upcoming permit period, and over a relatively short time, Duke
Energy plans to dump all the polluted water from its coal ash lagoons (untold millions of gallons)
into almost every major river system in North Carolina.
Charlottesville • Chapel Hill • Atlanta • Asheville • Birmingham • Charleston • Nashville • Richmond • Washington.DC
100%recycled paper

This final dump will contain some of the most polluted coal ash water ever dumped into
North Carolina's rivers, other than the flow from the Dan River catastrophe. Up until this point,
Duke Energy has been permitted to discharge only the top layer of water in the lagoons, from
which coal ash pollutants supposedly settle out. Now as it shuts down the lagoons, Duke Energy
will discharge the deeper, more polluted layers of water as the lagoons are "decanted" (by
pumping out water three feet or more above the coal ash) and "dewatered" (by pumping out
heavily-polluted water near to and mixed with coal ash). These final discharges from decanting
and dewatering the lagoons are significantly more polluted than the discharges from normal
operation. A coal ash wastewater discharge of this scale represents an unprecedented pollution
event for North Carolina's waterways, including Little Belews Creek,the Dan River, and Belews
Lake.
Unfortunately, despite some progress since the last draft, DEQ still falls short of
protecting communities and clean water around Belews Creek. In particular, the permit:
• Lacks certain key numeric effluent limitations for toxic pollutants like arsenic
during decanting into Little Belews Creek through Outfall 003.
• Lacks any meaningful numeric effluent limitations and monitoring for the new
Dan River outfall that have controlled toxic coal ash pollutants at other sites, like
Sutton.
• Fails to establish Clean Water Act Section 316(b) protections for fish from Duke
Energy's cooling water intake structure.
• Unlawfully and unreasonably grants Duke Energy continued permission to
discharge overheated water,though DEQ has recognized Duke Energy has not
justified a variance.
• Accelerates decanting and dewatering without explanation, putting at risk the
• safety of the ash basin and receiving waters.
• Qualifies the physical/chemical treatment requirement during decanting and
dewatering, so treatment is not required unless Duke Energy is pumping so much
toxic wastewater from its coal ash lagoon that Little Belews Creek and the Dan
River become impaired.
Especially now that Duke Energy is about to dump millions of gallons of among the most
polluted water from the coal ash basins, it is critically important that permits like the Belews
Creek permit contain strong protections, requiring Duke Energy to treat polluted discharges and
limit harm to North Carolina's communities and water resources.
As explained in greater detail below, we respectfully request that DEQ make the
following changes before finalizing a permit:
• Ensure the permit's pollution limits for Little Belews Creek are enforced promptly and
are not undone by an unnecessary Special Order by Consent;
2

• Strengthen absent or weak numeric effluent limits for toxic coal ash pollutants at Outfalls
003 and 003A;
• Strengthen the inadequate pollutant limits and monitoring for the proposed new outfall
006 to the Dan River;
• Restore the 2019 compliance date for technology-based ELG limits on scrubber
wastewater set in the two previous draft permits;
• Impose 316(b) cooling water intake structure requirements as mandated by the Clean
Water Act;
• Require Duke Energy to use readily-available physical/chemical wastewater treatment
technology for its coal ash discharges, including decanting and dewatering;
• Revoke the proposed thermal variance because no evidence justifies it or shows it is
permissible under the Clean Water Act;
• Ensure decanting complies with all dam safety requirements and is conducted at a safe
rate;
• Address Duke Energy's illegal constructed drain discharges into Little Belews Creek by
requiring them to be eliminated, not by writing them into the permit;
• Protect downstream drinking waters from cancer-causing pollution by setting protective
limits for bromides.
II. PERMIT COMMENTS
A. DEO Must Recognize and Protect Little Belews Creek.
Recognizing Little Belews Creek: With this draft permit, DEQ recognizes that Duke
Energy cannot use a water of the United States—here, Little Belews Creek—as part of its private
wastewater treatment system.
Little Belews Creek is subject to the Clean Water Act because it is a naturally occurring,
jurisdictional, blue-line stream, and a tributary of the Dan River. Before the headwaters of Little
Belews Creek were buried by Duke Energy's coal ash, people enjoyed fishing in Little Belews
Creek. For years, Duke Energy used Little Belews Creek as a discharge pipe, relying on an ash
basin discharge structure from the ash basin that dumps pollution into Little Belews Creek well
before it meets the Dan River, and only attempting to comply with the Clean Water Act at a
fictional Outfall 003 in the Dan River—a permit arrangement that illegally papered over this
blatant and fundamental violation of the Clean Water Act.
The draft permit recognizes, as it must, that Little Belews Creek (referred to in the permit
as an unnamed tributary) is a water of the United States that Duke Energy is polluting with its
ash basin discharge.1 The draft permit and outfall map correctly relocate Outfall 003 (the ash
basin discharge point), and the planned Outfall 003A from the future lined retention basin, to
positions that reflect the reality of Duke Energy's discharge. It also states that the receiving
' Draft Permit at 2;Fact Sheet at 1.
3

stream is the unnamed tributary, not the Dan River—though its name, as the surrounding
community knows, is Little Belews Creek.2
This long-overdue application of the Clean Water Act should have real significance,
finally providing water quality protections for Little Belews Creek. Although key limits are still
lacking, this draft permit imposes much improved protective limits based on the potential to
exceed water quality standards.3 These limits recognize that all waters of the United States need
protection and that Duke Energy cannot appropriate jurisdictional streams for its own private
use.
However, we understand that Duke Energy is seeking to evade compliance with these
limits for its coal ash pollution of Little Belews Creek with a request for a special order by
consent("SOC").4 Any proposed SOC would take away with one hand what the permit has
recognized with the other. It would again treat Little Belews Creek as a wastewater ditch by
removing Clean Water Act protections from it and allowing Duke Energy to treat Little Belews
Creek, a historic community resource and a water of the United States, as Duke Energy's private
coal ash pollution dumping ground. This is a blatant and egregious violation of the Clean Water
Act and an outrageous offense to the water resources of North Carolina and the surrounding
community.
Moreover, the public cannot meaningfully evaluate this draft permit without knowing the
status and content of any potential separate order that would undo the limits in this permit. This
lack of transparency hides crucial information from the neighboring community and the public at
large. DEQ must either release the SOC application and draft SOC promptly or—better still—
make clear that it will continue to protect Little Belews Creek and will not issue any SOC
regarding these outfalls. If DEQ gives in to Duke Energy's request and releases a draft SOC, it
must reopen the comment period for this NPDES permit so the public can evaluate the two
together.
DEQ should deny this request and require Duke Energy to treat its wastewater
discharges using readily available treatment technology in order to comply with the
necessary limits set out in the permit—and to protect this community and Little Belews
Creek. The surrounding community in Stokes County has suffered for years from Duke
Energy's coal ash pollution and DEQ's lack of concern. As we have previously explained
in comments, it contains a number of families of color and of limited economic means.
Their well-being and the pollution of their community have been disregarded for decades
by Duke Energy and DEQ. This must stop.
All of Duke Energy's decanting and dewatering of its coal ash lagoon will take place
in the coming months and years, and must be subject to pollutant limitations at least as
protective as those in this draft permit to protect this water of the United States and the
surrounding community.
2 Draft Permit at 1.
3 Draft Permit at Conditions A.(3.)&A.(4.).
4 See, e.g.,Draft Permit at 7,Condition A.(3.)note("unless specific interim action levels are granted in a separate
order").
4

The proper, lawful recognition that the Clean Water Act protects Little Belews Creek is
decades overdue. In that time, Duke Energy has had the benefit of polluting as it wishes,
dumping harmful contaminants into Little Belews Creek without monitoring or limits while
wrongly treating it as if it were a wastewater effluent channel. Waiving or delaying these limits
now would be unjustified and unlawful. To fully realize the purpose and requirements of the
Clean Water Act, DEQ must ensure these limits take effect immediately.
Imposing adequate limits: Although DEQ has taken a major step forward by recognizing
Little Belews Creek, it must do more to protect against toxic pollution. Outfall 003 still lacks
important numeric limits on pollution: During decanting, Duke Energy could pollute without
limit by discharging arsenic, mercury, chromium, boron, bromide, zinc, barium, antimony.5
During dewatering, Duke Energy could pollute by discharging unlimited mercury and boron, and
an irrationally high daily amount for arsenic.6 And from its new lined retention basin, Duke
Energy could pollute by discharging unlimited amounts of arsenic, mercury, chromium, zinc,
barium, and antimony. DEQ must impose limits on these pollutants to protect public health and
the environment.
Additionally, DEQ should set a daily maximum daily flow limit for decanting—at the
same amount used in the Reasonable Potential Analysis—to ensure the pollution does not exceed
the RPA's predictions. This draft permit contains no flow limits for decanting. Monitoring data
from decanting at Sutton show Duke Energy discharged as much as 45 percent more than the
daily flow assumptions used in the RPA.8 Without a flow limit, the same could happen at
Belews Creek. The water quality-based limits established for decanting based on the RPA would
be invalid and underestimate pollution if Duke Energy could discharge more than predicted in
the RPA.
Little Belews Creek needs these long-overdue protections now more than ever. Over the
next few years Duke Energy will decant and dewater the ash ponds through Outfall 003, into
Little Belews Creek. Having recognized that Little Belews Creek is a water of the United States,
DEQ cannot let this flush of pollution occur without the protections that it has long denied to this
waterway.
B. DEO has Proposed Inadequate Limits and Monitoring for the Future Dan
River Outfall 006.
The draft permit would allow Duke Energy to construct a new Outfall 006 that discharges
directly to the Dan River, avoiding discharge to Little Belews Creek. Although with this change
Duke Energy will end its years of illegal pollution and misappropriation of Little Belews Creek,
5 Draft Permit at Condition A.(3.).
6 Draft Permit at Condition A.(4.).
Draft Permit at Condition A.(5.).
$See DENR,Fact Sheet for NPDES Permit Development, Major Modification, NPDES No. NC0001422,3 (Feb. 18, •
2015)(reflecting DENR used a daily maximum flow rate of 14.14 MGD for RPA),available at
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/W ater%20Quality/NPDES%20Coal%20Ash/2014%20Duke%20Energy%20Renewal s%2
Oand%20Modifications/Sutton/Sutton%20WW%20%23NC001422-final%20fact%2osheet.pdf; Attachment 1,L.V.
Sutton Energy Complex,Outfall 001,Effluent Monitoring Data for December 2015,January 2016,February 2016
(for example,for January 2016,showing an average daily flow rate of 19.98 MGD and maximum daily flow rate
20.49 MGD).
5

Duke Energy will also use dilution as the solution to pollution, avoiding protective limits based
on a changed outfall location. Once Duke Energy constructs Outfall 006 and discontinues
discharges from Outfall 003A, DEQ proposes to impose much weaker limits on Duke Energy
just because the Dan River's flows supposedly will dilute the pollution.
At Outfall 006, the draft permit would let Duke Energy discharge without limit arsenic,
mercury, selenium, and other heavy metals. In this draft permit DEQ continues to rely solely on
the dilution available in the receiving stream and water quality standards (when they exist) to
determine what protections to impose. But under the Clean Water Act, DEQ has a responsibility
to make Duke Energy use the best available technology to remove these toxic pollutants before
they enter the River.
Moreover, DEQ proposes to give Duke Energy two full years to submit the required and
essential Form 2C for this new outfall, as well as for Outfall 003A from the lined retention
basin.9 As we have commented previously regarding Outfall 003A, this delay is unacceptable.
To understand what and how much Duke Energy is polluting from its new outfalls, DEQ must
require Duke Energy to submit Form 2C more promptly.
This uncontrolled pollution of the Dan River is especially unacceptable because the Dan
River has already suffered significant contamination from Duke Energy's mismanagement of
coal ash. As we have detailed in previous comments, the coal ash catastrophe at the Dan River
Site dumped more than 20 million gallons of wastewater and 39,000 tons of coal ash into this
River. Bromide from Duke Energy's coal ash caused carcinogens to enter drinking water
systems downstream of the Belews Creek plant in the towns of Eden and Madison along the Dan
River. Contaminants associated with coal ash—including thallium, lead, aluminum, and
copper—exceed water quality standards in the Dan River immediately downstream of the
Belews Creek coal ash site.
Given the history of environmental harm at Belews Creek, and the vulnerable
communities surrounding the plant, DEQ must impose strong, protective limits for Duke
Energy's discharge into the Dan River through Outfall 006. Although the major flush of decades
of pollution from the ash pond may be partially over before the new pipe is operational, Belews
Creek operations still pose a serious threat to the environment and will do so as long as the plant
burns coal and as long as the plant discharges into North Carolina's waters from its coal ash
lagoon. DEQ must protect the Dan River going forward.
C. DEO Cannot Delay or Undo Key Federal ELG Protections Against Toxic
Pollution.
With this draft permit, DEQ unnecessarily delays—and threatens to undo entirely—
critical protections against toxic pqution at Belews Creek.
At Belews Creek, DEQ previously determined that Duke Energy is capable of installing
the necessary technology to meet new effluent limitations for scrubber wastewater—an
especially toxic wastewater stream—by next year, November 2019. The 2016 and 2017 draft
permits would have required Duke Energy to comply by that date. Duke Energy has known it
9 Draft Permit at 10& 12,Conditions A.(5.)&A.(7.).
6

needed to meet these limits, and should have been preparing to meet these limits, since EPA
issued the federal effluent limitation guidelines in 2015. In its comments on the previous draft
permit, Duke Energy did not object to the 2019 compliance date or provide any information
showing it could not comply.
Nonetheless, this new draft permit would give Duke Energy an additional year, until
November 2020, to meet these scrubber wastewater pollution limits.10 Duke Energy has
provided no additional information to DEQ, and has not suggested it is unable to install the
needed technology by November 2019. And DEQ, in its fact sheet, does not justify the delay
other than to say: "Installation and optimization of this system would require time, it has been
determined that November 1, 2020 is an appropriate effective date for complying with the new
FGD limits."11 This justification has not changed at all since the 2017 draft—only the year has
changed.12 No good reason exists to let Duke Energy put off installing this known and available
technology for another year.
But in reality, because the draft permit also allows DEQ to reopen and modify the permit
if the Trump Administration's EPA undoes these key protections, it threatens to make those
protections meaningless. The Trump EPA has announced that it intends to complete its
reconsideration of the ELG Rule in response to industry wishes by November 2020 just when
Duke Energy would need to comply with the current limits for scrubber wastewater under this
draft permit. This reopener provision is an embarrassingly transparent attempt to make this
permit coincide with the political agenda of the current administration of EPA, rather than
protect the people and waters of North Carolina. DEQ should require Duke Energy to meet
ELG limits for its scrubber wastewater by November 2019, as DEO originally proposed
and as Duke Energy can achieve. DEO need not agree in advance to contemplate
reopening and weakening the permit simply to accommodate the Trump EPA's plans to
eliminate water protections.
D. The Permit Wrongly Purports to Grant Duke Energy a Variance for
Thermal Discharges, Despite Recognizing That There Is Not Sufficient
Evidence for One.
As we have stated in previous comments and reiterate here, DEQ cannot continue to
exempt Duke Energy from the Clean Water Act and allow it to discharge superheated water from
Belews Creek. DEQ has recognized since its 2016 draft permit for Belews Creek that there is
not sufficient evidence showing that a balanced, indigenous population of aquatic life will exist
if the variance is granted. Ignoring this lack of evidence, DEQ's new proposed permit once
again attempts to grant Duke Energy an exemption for its superheated discharges from the
cooling water outfall that discharges into Belews Lake. The fact sheet for the proposed permit
states that"based on the biological study submitted in 2016, the Water Sciences Section of the
DWR concluded that the information provided in the latest report is insufficient to determine
existence of the Balanced and Indigenous population offish and macroinvertebrates in the
receiving stream."13 Yet the proposed permit attempts to implicitly grant Duke Energy a
10 Draft Permit at Condition A.(2.).
Fact Sheet at 3.
12 See 2017 Fact Sheet at 4.
13 Fact Sheet at 5 (emphasis added).
7

•
thermal variance without the necessary evidence, stating that"[i]n order to continue the Thermal
Variance beyond the term of this permit the facility shall develop and conduct comprehensive
316(a) studies."14
To the extent that this statement purports to allow a thermal variance for the duration of
this permit term—before any demonstration of a balanced, indigenous population has been
made—DEQ is unlawfully putting the cart before the horse.
As the Clean Water Act regulations make clear:
"Thermal discharge effluent limitations or standards established in permits may be less
stringent than those required by applicable standards and limitations if the discharger
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the director that such effluent limitations are more
stringent than necessary to assure the protection and propagation of a balanced,
indigenous community of shellfish, fish and wildlife in and on the body of water into
which the discharge is made."15
Duke Energy has made no such demonstration here, and cannot receive a thermal
variance unless and until it meets this requirement. This is especially true given the history of
damage to the fish and other aquatic life in Belews Lake that has resulted from Duke Energy's
coal ash operations at Belews Creek. In 2007, EPA classified Belews Lake a "proven ecological
damage case"due to selenium poisoning from leaking coal ash pits at the Belews Creek plant.l6
Selenium contamination from the coal ash pits ultimately eliminated 19 of the 20 fish species
present in Belews Lake.17 Selenium bio-accumulates and persists in the environment, and birds
that feed in Belews Lake continue to experience adverse effects from selenium poisoning.18
DEQ must abandon its proposal to give Duke Energy a variance for its thermal discharges,
without knowing how much this will further affect the fish population in Belews Lake.
E. DEQ Must Require the Best Technology Available for Protecting Fish from
Duke Energy's Cooling Water Intake.
We support DEQ's recognition that it cannot justifiably let Duke Energy avoid even
submitting required studies until the next permit renewal five years from now. Even though
Duke Energy could have and should have prepared to submit these studies sooner, DEQ has
taken a step in the right direction by requiring Duke Energy to submit the necessary information
w• 19
within 3.5 years. DEQ must follow through on implementing the cooling water intake rule by
establishing strong protections and requiring prompt compliance with those protections.
14 Draft Permit at 22.
15 40 C.F.R. § 125.73(a).
16 USEPA Office of Solid Waste,Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments 25 (July 9,2007).
17 Rachel Cernansky,National Geographic News,Largest U.S.Coal Ash Pond to Close,But Future Rules Still
Undecided(Aug.9,2012),available at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2012/08/120809-little-
bl ue-run-coal-ash-pond-to-close.
18 Attachment 2,Barbara Gottlieb et al.,Physicians for Social Responsibility and Earthjustice,Coal Ash:The Toxic
Threat to Our Health and Environment, 12(Sept. 2010).
19 Draft Permit at Condition A.(16.).
8

Four years ago, Duke Energy knew it had an obligation to prepare and provide the
required studies to DEQ. The rule itself provided "advance notice to affected facilities about
permit application materials and compliance schedules," and EPA stated in rulemaking that
"July 14, 2018 reflects the date after which all permit application requirements must be
submitted as specified at § 125.95." 79 Fed. Reg. 48,359. Granting Duke Energy an additional
3.5 years to prepare and submit these studies is a generous extension.
But the draft permit fails to impose any requirements, interim or final, to reduce harm to
fish and other creatures. For permits issued before July 14, 2018, when DEQ has let the polluter
delay submitting information, DEQ must"establish interim BTA protections on a site-specific
basis based on the Director's best professional judgment." 40 C.F.R. § 125.98(b)(5). But as
DEQ well knows, July 14 is past. For this permit and any other permit issued from July 14
forward, DEQ must go beyond interim requirements and include final impingement and
entrainment protections in each permit. 40 C.F.R. § 125.9S(b)(2). The rule is clear: if issued.
after July 14, 2018, "the permit must include conditions to implement and ensure compliance
with the impingement mortality standard at § 125.94(c) and the entrainment standard at
§ 125.94(d)." Id. (emphasis added).
Especially given the delay granted to Duke Energy, and the cooling water intake rule's
- already protracted timeline, DEQ must establish protections in that require more than the
existing, inadequate intake structure and fully implement the cooling water intake rule.
DEQ should not repeat its past mistake of rubber-stamping primitive, plainly inadequate
infrastructure as "best available technology." Outside the cooling water context, DEQ has done
this in a previous draft permit for the leaking, unlined, and flood-prone coal ash lagoons at Duke
Energy's H.F. Lee site. Duke Energy later stated those lagoons were not suitable for the long-
term storage of coal ash and is now required to remove all the ash from those lagoons. More
recently, DEQ declared the outdated cooling water intake structure at Allen to be "best
technology available" for interim cooling water intake requirements, with next to no analysis.
Section 316(b) requires that the"location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling
water intake structures reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse
environmental impact." 33 U.S.C. § 1326(b); 40 C.F.R. § 401.14. DEQ loses credibility and
acts arbitrarily and capriciously when it refuses to meaningfully evaluate Duke Energy's existing
technology and determine what improvements are available and required to minimize harm to
fish and other creatures.
In addition, DEQ's evaluation must comply with EPA's instructions on Endangered
Species Act coordination, available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
04/documents/cooling-water_esa-instructional-memo_12-11-2014.pdf. And as the cooling water
rule requires, the final permit must state that"Nothing in this permit authorizes take for the
purposes of a facility's compliance with the Endangered Species Act." 40 C.F.R. § 125.98(b)(1).
F. DEO Must Require Duke Energy to Implement Physical/Chemical
Treatment Technology for Decanting and Dewatering, and Clarify
Notification Requirements.
9

Though previous draft permits across the state clearly required that decanting and
dewatering discharges receive physical/chemical treatment, DEQ has now qualified this
requirement. DEQ added the qualifier that physical/chemical treatment is required "if
necessary,"to assure state Water Quality Standards or interim action levels (for decanting) or
permit limits (for dewatering) are not violated.20
As already seen at Duke Energy's Riverbend facility, Duke Energy's pumping and
dumping of coal ash polluted water from its lagoon is dangerous and requires treatment. At
Riverbend, Duke Energy's dumping resulted in spikes of arsenic pollution in Mountain Island
Lake, a water body already polluted with arsenic from Duke Energy's coal ash lagoon.21 After
the spikes occurred, a treatment mechanism was installed. This unnecessary pollution event
underscores that Duke Energy's dumping and pumping of coal ash polluted water requires
treatment from the outset to prevent pollution of North Carolina's waterways.
DEQ should revise the permit to require Duke Energy to implement known, available,
and entirely feasible technology to control and monitor pollution. DEQ has a responsibility to
require Duke Energy to use the best available technology to remove these harmful pollutants
before they enter Little Belews Creek and the Dan River. Duke Energy has used treatment
technologies at Riverbend and Sutton, and Dominion has used such technologies in Virginia.
For this dramatic pollution event, DEQ should require physical/chemical treatment of Duke
Energy's dumping without exception. It should not make water pollution treatment depend on a
vaguely described contingency.
The notification requirement proposed at Belews Creek will only be as helpful in
protecting water quality as the limits in the permit. Recognizing that arsenic, selenium, mercury,
nickel, and lead are toxic coal ash pollutants, this condition requires Duke Energy to notify DEQ
and stop discharge if the pollution approaches the limits for one of these pollutants. But as
detailed above, for decanting, the permit would allow unlimited arsenic, mercury, and nickel
pollution, and for dewatering it allows unlimited mercury pollution. Even worse, the decanting
notification requirement is tied to an undisclosed possible separate order that apparently would
weaken or remove protections for Little Belews Creek. The notification requirement is
meaningless unless limits are established, and not weakened, for these pollutants. DEO should
establish limits for the key pollutants identified in this condition, and expand the
notification requirement to cover all pollutants for which limits exist.
G. DEO Gives No Rational Basis for Increasing the Speed of Decanting and
Dewatering to a Potentially Dangerous Rate.
While decanting is a necessary step toward stopping the outdated practice of sluicing wet
ash through massive unlined basins beside North Carolina's waterways, and should be done
without delay, it must be done safely. This is especially important for dewatering at Belews
Creek, because of the 2014 Dan River catastrophe. Yet in this draft permit, DEQ proposes an
20
Draft Permit at 7,9.
21 David Boraks,Coal Ash Pond Drainage Blamed for Arsenic in Mt.Island Lake,WFAE,July 7,2016,available at
http://wfae.org/post/coal-ash-pond-drainage-blamed-arsenic-mt-island-lake#stream/0.
10

astonishing increase to the speed of decanting and dewatering, from the one foot per week
approved at Sutton and proposed at other sites, to one foot per day.22
This speed of decanting and dewatering appears unprecedented before this year. In 2015,
EPA imposed conditions on decanting and dewatering at several facilities, including that
"drawdown will be limited to one foot per seven days to ensure structural stability."23 In permits
issued for Sutton, Dan River and Riverbend, and draft permits proposed for several other
facilities, DEQ has acted consistently with EPA's conditions by limiting the rate of decanting
and dewatering to one foot per week.24 In the 2015 permit for Sutton, DEQ affirmatively stated
the one-foot per week rate was to "maintain the integrity of the dams."25
This important limitation to protect water quality and dam safety has not impeded Duke
Energy's progress at these other sites: Duke Energy has successfully decanted these lagoons and
excavation is well underway. There is no reason to eliminate this protection for Little Belews
Creek and the Dan River.
Now DEQ provides no explanation for accelerating the rate, contrary to EPA's prior
approval of DEQ's plan for decanting, conditioned on the one foot per week rate. Nothing in the
permit materials shows this faster rate will be safe. DEQ must demonstrate a rational basis for
the change, including that it considered the impact of the increased speed to the structural safety
of the dam and water quality of the receiving waters. DEQ's justification for the change
becomes especially important because this change goes against previous DEQ and EPA actions.
Without a sufficient rational basis, DEQ's actions are arbitrary and capricious, and, more to the
point, threaten the safety of the basin and receiving waters.
DEQ must revise the permit to include appropriate decanting and dewatering rate limits
to protect the receiving waters and the structural integrity of the dams or provide a convincing
basis for DEQ's total about-face. Absent a rational basis for accelerating the speed of decanting
and dewatering, DEQ must reinstate the previous rate of one foot per week for both decanting
and dewatering.
H. The Draft Permit Gives Duke Energy Amnesty Going Fonu arc! for Illegal
Flows of Pollution into Public Waters.
22 Draft Permit at 7,9.
23 Attachment 3,Letter from James D.Giattina,Director,Water Protection Division,EPA Region 4,to Tom Reeder,
Assistant Secretary for the Environment,North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality(Dec. 14,2015).
24 See Attachment 4,L.V. Sutton Energy Complex NPDES Permit(NC0001422),4,6,7, 8, 10(Sept.29,2017);Dan
River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit(NC0003468),6, 8(Oct.27,2016);Riverbend Steam Station NPDES
Permit(NC0004961),5,6(Feb. 12,2016);see also L.V.Sutton Energy Complex 2017 Draft NPDES Permit
(NC0001422),4,6;Belews Creek Steam Station 2017 Draft NPDES Permit(NC0024406),6, 8;Cape Fear Steam
Electric Power Plant 2016 Draft NPDES Permit(NC0003433),8, 10;H.F.Lee Energy Complex 2016 Draft NPDES
Permit(NC0003417),5,7;Roxboro Steam Electric Generating Plant 2017 Draft NPDES Permit(NC0003425),5,7;
W.H.Weatherspoon Plant 2016 Draft NPDES Permit(NC0005363),5,all available at
https://deq.nc.gov/about/d ivisions/water-resources/water-resources-hot-topics/dwr-coal-ash-regulation/duke-energy-
npdes-permits-for-facilities-with-coal-ash-ponds/duke-e nergy-npdes-modi fications-renewals.
25 See L.V. Sutton Energy Complex NPDES Permit(NC0001422),3,n.7,4,n.8,5,n.5,6,n.5 (Dec.3,2015),
available at
https://fi les.nc.gov/ncdeq/W ater%20Quality/NPDES%20Coal%20Ash/2014%20Duke%20Energy%20Renewals%2
Oand%20Modifications/Sutton/Sutton%20 W W%20%23NC001422%20permit%20signed-2015.pdf.
11
ti

.
As explained in our comments regarding the Buck and Belews Creek Special Order on
Consent("SOC"), at Belews Creek Duke Energy has gone so far as to actually build an illegal
toe drain to direct flows of coal ash polluted water into Little Belews Creek and the Dan River.
These flows pollute these waters and their tributaries and surrounding wetlands. They are not
authorized outfalls in Duke Energy's Belews Creek permit and therefore are illegal.
Indeed, Duke Energy's practice of building illegal discharges into neighboring waterways
formed the basis of criminal charges brought against Duke Energy companies and their guilty
pleas to coal ash crimes in 2015 at the Asheville, Lee, and Riverbend sites.
DEQ acknowledges the illegality of Duke Energy's toe drains. On August 16, 2013,
DEQ filed a verified complaint with the Mecklenburg County Superior Court that asserts Duke
Energy intentionally constructed engineered discharges from the Belews Creek coal ash
lagoon.26 Under oath, DEQ stated Duke Energy's unpermitted engineered discharges violate
state law and that"without . . . taking corrective action,"these seeps "pose[] a serious danger to
the health, safety and welfare of the people of the State of North Carolina and serious harm to the
water resources of the State."27 As a result, DEQ asked the court to enter a permanent injunction
requiring Duke Energy"to abate the violations of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, [and] NPDES
Permits" at Belews Creek.28
However, since filing the complaint in 2013, DEQ has done nothing to require Duke
Energy to stop violating the law and its permit at Belews Creek. Instead now, with this draft
permit, DEQ proposes for the first time to legalize these illegal structures going forward and
permit them—and not treat them as ongoing violations of law to be addressed in the SOC.
Correctly, DEQ's SOC treats the so-called non-constructed flows or seeps as ongoing
violations of law. The SOC fines Duke Energy for those flows of polluted water and requires
that Duke Energy eliminate them or address them subsequently if they are not eliminated by the
"decanting" of the coal ash lagoons,the removal of some of the water in the coal ash lagoons.
The SOC rightly recognizes that these seeps "cause[] or contribute[] to pollution of waters of this
State."29 But the same is true of the illegal flows of water Duke Energy's illegal structures
collect and convey.
There is no reason why the constructed violations of law should be treated differently. If
anything, the constructed flows are even more illegal because Duke Energy has gone so far as to
build illegal structures to facilitate the flow of coal ash polluted water into lakes, rivers, and
streams.
The constructed flows orceps should be treated the same as the non-constructed seeps,
as legal violations—in the past, n w, and going forward—that Duke Energy must correct and be
held accountable for. DEQ should not grant Duke Energy amnesty going forward for some of its
most blatant violations of its permits and the Clean Water Act.
26 Attachment 5,Complaint&Motion fol.Injunctive Relief,State of North Carolina ex rel.N.C. DENR, DWQ v.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC,No. 13 CVS 14661¶¶ 131-33 (Mecklenberg Co.,August 16,2013).
27 Id. ¶ 197.
28 Id Prayer for Relief¶2.
29 SOC¶ 1.n.
•
12

In no instance can DEQ justify giving Duke Energy a permit to continue directing coal
ash polluted water through structures that it has illegally built into North Carolina's lakes, rivers,
and streams. Indeed, since Duke Energy has collected illegal flows of coal ash polluted water by
building structures to gather and direct those flows,these flows through Duke Energy's
structures should be the easiest to remediate. DEO should remove Outfall 111 from the
permit and require Duke Energy to gather those flows before they reach Little Belews
Creek and either direct them to a treatment facility or return them to the lagoons.
I. The Permit Must Address a Limit for Bromide Discharges.
We strongly support the addition of instream monitoring for bromide to protect drinking
water for communities downstream. Downstream of the Belews Creek coal ash lagoon,
approximately 90,000 people rely on drinking water intakes that have had problems with
elevated levels of carcinogens known as trihalomethanes. When bromide mixes with chlorine in
treated drinking water supplies, it forms these trihalomethanes.30 Monitoring for bromides is an
important step in understanding the bromide discharges from Belews Creek and protecting
drinking water from Duke Energy's pollution.
However,the draft permit sets no discharge limit on the ash pond outfall. Despite this
known threat to downstream drinking water supplies, it still does not appear that DEQ plans to
conduct a Reasonable Potential Analysis to determine what limits need to be set for bromide
discharges from Belews Creek. Longstanding Clean Water Act regulations require agencies to
establish water quality-based permit limits on bromide if necessary to meet narrative water
quality standards, including standards to protect human health.3' Under the ELG rule, EPA
reaffirmed that this established requirement applies to bromide, and instructed permitting
authorities to develop permit limits on a site-specific basis for bromide when necessary to meet
narrative water quality standards.32 North Carolina has put in place exactly such narrative
criteria for water quality to protect people from unsafe levels of pollutants such as brominated
trihalomethanes: "Human health standards: the concentration of toxic substances shall not
exceed the level necessary to protect human health through exposure routes of fish tissue
consumption, water consumption, or other route identified as appropriate for the water body."33
In accordance with these state and federal laws, DEQ must revise the draft permit to include a
30 EPA,Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source
Category, 80 Fed.Reg.67,838,67,872,67,886(Nov. 3,2015)("Bromide discharges from steam electric power
plants can contribute to the formation of carcinogenic DBPs[disinfection byproducts,e.g.,trihalomethanes] in
public drinking water systems,"and"[s]tudies indicate that exposure to THMs[trihalomethanes] and other DBPs
from chlorinated water is associated with human bladder cancer.").
31 40 C.F.R. § 122.44(d)(1)(i)("[e]ach NPDES permit shall include conditions meeting the following requirements.
:any requirements in addition to or more stringent than promulgated effluent limitations guidelines or standards
under sections 301,304,306,307,318,and 405 of[the] CWA necessary to: (1)Achieve water quality standards
established under section 303 of the CWA,including State narrative criteria for water quality.").
32 80 Fed.Reg.at 67,886-87("[W]ater quality-based effluent limitations for steam electric power plant discharges
may be required under the regulations at 40 CFR 122.44(d)(1),where necessary to meet either numeric criteria(e.g.,
for bromide,TDS or conductivity)or narrative criteria in state water quality standards. . . .These narrative criteria
may be used to develop water quality-based effluent limitations on a site-specific basis for the discharge of
pollutants that impact drinking water sources,such as bromide.").
3 15A N.C.Admin.Code 2B .0208(a)(2).
13

limit for bromide sufficient to protect everyone who drinks water downstream, particularly
during dewatering and decanting.
J. Compliance Boundary
North Carolina implements some parts of its Groundwater Protection Rule ("2L Rule")
through permits issued to industrial facilities under the solid waste disposal statutes or the
NPDES permit program. The 2L Rule directs that "[t]he [compliance] boundary shall be
established by the Director, or his designee at the time of permit issuance." The"compliance
boundary" is a"boundary around a disposal system at and beyond which groundwater quality
standards may not be exceeded." We support the additions of a compliance boundary map and
related condition A.(25.) as important steps toward enforcing the 2L Rule at Belews Creek Steam
Station.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Leslie Griffith
Staff Attorney
14

a
Owlruu nal.Page I..17 C(101 NO t'ONI/losirculmun cssaing timer.mn-contact cooling water.and treated wastewater from outralls the,.and 0041
EFFLUENT
NPDES Permit No. NC0001422 Discharge No. 001 Month December Year 2015
Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover
(Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No. 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified Laboratories (1)Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2)L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3) Environmental Testing Solutions,Inc.
Check If ORC has Changed Person(51 Collecting Samples Stall
/ Fl. W'/DIStRGE FROM SITE.
51,11 ORIGINAL.and ONT.COPY o,. (x) 6t-'y i.„' r A 'Y k r '1----- -7-r -(.
ATTN Central Piles (SIGN ATL'ftliOfOPT RATORINRI1SI'ONSIHLE.CIiAR(iF.) DAIL
. Pisision of Water Resources Bs This Signature.I Certify That This Report Is
11,17 Mail Sento:Center. Accurate And Complete To The Best Of Sly Knowledge.
Raleigh.NC 27699-1617 Hecaaxa of,f,-.umenied senator.n;iv,o„n era Ina:.a EPA pnaedwe,.
• a,,not(n'.:hie n,41.t4,1e1).ovals the mow,cera:}sot the data,ertain.d el chi.[MIH
5114Si1 50050 11111110 I1040I 110776 00510 07601/ 0062`• 01610 00667 0010) MEW
(/per ahit
Anis al Operator • I'I,n, How rola! told Nliraie•
Time I time OR(' Oil)Normal tit,I TOewate( Temp Oil lc Sul-smiled Total Atalahl Nitrite- Thal olid,',ev .Acme
Dam 2400 Cin.k . tin Sar (1n Sac nail,Rate 0.1.1i Hale I(Poem pH louse Si ants Nitrogen Nungen Nitrogen Phosphorous Oxygen To.uces
His TIrs 17R;N 511ill 51(,1) '( Onus ntgA. mgil. mg/1nlfJI.. my,'I. ntg/1. mg/1. Pas,%Fall
1 06:00 5 Y 0.00
2 06:00 8 Y 0.00
3 06:00 9 V 0.00
4 N 0.00
5 N 0.00
6 N 0.00
7 06:00 10.5 Y 0.00
• 8 06:00 8 Y 19.70 13.6 6.84 PASS •
9 07:30 8 Y 19.70 14.4
10 07:30 8 V 19.70 14.8 7.10 <5 <2.9 0.7 0.7 0.05 (1.04 9.70
i II 06:00 8 1' 19.70 21.8
12 N 19.70
13 N 20.08
14 07:1)0 8.5 1' 19.83 17.3 7.08 <5 3.0 0.6 0.6 0.11 1.11 8.50
15 05:30 8 V 20,02 19.1
16 06:00 8 V 20.42 17.5
17 06:00 8 Y 20.42 18.3
18 06:00 8 'V 20.42 19,1
19 N 20.42
20 N 211,42
21 06:00 8 Y 20.42 14.9 6.67 9 <2.9 OS 0.5 0.02 1.02 9.70
22 06:00 8 Y 20.42 16,4
23 05:00 8 V 20.24 16.4
24 H 19.70
25 H 19.70
26 N 20.24
27 N 20.42
28 04:30 13 Y 20.49 19.8 6.90 <5 9.5 0.7 0.7 0.05 1.56 8.00
29 05:00 10 Y 20.49 20.1
30 04:1)0 8 1' 20.49 21.0
31 05:00 7 Y 20,49 21.0
Average 15.601 17.8 _ 2.25 3.13 0.6 0.6 0.06 0.93 8.98
Maximum 20.49 21.8 7.10 9.0 9.5 0.7 0.7 0.11 1.56 9.70 ■
Minimum 0.00 13.6 6.67 <5 <2.9 0.5 0.5 0.02 0.04 8.00
Comp.(C)/Grab IG) G G G G G G G G G G
Monthly Limit 2.1 See Permit 6.0-9.0 15.0 30.0 See Permit
Pacihty Stales.4l'tease Check one of the follow'mg1
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet prima requirements X
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies du NOT meet permit requirements •
"I certify,under penalty of law,that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supeniston in accordance with a system designed
do assure that qualified personnel properly gather and esnlume the information submitted. (lazed on my inquiry 01 the person or persons aho'manane the system,
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted us.to the hest of my knowledge and belief.true.accurate.and
complete, I em an ate that there are uendisam penalties fur submitting lake information.m lolling the possibility of lines and imprisonment for knowing s iolauons"
• Jesse E.Huntley,11 J L/ It�,,t �� It
I /1-"L[2
Permiuce(Please print or type; Signature of Permtntee• i Pate
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington,INC 28401 [phone] December 31.2016
t'crnutlee Address Phone N'umhet Penal lisp nate
•(Oki-n.ue,i.n laiar and doramenl,,..,aunnx.n lacLi,a,rapnred tel 15A NCM'tG 0201
'•t)..gnea 5y mherthat the pOOlurar,drkpaorr,e,.agnahre auaurny marl he,nk,with the.rate;.et 17A Sl'At'25'I51u h, iiia
•••(hl,-rine on(Ya,rnm</an,nunc,.Jutun edam! ford Aih.:sal(Normae result,ac atwallr Tts:a xe.wual rlaaanu
Ila:monthly average for fecal coliform is to he reported ase()F.(141f TRIC 1114411 Lie.oily designated units in the reptwling larihly•penult for rep,xtmg data

,
Outran 1)01.Page 2.11 1115 ll.IN1,IMI NI 1(IU'p i t'_•thduu, xt 101)019.l.,8_+1111.1T eo..ansf.treafst! atilstoter(rn_slt141,, . l:1414
EFFLUENT
NPDES Permit Nu. NC0001422 Discharge No. 001 Month December Year 2015
Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover •
Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified Laboratories (1)Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2)L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3)
Check If ORC has Changed Person Is)Collecting Samples Staff
--
W/ . ROE FROM SITE
Mail URICINAI.and ONI1 COPY to. (x) er'')Ch r� t ,Z7—
)47
ATTN:Central Files (SIGNATURE OF U1'LRA7()K IN RESPONSIBLE Cl•IARCt-t 1/ATE
Division of Water Resource.. - By This Signature.I Certify That This Report Is
1617 Mail SCI,We Center Accurate And Complete To The Best Of sty Knowledge. •
Raleigh,NC 27691).1617 name ofdt.umemod saoau:'n.:o Io.va,m and loos or PPA p'mines.
n is not possible to ahsi Joel).null the mow asur.r.v ci the Woo..vrwncd a all,.I Nlla
CUN11:R 0111)2 111147 01105 01051 01027 1111117 01042 O11)2 111070
1'.xal Total Total rota) betal [lead 10111 rola) Total
Dam Mcrevns Arsenic Selenium bon load Cadnuun Aluminum C'opper Zen Turhutos
nolle !WI. PO, mgt. pg0. put. pod. Ilu0. ng/t. NrC
1
•3
_ .
4
5 +
6
7 .
R
9
•
10 0.947 <10 <10 0.169 <10 <10 68 <10 <10 13
11
12
13
11 1.05 <10 <10 0.216 <10 <10 87 <10 <10 1.8 •
15
16
17 •
18
19
20
•
21 1.37 <10 <10 0.194 <10 <10 75 <10 <10 1.2
77
23
•
24
25
26
27
28 3.43 <10 <10 0.602 <10 <10 314 <10 <10 9.1
29
30
31
Average 1.70 0 0 0.295 0 0 136 0 0 3.3
Maximum 3.33 <10 <10 0.602 <10 <10 314 <10 <10 9.1
Minimum 0.95 <10 <10 0.169 <10 <10 68 <10 <10 1.2
Comp.(CI/Grab(G) 0 0 G G 0 0 G 0 0 G
Monthly Limit 47.0 10.0 5.0 1.0 2511 2 0 See Permit •
Facility Status:(Please Check one of the following)
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements X
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet permit requirements '
'I certify.under penalty of law,that this document and all attachments were prepared under my dvectins or supers triton in accordance with a system designed
to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and esahtate the information submitted. Based on my Inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system.
or those persons directly responsible for galhenng the information,the informatutn submitted is.to the hest of my knowledge and belief.true,accurate.and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information.including the passihdity of lines and tmpnsonm• t for knowing violations
Jesse E.Huntley.II 1 Li - [ A (i t/ 2/2)4
Permittee(Please print or type) Signature of Permittee'• Dale •
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington,NC 28401 [phone] December 31,2016
Pernu0ee Address Men Number Perndt tap Um:
•01C must visit l'atlny and i tenrnt visnatitros of Enda)as resumed sr 15A N1'AC 00 0311
••II nrnesi h)oiler Illam the.rtrnetu••.delegation it srgnauvy audunt)IMO be o41 file wish the;tare per ISA NCA('211 OSlo i is.;2,-11,
•••Chlorine or('hhvmdan:nune tnlunon aided told Residua Chkvme u,olri as•actual))Gad Residual Oxidants
flu rnmtN,average rev kcal ndiftvm is to be reported as a CI,lJMtTRIC mean Use infix designated units in tlr reprinting laahry s permit fin reporting data.

Outran Out.Page 2 at 3 COOLING l uN Imeir rat sodn.kaAti ry nn i ioisliKdsw ay ;lhr fp, owla11.(lit';uPlolld
s_GIrS w'ii n
EFFLUENT
NI'DES Permit No. NC0001422 Discharge No 001 Month January
Year 2016 •
Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover
Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified t.abaralories (1) Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2) L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3)
Check If ORC has Changed Person tsl Collecting aniples Staff
NC) .)W'/ SCHAR )M SITE
Mail ORIGINAL and ON!.COPY w. (x) 0T.. ,��, r�( .\r^� — _'(,'
ATfconal t le. iSIGNATC'kF.OF Ol'I:RATOR IN RISi'ONSttll t:.('HANOI o C s
\'('
OATP.
I hrisum of Water Resource, Ry This Signature.1 Certify That This Report Is
1617 Mail Soo ice('enter Accurate And Complete To The Rest Of Sly Knowledge.
60(0(06.NC 27690-1617 ne,..n.e.a d,s.,llknlyd.,r..,,n,in press n nail Mi.ie 1.00 pnxmm.n.
01.0.5 nro.ahle III lh.ni111c11,0(1.110 1•10,,.0.0 _:Ii the dal..unran0,4 In ibis nM1IR
C11511-12 1(1002 (II IJI 01045 0111,51 01(127 011115 "(111012 (11072 001170
Taal 'inial .
iiial !pill 1, 1 r,ii.ii
Rile Mersury :5r.senic Sole omit Iron Lead C ailamiti Alninimin Copp, 'zinc I whidity
gn n6 I.
1
,
3
4 1.73 <10 <10 0.315 <10 <10 174 <10 16 2.2
5
6
7
• 8
9
10 _.
1I 2.79 <10 <10 0.341 <10 <10 175 <10 <10 3.0
12
•
. 13
14 .
15
16
17
IS 1.10 <10 <10 0.145 <10 <10 53 <10 <10 1.2
19
. 20
21
•n
23
24
25 1.65 <10 <10 0.203 <10 <10 98 <10 <10 2.3
26
27 .
28
29
30
31
Average 1.82 0 0 0.251 0 0 125 0 4 2.2
Maximum 2.79 <10 <10 0.341 <It) <10 175 <10 16 3.0
Minimum 1.10 <10 <10 0.145 <10 <10 53 <10 <10 1.2
Comp 10/Grab rCi) G G 0 G G C G C G C
' Monthly Limit 47 0 10 0 5.0 1 0 25 0 2.0 See Permit
Facility.Sum,I Please Chock one of the following(
All monitoring dud and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements X
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet permit requirements
'I certify.under penally of law.that this d,loumeni and all attachment,acre prepared under my direction(Jr supers isinn in accordance with a system designed
Io assure that qualified personnel properly gather and es aluate the information submitted. Rased on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage(he system.
or Ih,.se persons directly responsible(or gathenng the informationthe information submitted i..to the hest of Inv knowledge and belief.nue.accurate.and
eomplele. I am aware Ilial there are significant penalties for.submitting false information.including the possibility of lines and imprisonment for knowing 1(0101(1,n..'
Jesse E.Huntley.11 1 'iii �21n�lcr
Permittee(Please pnnt or type( Signature of Pen ince'. I)ate
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington.NC 28401 [phone] December 31.2016
Polon Ice Address. Phone Nelnn.r
Perim Exp Daae
•(1118-Imo%Lint Isis ilip and dishy lrn:claimnn.:d ueil:l)as reyuva t 1r 15n WA('1111 02.10
•'II signed 5. -vMr than the permit..Jelegmun rel unmmin mason,mita be m1 file with the:me per 154 4.Nr'4('.R IIsi n..h,::10,
"•1'hlennc,,(TI<mru(arnnune.1(00.-n udul lural brrlduat(711rnnc rr;nll,..lc astuan)r..!R,edn11 Ozrd i.
' rhe humbly arniage to local Mit'ornl is to he nop.nted as a(il-(A**611 neon tic rob dcoignlald Wnlh 111 the rein-rung raellllr s rents)lin ri p.rlulg data

•
• (Wall 001.Page 3 at 3 CODAN(i PQtill irx-rir,uLu .•iwd r.tion eemactunl(IOy w;yrr_;y,gl.!rSan wa+lLw,gL yp1;1)lit.11u2.awl 184)
•
•
NPDES Permit No. NC0001422 Discharge No. 001 Month January Year 2016
Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover _
Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No. 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified Laboratories (1)Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2)L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3)
Check If ORC has Changed Person(a)Collecting Samples Staff
Nall) '/DISCH FROM SITL
Stream Cape Fear River (x)
(p
(SIGNATuRE Of OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) ,f- DATE
Upstream Location 2700 feet above outfall By This Signature.I Certify That This Report Is
Accurate And Complete To The Best Of lkiy Knowledge. •
Downstream location 1.25 miles below outfall Ikr a Al dwvnwmnl iann„o•In gumnao sial Inn of Pl'A pr.cNures.
• -..._ it is not puslnk ht ahsututey crndy me pots.,.wcurJc)01 the data contained in has rthiN
UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM .
i11N)11) 00011)
r,•rnlwralwc 1ctnperatwc
3
4
S
6
8
9
•
10 •
11
12
13
14
15
Ih
17
8
�9
1 —
2l
22
23
24
25 •
26
27
28
29
30
31 .
Average
• Macimum
Minimum
Comp.(CI/Grab(GI G G
Monthly Limit See Permit See Permit
Facility Status:(Please Check one of the following)
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements X
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet permit requirements
"I cemfy,under penalty of law.that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed
in assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system. •
or those persons directly responsthle for gathering the information,the information submitted is,to the lest of my knowledge and belief.true.accurate.and
a implete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false infth
information.including e possibility ines and it rivaAwing siulations... •
���""'
Jesse E.Huntley,[I 7 lzWz0/4/
Permittee(Please print or typo) Signature of Nominee.* Date
80I Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington,NC 28401 [phone]
December 31.2016
Permit ie Addienn RUNIC Nundkr Permit Exp fate
•Oke mutt stat linthts and document vt.HtalnM,of tauhi)as mooed pp ISA NCA('&i 021.1
••it vaned hs other Ihn the permatice.*legman a.ignwMe amhioty must he nn Iile with the staie px I(A SCA('?U IKtg,p hit St ID,
"'('hhxine iM Chimneil(rvnune raiment]adrk0 real RoMud Chk•nnc tout,tie anuaNs Total Rotduat(Instants
the monthly asmaga rot Ilial oitttMm I5 to ha n salad as a GEOMETRIC mean.Use tinly designated mitts in IMC rip Ming Witty's permit Si reporting data.

•
it
I/titinl 001.Page I or? lI)()I.INtI PINI)u.cn,vlan„n e,‘,ling waist,.n;n.,intact c,ullutg nat..wnl lr:al.J n..lcu act nom outfalls 002.dud ta)4t
EFFLUENT
NPDES Permit No. NC0001422 Discharge No. 001 Month February Year 2016
Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover
• Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No. 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified laboratories (1) Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2)L.V.Sutton Energy Complex .
(3) Environmental Testing Solutions.Inc.
Check If ORC'has Changed Person(s)Collecting Samples Staff
7 f)FEC 4}_(�ISCHARGF FROM SITE 1 1
• Mail 0811.1001.and ONE('(WY tu. (X) i titi �.. 3-r�(,I r
_I( .
ATTN-.Central biles ISI(;'ATI'RE.OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGEi 11 ELATE
Division of Water Resources By This Signature.I Certify That This Report Is
1617 Mail Service Center .Accurate And Complete To The Rest Of Aly Knowledge.
• Raleigh.N('27609.1617 nwcc„•,,,htmnemcd..r,:m o.
,n p,e.,a:a And hl,.;u ern pn,cJw.n. •
o,t rut p,a,0Nc to,h.,J,neh:.r'.'t)the pr-:l)..w[uracc Ol IIIc;1)1.)c,mean,N In Ihl..1)0111
5011311 5110511 0011111 (111.11111 0115 56 1015111 1)116011 11062 1)116111 (111060 1011101 16)161'
optaaha
.
ArII.al Orton,,t S
how Flow Tort' (,nal Nimalc....
l Intl los' (510 it/I•N,rnul 001-Ik9,tot I cusp ()I1,t: Suspcndctl total 4.11.101 Nnms 1,1x1 1hulo,cd .A.r1c
11wc 2400(1,k l)n/tie (hr Silc lists k.ac Dint)(aic 1.1115m pll Grass S,d,Jc N,rng.•n Nnn,gns Nnmgcn Phnsplmnnls (Is)gen 1nc,c
11)
11rs fn. 5'u t/N .NI1;11 01(11 l ('nit. n o/I n0l. onel. tell. WI1 mg/I. Illy./1. Pau/I.ad
I 07:00 8 V 0
2 05:30 12 V 0
3 07:00 95 Y 0
4 04:00 8 Y 0
5 04:30 9 V 0
6 N
7 N
8 07:00 9 Y 19.70 10.5
9 06:30 10.5 Y 19.70 11.9 8.14 <5 9.2 2.6 2.6 <0.02 0.21 10.7 P
10 07:00 9 1' 19.70 113
II 07:00 8 1' 19.70 9.9
12 04:00 6 Y 19.70 8,7
13 N
14 N '
. 15 07:00 8 Y 19.70 8.1 7.34 <5 <2.8 <05 <0.5 0.03 0.13 10.8
IS N 19.70 9.4
17 06:00 6 V 19.70 105
18 05:30 . 6.5 Y 19.70 10.7
19 07:00 5 1. 19.94 9.9
20 N
21 N
• 22 07:00 8 }' 20.42 14.9 6.99 <5 3.8 0.6 0.6 <0.02 0.37 10.2
• 23 07:00 8 V 20.42 133
2407:011 8 Y 20.42 11.1
•
25 07:00 2 Y 20.42 14.1
26 N 20.42 13.6
27' N
28 N
29 07:00 8 V 20.42 155 7.80 <5 <2.7 0.6 0.6 <0.02 0.04 103
30
31
_ Aserne 15.23 117 MEI 0 3.3 1.2 0.95 0.008 0.19 10.50
Maximum 20.42 15.5 8.14 <5 9.2 2.6 2.6 <0.02 037 10.80 ■
Minimum 0 8.1 6.99 <5 <2.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.02 0.04 10.2(1
Comp (C)/Grah(Co G Ci G G G G G G G G
Monthly Limit 2 I See Permit 6.0-9.0 15.0 .10.0 See Permit
FaeilnY Status.illeaxc Check one of the following)
All moniu,nne data and sampling(rcquencles meet permit requirements X
Ail monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet pernul requirements
'I certify.under penalty of law.that this doeurnem and all attachments uere prepared under m)direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed
tie av-sure that qualified pervunnel properly gutter and evaluate he information submitted Based un my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,
or those persons Jiret_u s responsible her gaihenng the information,the information submitted Is.to the hest of my knowledge and belief,true.aeeurale.and
complete. I am aware Thal there are'significant penalties Ile.submitting false mfnrmauun.including the pi:sibihly of lines and impnson:., 1 for knowing siolauons-
Jesse E.Huntley,II Nil,1JyY_ - ,A, '�`{1 !‘ 3/&/2t'
Permmee/Please print or type) Signature of PerrnnIee ' Dale
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington.NC 28401 [phone] December 31.2016
l'crmitim Add/c>s I'lum Number Itnwt Gsp.Ism
'I WI Inc,I,,,,,..021,arc a,tiunwml,I.'ula,n.,,n.acu)As ny,m,J 14.113A Nt'At''WI 1)2141
•.11.rgecc4 M,nher iliac l he pernnnee,bietau,n,.rt:'gnu oidium)muni 5,on uk,.,Ju tho coo pat I5A 1111'Ar 211,15t1h,h".IJ)�
tTNt,n..0 I'hi:•nne/hr.:rm at„.h0,11 40.1,1 lot:1 R.."114:11'hmmr,reecho ye I,raall,anal Rc.adual nthlanl.
The int nNlb a. .c for Iecel;,,hG'mt is to be rcpt ned a,a GU)(Ott'1111('wean 1'x.•only dcsigna,J units m du r pwm)e laciliis.pernio Ln reporting data

I.
Uw6d1001,Pay 2 of 3 ('OOI INt 1'45(t rfsajsii tuvt.iltne .in/t,aYts Startsititlitlwa0.•p..4141..uS1iC4iteittaiatell.Jn„ntf_11Ix1_yid‘5a)
EFFLUENT
ss
NPDES Permit No. N00001422 Discharge No 001 Month February Year 2016
• Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover
Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No 996743 Phone [phone] •
Certified Laboratories (1)Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2) L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3)
Check If ORC has Changed Person(sl Collecting Samples Staff
r--- (Tc,,„„2 O FLOW/DISCHARGE FROM SITE
Mail ORIGINAL and ONF COPY ti: (x) s ,1'.'7
—r;,L\ —'(..i;
ATT.N:Central Files tSIGNATORI 01'I)PCRATOR IN RI.SP(INSIRLy CHAR(it'_I I1ATF
h i.sins of Water Reviuice, By This Signature.1(.'ertify That This Report Is
1517 Mail Scrs ice('enter Accurate And Complete To The Best Of My Knowledge. '
Raleigh.NC 2769s-1617 11..m„:,n d„urnymed.anay.n,in prcau.m m,l i,..s t1'A I'u sab le,.
,t I.net pntnme to.me,,hne9),.,lily the rreo,e..our.+.;1 the dal.,...interned 111 nu,OMR
COMER 1111102 Il1.17 11103 nin51 111(127 0i IllS (111142 11092 1111(70
Total tonal Total 1,1al Tial Total Total local ford
•
I tate Mcrsvr> ,trernwe Selenium Ir.,, I sad C.:A n um Allurunun, Copper tine Iurtuds)
ng,1. rifle ogl1. mei!. uan. tgA. PAA. ug/I. ug/7. NT('
1
4
6 _
7
-
8
9 4.81 <10 <10 0394 <10 <10 480 <10 <10 10.1
10
II - ,
-
17
13 _ ,
V
13
•
15 1.09 <10 <10 0.143 <10 <10 42 <10 <10 1.1 .
16
17
IS
19
21
22 1.96 <10 <10 0.348 <10 <10 198 <10 13 4.0
23 •
23
•
_ _
25
26 — _
27
28
29 1.73 <10 <10 0.422 <10 <10 76 <10 49 1.6
30
31 ,
Average 2.40 0 0 0.377 0 0 199 0 15.5 4.2
Maximum 4.81 <10 <10 0.594 <10 <10 480 <10 49 10,1
Minimum 1.09 <10 <10 0.143 <10 <10 42 <10 <10 _ 1.1
Comp.(C)/Grab(Gt G G G G G G G G G G
Monthly Limit 47.0 10.0 5.0 1.0 - 25.0 2.0 See Permit
Facility Status-:Please Check one of the following!
•
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements X ,
All monitoring data and sampling frequenctes do NoT meet permit requirements I I
'I certify.under penally oI law,that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supers Sian in accordance with a system designed
to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the.system.
or those persons directly responsihle for gathering the tnitnatation.the information submitted is.to the hest of my knowledge and belief,true.accurate.and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties fir suhmuung false information.including the possibility of fines and imprison�rncnt for knowing',elations.”
•
Jesse E.Huntley.II dave.. E. (.w I-&..L 11 3/2 /Z0167
Permittee i Please print or typeI Signature of Permittee" Date
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington.NC 28401 [phone] December 31.2016
Permutti•.Address Phon,Number Permit Exp Irate
•OR('man cis,!1001,11 soul ins-anent,,tlian,ma Ill 4,1111)..,19$10J per IFA Nt'Al'Nf1 0244
••R swim,hymhur mm,be permit et'.;klerarron,9 urnatt»au,lemi)mum he on Me aim me•mate per lin Nt'AL'114 itel'hI.2,.I r.
•••Chromic,t rTkuoe'/tb,'nune sonarinl.ailed Tonal ResNaaiI'hlruiw reauha sire aeu.dl,T,11a1 Rcmuuoi(budanl,
(lie Ireorlhly au n ge for feeal ndllirm Is to he rpirtcd as a CdiOM;TRIL mean Use only de..iu,ate l,ant,in the repining taedlty's permit rig reporting data. .

•
•
!haat'0111.Page.143 s•Ix,.)1,11M,,i11)N sanded(0s1tehe seal•r ly iniilela im;ealeL 111�r1'alUl wu+lcwwulie toy (n), Ix
NPDES Permit No. NC0001422 Discharge No. 001 Month February Year 2016
• Facility Name L.V.Sutton Energy Complex Class P/C-1 County New Hanover
Operator In Responsible Charge Roland G.Rivenbark Grade P/C-1 Certification No. 996743 Phone [phone]
Certified Laboratories (1)Environmental Chemists,Inc. (2)L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
(3)
Check If ORC has Changed Person(st Collecting Samples Staff
•
NO FLOW/DISCHARGE FROM SITE j
Stream Cape Fear River (X) L•CY
(SIGNATI.'RE OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
Upstream Location 2700 feet above outfall By This Signature.I Certify That This Report Is
Accurate And Complete To The Best Of fly Knowledge.
Downtstream Location 1.25 miles below outfall x aaa.e„I ti ,witted s:Inationsin pee;inn am hu.d EPA pr,-,ednr,
II i.n,n Ix.,P l lei ah,..l„ai,,nil)the mote.uavrae),.f the a:a s cnntamet In dui MIR
UPSTREAM DOM NSTRF,ASI
IMO III INhll l
•
Temperature leri,p telur:
Uale
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17 7,8 7.8
18
19
20
•
21
22
23
11
25
26
27
28 -�
29
•
30
31
Average 7.8 7.8
Maximum 7.8 7.8
Minimum 7.8 7.8
Comp.(C)/Grab(Co G • G
Monthly Limit See Permit See Permit
Facility Status:(Please Cheek line i the following)
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements X
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet permit requirements
. •'I cenify.under penalty of law,that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed
to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information suhmitied. Based on my inquiry of the person to person-s who manage the system.
•
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information.the information submitted is.to the hest of my knowledge and heltef.true.accurate,and
complete. I am aware that then:are stgmfieant penalties for submitting false information.including the possihilit of fines and imprisonment lire knowing violations.'
Jesse E.Huntley.II ,p £ L 1 1 3/zerzoik
Permittee(Please print or type) Signature of Permist' : { l Date
801 Sutton Steam Plant Rd. Wilmington,NC 28401 [phone] December 31.2016
Permits:Address Plume Number Permit Fsp One
' •I)Rt'muu ane(Alloy aol ars:lawn;arutanmIi trtlll) Ni'Ai"
•'li nrncd 010to than the mastics.dclegaltnn„1 attrauer.i rMau)tn.,he on file welt the uaie t-sr ISA N('AC 20 t1S0h 1h0 1 2;;lit
•--i r1,rine,a l'hun,rAiro mar.,elutes,added Fatal Rmuaual t'hlorntc re.cnl4:ac anualt)renal Rcaldu:Il l tautens
- The mauhh...rage fur,seal entihrin is to he reprutad:s a GEOMETRIC saras lire,oily designated units ht that repaving lacilny r pant e r reputing data

Attachment 2
Coal Ash - The toxic threat to our health and environment
A Report from Physicians for Social Responsibility
and Earthjustice
September 2010

Coal /\ S The toxic threat to our
health anal environment
}� 3 • yTM.,px t-w� f
A REPORT FROM PHYSICIANS
FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
AND EARTHJUSTICE
a� w ,..
s
\\.... ....,,,, n ti
„ 1
By
Barbara Gottlieb with
Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT
and Lisa Gollin Evans

C o al Ash
The toxic threat to our
health and environment
A REPORT FROM
PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
AND
EARTHJUSTICE
By
Barbara Gottlieb with
Steven G. Gilbert, PhD, DABT
and Lisa Gollin Evans

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to Tim K. Takaro, MD, MPH, MS; Roberta Richardson,
MD; and Molly Rauch, MPH for their careful reading of the text; to Rebecca Abelman for
research support and copy editing; and to Jared Saylor for editing.
Cover Art: David Stuart
ABOUT EARTHJUSTICE
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent
places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all
people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and
strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and
communities. We've provided legal representation at no cost to more than 700 clients. For
more information, visit www.earthjustice.org.
ABOUT PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
PSR has a long and respected history of physician-led activism to protect the public's
health. Founded in 1961 by physicians concerned about the impact of nuclear proliferation,
PSR shared the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize with International Physicians for the Prevention
of Nuclear War for building public pressure to end the nuclear arms race. Today, PSR's
members, staff, and state and local chapters form a nationwide network of key contacts
and trained medical spokespeople who can effectively target threats to global survival.
Since 1991, when PSR formally expanded its work by creating its environment and health
program, PSR has addressed the issues of global warming and the toxic degradation of our
environment. PSR presses for policies to curb global warming, ensure clean air, generate
a sustainable energy future, prevent human exposures to toxic substances, and minimize
toxic pollution of air, food, and drinking water.
SEPTEMBER 2010
Printed with soy inks on 100%post-consumer recycled paper by a union printer.

Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v
1. HEALTH IMPACTS OF COAL TOXICANTS 1
2. FROM CONTAINMENT TO CONTAMINATION: THE RISK OF EXPOSURE 7
3. EVIDENCE OF HARM: THE DAMAGE CASES 15
4. POLICY IMPLICATIONS 22
NOTES 24

• 41
•
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . .
oal ash,one of the dirtiest secrets in
American energy production,burst into
the U.S.consciousness three days be-
fore Christmas,2008 when an earthen
wall holding back a huge coal ash disposal pond
failed at the coal-fired power plant in Kingston,
Tennessee.The 40-acre pond spilled more than i'
1 billion gallons of coal ash slurry into the adjacent
river valley,covering some 300 acres with thick,
toxic sludge,destroying three homes,damaging ,
many others and contaminating the Emory and
Clinch Rivers.'
When the U.S. Environmental Protection ,,
Agency tested water samples after the spill,they
found toxic heavy metals including arsenic,which
they measured at 149 times the allowable stan-
dard for drinking water.'Water samples al o con- .F.�. F--. -
tained elevated levels of other toxic metals lead,
thallium, barium, cadmium, chromium, m rcury,
and nickel. •
Despite that catastrophic spill in Tentless e, the
full dimensions of the health threats from c al ash
are just beginning to register with the American ;.
public.Coal ash is the waste product left o r after
coal is combusted,or burned.Many peopl are ^• � �• �•
still not aware of how toxic coal ash is,muc less R, '
how much coal ash is generated each year nd how
grossly mismanaged its disposal is: Ae r h
• While the toxic contents of coal ash may vary
depending on where the coal is mined, coal Two dozen homes were destroyed or damaged by the 2008
ash commonly contains some of the world's coal ash spill in Kingston, Tennessee.

vi ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT •
deadliest toxic metals:arsenic,lead, mercury, less dramatic scenario: the slow leakage of toxic
cadmium,chromium and selenium.' pollution from disposal sites such as ponds and
landfills.
• These and other toxicants in coal ash can cause Toxic pollution,some of it cancer-causing,can
cancer and neurological damage in humans. and does escape from some of those sites,accord-
They can also harm and kill wildlife,especially ing to the EPA."This occurs in a variety of ways,
fish and other water-dwelling species. most frequently when coal ash comes into contact
with water,allowing toxics to"leach"or dissolve
• Coal ash is the second-largest industrial waste out of the ash and percolate through water.Coal
stream in the U.S.,after mining wastes.' ash toxics have leached from disposal sites in well.
over 100 communities,carrying toxic substances
• Coal ash is disposed in approximately 2,000 into above-ground and underground waterways
dump sites across the nation:at least 629 wet ash including streams,rivers,aquifers,and drink-
ponds 5 and 311 dry landfills at power stations, ing water wells,forcing some families to find new
at least 100 offsite dry landfills,6 and 750 inac- drinking water supplies. Several coal ash-contam-
tive dumps,'and hundreds of abandoned and inated sites are federal Superfund sites, including
active mines (as fill).' one entire community that has been designated a
Superfund toxic site due to the contamination of
• Coal ash dumps likely exist in every state in the its water supply by coal ash.'2
U.S.due to the widespread use of coal to gener- Large quantities of coal ash are"recycled,"
ate electricity in the nation's 495 coal-fired power presenting another potential route of exposure to
plants and hundreds of industrial boilers.°•' coal ash toxics. Some states allow coal ash to be
used as structural fill,agricultural soil additive,
After the Tennessee spill, public attention fo- top layer on unpaved roads, fill for abandoned
cused at first on the possibility of more sudden mines,spread on snowy roads,and even as cinders
catastrophes. But the most common threat that on school running tracks.These uses may expose
coal ash poses to public health comes from a coal ash to water,increasing the risk of leaching.
Coal ash is also dangerous
1111.111 if inhaled,so some of these
Mirforms of recycling may en-
,'. danger human health from
airborne particles,even
where no water is involved.
p✓'._✓. The EPA has document-
./1" ' ed that coal ash contains
toxic materials,and that
;,, these toxicants can and do
escape from disposal sites.
It has confirmed and mea-
* • sured toxic leachinginto
water supplies.And it has
- .� identified specific sites at
which humans have been
exposed to coal ash tox-
"- ics,whether from drinking
contaminated water,eating

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ vii
contaminated fish,or breathing"fugitive dust.''' ■ Fluidized bed combustion (FBC) wastes are gen-
Yet as of late 2010,no federal standards exist to erated by a specialized combustion technology
regulate how coal ash is disposed or where and in which a heated bed of sand-like material is
how it can be recycled. Instead, a patchwork of in- suspended (fluidized) in a rising jet of air.FBC
sufficient state regulations allows widely disparate waste may include fly ash and bottom ash and
uses of and disposal methods for coal ash. This re- tends to be more alkaline because of the lime-
port examines the risks to public health that result stone used in the process.
from that inadequate regulation and highlights
the damage that has occurred in the absence of The EPA has found that living next to a coal ash
strong,federally enforceable safeguards.The disposal site can increase your risk of cancer or
report concludes with recommendations for effec- other diseases,especially if you live near an unlined
tive policy reforms that could significantly protect wet ash pond that contains coal ash comingled with
human health. other coal wastes and you get your drinking water
Given the high toxicity of coal ash's consl.ittt- from a well. According to the EPA's peer-reviewed
ents, the growing number of proven and potential "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment for Coal
damage cases,and the prospect of more damage Combustion Wastes,"people in those circumstances
cases emerging as toxicants reach peak concen- have as much as a 1 in 50 chance of getting cancer
tration in the coming years, the magnitude of from drinking water contaminated by arsenic,one
coal ash as a threat to human health is likely only of the most common and dangerous pollutants in
beginning to emerge. coal ash.14 This risk is 2,000 times greater than the •
EPA's goal for reducing cancer risk to 1 in 100,000.
WHAT IS COAL ASH AND HOW TOXIC IS IT? That same risk assessment says that living near ash
ponds increases the risk of health problems from
Coal ash has different physical and chemical prop- exposure to toxic metals like cadmium,lead,and
erties depending on the geochemical properties of other pollutants.
the coal being used and how that coal is burned. Typically,coal ash contains arsenic,lead,mer-
cury,cadmium,chromium and selenium,as well
• "Fly ash"consists of the fine powdery particles of as aluminum,antimony,barium,beryllium,bo-
minerals,plus a small amount of carbon, that are ron,chlorine,cobalt,manganese,molybdenum,
carried up the smokestack by the exhaust gases. nickel, thallium,vanadium,and zinc.15 All can be
toxic.16 Especially where there is prolonged expo-
• "Bottom ash"is a coarser material that f lls to sure, these toxic metals can cause several types of
the bottom of the furnace. cancer,heart damage,lung disease,respiratory
distress,kidney disease,reproductive problems,
• "Boiler slag"is created from the molten ot- gastrointestinal illness,birth defects,impaired
torn ash that,when cooled in contact wi water bone growth in children,nervous system impacts,
in wet-bottom boilers,forms pellets of a ard, cognitive deficits,developmental delays and behav-
glassy material. ioral problems.In short,coal ash toxics have the
potential to injure all of the major organ systems,
• Flue gas desulfurization (FGD) waste is the by- damage physical health and development,and
product of air pollution control systems used to even contribute to mortality.
• reduce the sulfur dioxide emissions fro coal- Adding to the toxicity of coal ash is that some
fired power plants. "Scrubbers"spray lime or power plants mix coal with other fuels and wastes, •
limestone slurry into the flue gas,where it reacts such as used tires and even hazardous wastes.In
with the sulfur to form calcium sulfite that is addition,when coal ash is disposed with coal re-
processed to make FGD or synthetic gypsum. fuse,a highly acidic waste, the resulting mixture is

viii • COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
significantly more toxic and prone to release met- that would otherwise go up the smokestacks.,When
als into the environment."Utilities that manage those.pollutants are captured, they are shifted from
coal ash in ponds often mix coal refuse with coal the air to the coal ash.19 Mercury and other pol-
ash,a practice that greatly increases the cancer lutants that previously contributed to air pollution
risk to nearby residents who get their water from are now becoming solid wastes—and when they
drinking wells.'8 leach into water, their toxicity is carried into the
Not only is coal ash toxic,it is likely to grow in- water.The EPA speaks of"ensuring that emissions
creasingly dangerous.Air pollution control technol- being controlled in the flue gas at power plants are
ogies—scrubbers,selective catalytic reduction,and not later being released to other environmental
activated carbon injection technologies to capture media."20 Unfortunately, that's exactly what is hap-
mercury and other hazardous air pollutants—cap- pening: One toxic environmental problem is being
ture an increasing proportion of the coal pollutants traded for another.

•
1. Health .f Impacts o Coal Toxicants ® ®
oal ash contains a rarige of toxic con- and damage to the peripheral nervous system.
stituents that are known to leach, leak, According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and
or spill out of coal ash disposal sites and Disease Registry (ATSDR), there is some evidence
• adversely affect human and environ- that in childhood,long-term exposure to arsenic
mental health.We summarize here the effects on may result in lower IQ scores and exposure to arse-
the human body that can be caused by exposure nic in the womb and early childhood may increase
to nine of the most common toxic contaminants in mortality in young adults."Many of arsenic's ef-
coal ash.21 fects are dose-and time-dependent.Repeated low
levels of exposure over an extended period of time
ARSENIC can produce effects similar to a one-time high level
of exposure.
Arsenicis an ancient and well-known poison and a Contaminated drinking water is a primary route
dangerous environmental contaminant. In recent of arsenic exposure.Scientific studies have shown
years it has been widely used as a wood preserva- that exposure to arsenic in drinking water results
tive in treated lumber to construct decks, play- in an elevated risk of urinary tract cancers (can-
ground equipment,fences,utility poles and piers. cer of the bladder,kidney,ureters,etc.).Both the
Because of its excessive toxicity,arsenic has now level of exposure and the duration of exposure
been banned in wood for most residential settings, are significant factors,according to a 2010 article
including decks and play sets.Arsenic is present in in the journal of the American Association for
coal ash and has been shown in numerous ases to Cancer Research.Reporting on a study in Taiwan
leach from ash and contaminate drinking ater. of residents whose well water was contaminated
Arsenic produces a variety of adverse he:lth ef- with naturally occurring arsenic, the article found
fects. Ingesting very high levels can result i death. a"significant"trend of increased cases of urinary
Chronic exposure to arsenic in drinking w:ter can tract cancer as exposure levels increased.24
cause several types of cancer,including ski i can- The duration of exposure was also signifi-
cer,bladder cancer,lung cancer and kidne, can- cant,especially at high levels of exposure.Those
cer.Recent studies have linked arsenic ing•stion who had been drinking arsenic-contaminated
to cardiovascular disease and diabetes mei itus.22 well water since birth—that is, those with the •
Exposure to lower levels can cause nausea nd longest-term exposure—exhibited a four-to five-
vomiting,decreased production of red an' white fold increased risk of urinary cancers.The study
blood cells,and cardiovascular effects inc ding also found that exposure from birth may increase
abnormal heart rhythm,damage to blood vessels, urinary cancer risk much later in life.This find-

•
2 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
ing of a long latency period (the time that elapses lead to death. Children living near waste sites con-
from exposure until the time of illness) suggests taining boron and boron compounds are likely to
that people whose drinking water is contaminated be exposed to higher-than-normal levels through
by arsenic from coal ash should be monitored inhaling boron-containing dust, touching soil,and
long-term for urinary tract cancer,even if they stop swallowing contaminated soil.
drinking the contaminated water.25 Boron is an essential micronutrient for plants,
In addition to drinking water,arsenic can en- where it plays a role in cell division,metabolism,
ter the body via other pathways.Inhaling sawdust and membrane structure.However,while it is need-
from construction with arsenic-treated lumber can ed as a nutrient, there is a small range between
greatly increase the danger of lung cancer,as it can deficiency and excess uptake or toxicity. Dangerous
be absorbed through the lungs. Inhaling arsenic levels of boron may occur in soils that have been
from coal ash fugitive dust can likewise pose a dan- contaminated by pollutant sources such as coal ash
ger to human health.Arsenic can also be absorbed from coal-fired power plants.26
through the skin,which is why its use in decks and
play equipment was outlawed. Children who play CADMIUM
near spilled coal ash or where there is fugitive dust
• may be at risk of arsenic exposure. Cadmium is a metal widely used in manufactur- •
Because arsenic occurs naturally as an element ing. Dietary exposure to cadmium is possible from •
distributed widely in the earth's crust,we are ex- shellfish and plants grown on cadmium-contami-
posed to constant low levels of arsenic from air nated soils.Fortunately,oral ingestion of cadmium
and water. Normally, air contains a background results in low levels of absorption.The lungs,how-
concentration of less than 0.1 micrograms per ever,readily absorb cadmium,so inhalation expo-
cubic meter, and drinking water less than 5 mi- sure results in much higher levels of absorption.
crograms per liter, but water levels can be signifi- This makes cadmium a potential hazard from coal
cantly higher,as can exposure from'other sources. ash dust,which may be released into the environ
Thus,health concerns involving arsenic exposure ment when dry coal ash is stored,loaded, trans-
from coal ash must take into account the cumula- ported,or kept in uncovered landfills. Chronic
tive effect of acute exposure from ash combined exposure can result in kidney disease and obstruc-
with background exposure and exposure from tive lung diseases such as emphysema. Cadmium
other sources. may also be related to increased blood pressure
(hypertension) and is a possible lung carcinogen.
Cadmium affects calcium metabolism and can re-
BORON sult in bone mineral loss and associated bone pain,
Boron occurs in nature as an essential plant nutri- osteoporosis and bone fractures.
ent. It is used in a variety of products and processes
ranging from detergents and cleaning products CHROMIUM
to the production of glass, fiberglass and ceram-
ics.Breathing moderate levels of airborne boron While chromium (III) is an essential nutrient in
causes non-persistent irritation of the nose, throat, the body, the other common form of chromium,
and eyes.Airborne exposure most commonly oc- chromium (VI),is highly toxic and is frequently
curs in the workplace,for example,where borates found in coal ash.When ingested via contami- •
are mined or processed. However,ingestion (eat- nated water,chromium (VI) can cause stomach
ing or drinking) of large amounts of boron can and small intestine ulcers. Frequent ingestion can
result in damage to the testes,intestines,liver, cause anemia and stomach cancer. Contact with
kidney,and brain. Exposure to large amounts of the skin by some compounds of chromium (VI)
boron over short periods of time can eventually can result in skin ulcers.When inhaled in large

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ 3
amounts,chromium (VI) can cause lung cancer, delays and abnormalities,reduced IQ and mental
breathing problems such as asthma and wheezing, retardation,and behavioral problems. State agen-
and nose ulcers. cies regularly issue fish consumption advisories to
caution women of child-bearing age and children
LEAD against eating mercury-contaminated fish.The
FDA has set a limit for safe consumption of 1 part
Lead is a very potent.neurotoxicant that is highly per million of methylmercury in fish.29
damaging to the nervous system. Its dangers have
been acknowledged,if not fully understood,for MOLYBDENUM
thousands of years.Health effects associated with
exposure to lead include,but are not limited to, Molybdenum is a metal with an extremely high
neurotoxicity,developmental delays,hypertension, melting point that is often used to strengthen steel.
impaired hearing acuity,impaired hemoglobin It is found in the human body in small quantities,
synthesis,and male reproductive impairment.27 and some foods naturally contain molybdenum
Importantly,many of lead's health effects may oc- such as liver,eggs,and some grains.
cur without overt signs of toxicity.Scientists have As a contaminant,molybdenum exposure is of
long recognized that children are particularly sensi- concern from inhalation of dust or ingestion.This
tive,with high levels of lead resulting in swelling of may occur from exposure to dust on food or on
the brain,kidney disease,effects on hemoglobin the hands,or if molybdenum in the air is inhaled
and possible death.Adverse effects in children can and then coughed up and swallowed. Exposure
also occur well before the usual term of chronic ex- can occur in mining,and the Occupational Safety
posure can take place. Children under 6 years old and Health Administration has set an occupational
have a high risk of exposure because of their more exposure maximum permissible limit at 5 mg per
frequent hand-to-mouth behavior.It is now well ac- cubic meter of air in an 8-hour day. Chronic expo-
cepted that there is no safe level of lead exposure, sure to molybdenum can result in excess fatigue,
particularly for children.28 Harmful levels of lead headaches and joint pains.
• exposure can result from drinking water contami- Some molybdenum compounds have been
nated by coal ash and from exposure to coal ash shown to be toxic to rats.Although human toxicity
contaminated soils, data are unavailable,animal studies have shown
that chronic ingestion of more than 10 mg/day of
MERCURY molybdenum can cause diarrhea,slowed growth,
low birth weight and infertility,and can affect the
• Another well-known neurotoxicant, mercu y has lungs, kidneys,and liver.
the dangerous capacity to bioaccumulate, r build •
up in animal tissue.When mercury leache from THALLIUM
coal ash into the soil or water,it is convert d by
bacteria into methylmercury,an organic form Thallium, a metal found in trace amounts in the
that can be absorbed by small organisms nd the earth's crust,enters the environment primarily
larger organisms that eat them.As it mov s up the from coal-burning and smelting. Once in the envi-
food chain, the concentration of methylm rcury ronment, it is highly persistent and enters the food
increases.When it has accumulated to hi h con- chain by being absorbed by plants and building
centrations in fish, this becomes a major athway up in fish and shellfish. Eating food contaminated
for human exposure. with thallium may be a major source of exposure
Mercury is particulary toxic to the deve op- for most people; however, the ATSDR lists
ing nervous system. Exposure during gest tion, "[1]iving near hazardous waste sites containing
infancy, or childhood can cause develop ental thallium"as a path to exposure;in fact, it is the

4 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
only path which the ATSDR notes"may result in Humans are susceptible to similar effects as'well as
• higher than normal exposures.""Other paths in- additional neurological impacts.
chide touching thallium,breathing in low levels of Selenium exposure also affects fish,which absorb
thallium in air and ingesting low levels in the metal through their gills or by eating contami-
water,or,for children,eating soil contaminated nated food sources such as worms.Extremely high
with thallium. levels of selenium have been found to accumulate
Exposure to high levels of thallium can result in fish and amphibians living in coal ash-contami-
in harmful health effects.Workers who inhale nated waters and wetlands,if they survive exposure
thallium over several years report nervous system to the toxin.As confirmed by laboratory studies,
effects such as numbness of fingers and toes. selenium accumulation can cause developmental
Ingesting large amounts of thallium over a short abnormalities in fish and amphibians and has led to
time has been shown to lead to vomiting,diar- the death of entire local fish populations.Selenium
rhea,and temporary hair loss,along with adverse is bioaccumulative,meaning it is passed up the food
effects on the nervous system,lungs, heart,liver, chain in increasing concentrations,and excessive
and kidneys. Ingesting thallium can even lead amounts have been found in water snakes,small
to death. It is not known what the effects are of mammals,birds and humans.
ingesting low levels of thallium over a long time.
Studies in rats have shown adverse developmental
effects from exposure to high levels of thallium, ■ ■ ■
and some adverse effects on the reproductive sys-
tem after ingesting thallium for several weeks. It
is not known if breathing or ingesting thallium Concern also exists about the risks to health
affects human reproductions' from coal ash toxicants in combination.While
the properties of coal ash toxicants are under-
SELENIUM stood as they function individually,little is known
about what happens when these toxic substances
Selenium is a common element,an essential nu- are mixed—as routinely happens in coal ash.
trient,and readily available in a variety of foods Concurrent exposure to multiple contaminants
including shrimp,fish,meat,dairy products,and may intensify existing effects of individual con-
grains.It is readily absorbed by the intestine and taminants,or may give rise to interactions and
is widely distributed throughout the tissues of the synergies that create new effects.For example,
body,with the highest levels in the liver and kid- aluminum,manganese and lead all have adverse
ney.While selenium is used by the body in a variety effects on the central nervous system;barium,
of cellular functions, too much can be harmful, cadmium and mercury all have adverse effects on
as can too little.The recommended daily intake is the kidney.Where several coal ash contaminants
55 to 70 micrograms.Excess selenium intake can share a common mechanism of toxicity or affect
occur in both animals and humans living in areas the same body organ or system,exposure to sev-
with elevated selenium in the soil. Most grasses eral contaminants concurrently produces a greater
and grains do not accumulate selenium,but when chance of increased risk to health.32 Yet the EPA
an animal consumes plants that do accumulate has not taken into account in its risk assessments
selenium (some up to 10,000 mg/kg), they can the possibility of synergistic interactions,despite
develop a condition called the"blind staggers." the common occurrence of multiple contaminants
Symptoms include depressed appetite,impaired in combination in coal ash.33 Figure 1 summarizes
vision,and staggering in circles. High expo- the effects of some of the most harmful coal ash
sures can ultimately lead to paralysis and death. contaminants on the body.

• e
COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT • 5
Figure 1. Health Impacts of Coal Toxicants
Mercury*• +
Mercury poses particular risk to , / �eat�
children, infants and fetuses. �� Exposure to lead can result in
brain swelling, kidney disease,
Impacts include nervous ,��,.„
system damage and cardiovascular problems, nervous
developmental defects system damage, and even death.
like reduced IQ and •, It is accepted that there is
mental retardation. no safe level of lead exposure,
particularly for children.
Chromiumo / oArseni�c*
Ingestion of chromium �0, Ingestion of arsenic can
can cause stomach and o
iiM1
lead to nervous system
'''\\\\
intestinal ulcers, anemia, damage, cardiovascular
. and stomach cancer. issues, and urinary tract
Frequent inhalation can cancers. Inhalation and
cause asthma, wheezing, absorption through the
and lung cancer. f �' D/
% skin can result in
,i t if
lung cancer and skin
414C) 1 4 cancer, respectively.
Selenium• / ' 1 ,• Cir ,
Selenium is used in ®Boron •
many bodily functions,
lib" 'y 1 Inhalation of boron
but deficiencies or I can lead over the
excesses can be bad i short-term to eye,
for one's health. y nose, and throat
Excess intake of i r , irritation. Ingestion
selenium can result I,'1 I
of large amounts,
in a host of however, can result
neurological effects, � in damage to the testes,
including impaired vision intestines, liver, kidneys,
and paralysis, and even death. and brain, and eventually
lead to death.
•
Other Toxicants
Antimony Cadmium Molybdenum Thallium
Eye, skin irritation Emphysema In animals: Nervous system damage
Stomach pain, ulcers Kidney disease Slowed growth Lung, heart, liver,
Lung disease Hypertension Low birth weight kidney problems
Lung cancer Infertility
*Children are particularly at risk

c ' COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
a._
—
•
i
3
err, p i,
. r,-.... . . . . -,..., 4,‘„,,. ,.,„,,,,,,..„ ...‘, „ .....„.......„,„„„„,... ... ,
0
,„.,. .., , ,,,,4,,,,„.„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,. ., w,
flA
`� �. ire .s. .,.'i :^ ? - '' % t' 'k i t: i , '
,r
itge
r
'',,„4' - X
:t :tt 1 / . it w i + d d t�.'I
,M141: * ' ' ' , .
44
,s

2. From Containment to Contamination:
The Risk of Exposure ■ ■ ■ ■ e e ■ ■ •
COAL ASH DISPOSAL: HOW, WHERE, for details.) Ponds lined with clay are also subject
AND HOW SAFE? to leaching dangerous amounts of toxics to under-
lying groundwater.The greatest level of protection
Utility companies have three basic options for
disposing of their ash. If the ash is dry,it can isafforded by composite liners,constructed from
be disposed in landfills.According to the EPA, various layers including human-made materials,
an estimated 36 percent of the coal combustion such as a plastic membrane like high-density poly-
waste generated by utilities in 2007 was disposed ethylene,placed over clay or geosynthetic clay.
However, these liners have a finite lifespan,so truly
of in dry landfills,frequently on-site at the power
permanent safe storage of coal ash toxicants will
plant where the coal was burned. Coal ash may
also be mixed with water and stored in so-called require ongoing diligence well into the future. •
"ponds"—some more than 1,000 acres—and some Despite the obvious danger to human health as-
sociated with coal ash disposal,it is hard to deter-
constructed only with earthen walls.These wet
disposal areas are called"surface impoundments" mine precisely how many coal ash disposal areas
and in 2007 accounted for 21 percent of coal ash there are in the U.S.In 2009, the EPA requested
information from electric utilities operating wet
disposals"The remaining 43 percent of coal ash
was reused in a variety of industrial and other ap- ash ponds.The EPA received information on 629
plications,discussed at the end of this section, coal ash ponds in 33 states."Because this count
The EPA has found that two factors drar{natically included groups of ponds at some sites, the num-
increase the risk that coal ash disposal uni s pose, ber of power plants with ash ponds was 228.The
• both to human health and to ecosystems: 1) the EPA's 2010 Regulatory Impact Analysis estimated
• use of wet surface impoundments rather t an dry that the number of active landfills was more than
landfills,and (2) the absence of corrrposit liners the 311 known dumps utilized at power plants.An
to prevent leaking and leaching.Surface i pound- estimated 149 power plants utilize an unspecified
ments (wet ash ponds) consistently pose h gher number of landfills located outside the plants'
risks than do landfills.35 Some surface im•ound- boundaries,adding to the total number of land-
ments are little more than pits in the Bart , totally fi11s.38 Although the number of states and sites is
lacking protective liners,with native soils :s the hard to specify with precision, there appears to be
bottom and sides.These unlined wet disp.sal areas disposal of coal ash in at least 46 states."
constitute a disproportionate number of he"dam-
age cases"where coal ash toxics are docu ented to Susceptible populations
have escaped from disposal facilities and •amaged With coal ash disposal sites located in most of the
human health or the community." (See •ection 3 50 states, the threat to public health affects many

•
.
8 • COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
communities. However, that threat is not shared nities live near a disproportionate share of coal ash
• equally. Many coal ash disposal sites are located in disposal facilities.4"
rural areas,where land availability and lower land Children are another susceptible population. •
prices make it cheap to purchase the multi-acre This is due in part to their size: any exposure they
sites necessary for ash ponds and landfills—and suffer is more significant for their small bodies than
where the power plants that generate the ash are it would be for an adult. In addition,children's
also frequently located. In fact, the majority of organ systems,particularly the nervous system,are
coal ash disposal sites are on the power plant site, still undergoing development and are thus more
thus avoiding costly transportation of the ash,but susceptible to the effects of toxics exposure.This is
concentrating the pollution. Low-income commu- particularly the case during gestation (in utero) and
infancy,and it remains true throughout childhood.
Children also breathe more rapidly than adults and
HOW MUCH COAL ASH IS THERE? their lungs are proportionately larger, thus increas-
Coal ash constitutes one of the largest waste ing their susceptibility to airborne toxics.Finally,
streams in the United States.The American young children are prone to hand-to-mouth behav-
Coal Ash Association, an industry group, iors that expose them to higher levels of ambient
estimates that coal combustion generated contaminants,such as the"fugitive dust" that can
approximately 131 million tons of coal ash blow off of exposed coal ash.
in 2007.41 The Environmental Protection
Agency, noting that this figure excludes PATHWAYS TO EXPOSURE
smaller coal-fired power plants (those
generating between 1 and 100 megawatts The toxic contaminants in coal ash follow various
per year), has suggested that a more routes,or pathways, to make their way into what we
accurate figure is 140 million tons of coal eat,drink or breathe.Some escape from coal ash by
waste annually.42 The EPA estimates that leaching or dissolving into water,subsequently con-
the storage capacity for all existing coal taminating underground aquifers (groundwater) •
ash ponds and landfills is approximately or surface waters like rivers and streams.Some are
864,000 acre feet.This is enough coal ash to consumed when people eat fish that have been con-
flow continuously over Niagara Falls for four taminated by coal ash-exposed water or sediments.
days straight. Coal ash is the second largest Coal ash toxicants also travel through the air as
industrial waste stream in the United States, fine particles or dust or over the ground and other
second only to mine wastes. •
surfaces,due to erosion,runoff,or settling dust.
The surface water path
9° Coal ash contamination of surface waters such as
streams,rivers,ponds,lakes,and wetlands poses
a serious threat to the life forms that live in and
eat from those waters.The most dramatic acts of
contamination occur when impoundment retain-
k. ing walls give way,spilling enormous quantities of
coal ash slurry directly into surface waters.The
rupture of the retaining dam at the Kingston,
Tennessee,coal ash waste pond spilled more than
Enough coal ash is stored in waste•ponds and 1 billion gallons of coal ash slurry into the Emory.
landfills to flow over Niagara Falls for four River.Although it is the best known example of a
consecutive days. coal ash pond failure,it is not the only case.For
example,a rupture occurred in August 2005 when

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT • 9
•
a dam failed at the Martin's Creek Power Plant containing very high levels of arsenic,selenium,
in eastern Pennsylvania,allowing more than 100 and boron—directly into streams,rivers and
million gallons of coal ash-contaminated water to lakes.At the majority of power plants, the permits
flow into the Delaware River.Arsenic levels in the allowing these discharges contain no limits on the
river jumped to levels that exceeded water quality levels of heavy metals and other toxics that can be
standards,and a public water supply was temporar- released into surface water.
ily closed downstream.The response action cost
$37 million 48 Leaching into groundwater
Some coal ash impoundments are rated for the Far more common than a dam break is leaching of
degree of danger they pose to the communities contaminants from ponds and landfills: the pro-
and environments downstream.According to the cess by which toxic materials in coal ash dissolve
EPA rating system,a"high"hazard rating indicates in water and percolate through the earth.The dis-
that a dam failure is likely to cause loss of human solved toxics,called"leachate,"can endanger pub-
life.A"significant"hazard rating means that failure lic health and the environment by contaminating
of the impoundment would cause significant eco- surface water or groundwater used for drinking
nomic loss,environmental damage,or damage to supplies. Leaching may be less spectacular than a
infrastructure. In 2009, the EPA found that of the rupture,but it happens with much greater frequen-
629 ash ponds it identified,only 431 were rated. Of cy46and may continue to release toxic substances
those,50—more than one in ten—had a"high" into the environment for decades.
hazard rating and 71 had a"significant"rating.44 Leaching can expose people to dangerous toxi-
The number of coal ash dams with high and sig- cants at levels above safe drinking water standards.
nificant hazard ratings is likely to rise much higher The amount of leaching that takes place at coal
because almost 200 coal ash dams are not yet rated. ash storage facilities varies greatly from place to
Currently no federal regulations exist to require place, reflecting the type of coal ash that is stored,
hazard safety ratings. its concentration and acidity,and the nature of the
Dramatic failures aren't the only source of stir- disposal site.As a result,leachate concentrations
face spills;smaller spills occur when impoundment are different in different sites and vary for different
dikes and dams leak less significant amounts,or elements 47 The rate of leaching may be affected
impoundments overflow in heavy rains or floods. by a number of factors: the size of the disposal
In addition,both coal ash ponds and landfills pond,pond depth,and the amount of pressure the
often discharge coal ash-contaminated waters di- waste creates; the underlying geology(the types
reedy into surface water.In one documented case, of soil and rock that lie underneath); the gradi-
at the U.S.Department of Energy's Savannah River ent or slope of the land;and how far beneath the
Project in South Carolina,a coal-fired power plant pond or bottom of the landfill an aquifer or under-
transported fly ash mixed with water to a series of ground stream might lie.What most determines
• open settling ponds.A continuous flow of that wa- the amount of leaching is not the coal,however,
ter exited the settling ponds and entered a swamp but the robustness of the storage site.The single
that in turn discharged into a creek.Toxic nts most important factor is whether the disposal site
from the coal ash poisoned several types o aquatic is lined,with composite liners being the most ef-
animals inhabiting the wetlands:bullfrog adpoles fective in keeping the ash from contact with water.
exhibited oral deformities and impaired s imming Another essential safeguard is a leachate collec-
and predator avoidance abilities,and wat snakes tion system that collects the leachate that develops
showed metabolic impacts.According to t e EPA, and pumps the dangerous chemicals back into the
the impacts were "caused by releases from the ash lined unit.
settling ponds."45 A more common occurrence is Verified damage from leaching has occurred at
the permitted discharge of ash-laden water—often dozens of dump sites throughout the U.S.,contami-

10 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
riming drinking water,streams,and ponds and kill- federal government defines as a hazardous waste.
ing wildlife.For example,in Gambrills,Maryland, Here are some of the most elevated readings the
residential drinking wells were contaminated after EPA observed:
fly ash and bottom ash from two Maryland power
plants were dumped into excavated portions of • The highest leaching level for arsenic was
two unlined quarries. Groundwater samples col- 18,000 parts per billion (ppb).This amount is
lected in 2006 and 2007 from residential drinking 1,800 times the federal drinking water standard
water wells near the site indicated contamination and over three times the level that defines a
with arsenic,beryllium,cadmium and lead,among hazardous waste.
other suspected"constituents of concern."Testing
of private wells in 83 homes and businesses in ar- • The concentration of antimony in coal ash leach-
eas around the disposal site revealed exceedances ate reached 11,000 ppb,also 1,800 times the fed-
in 34 wells of Maximum Contaminant Levels,the eral drinking water standard for this pollutant. •
highest level of a contaminantthat is allowed in
drinking water.48 In November 2007,power plant ■ For selenium, the highest leaching level found
owner Constellation Energy settled with residents by the EPA was 29,000 ppb,a level that is 580
of Gambrills for$54 million for poisoning water times the drinking water standard,29 times the
supplies with dangerous pollutants. hazardous waste threshold,and 5,800 times the
Other documented cases of harm from leaching water quality standard.
are presented in section 3.
• The EPA found that barium could leach to the
How toxic is coal ash leachate? level of 670,000 ppb,which is 335 times the
As the discussion of pathways indicates,dangerous drinking water standard and almost seven times
substances in coal ash can leach out of disposal fa- the hazardous waste threshold.
cilities and expose humans to serious health risks.
A report released by the EPA in 2009 documented ■ For chromium, the highest leaching level found
that many of those toxicants leach at concentra- by the EPA was 73 times the federal drinking
tions high enough to seriously endanger human water standard and more than 1.5 times the
health.The findings reflected the EPA's adoption threshold for hazardous waste."
of new and improved analytical procedures that,
according to the EPA,are better able to determine Not only are these levels high enough to harm
how much toxic material would leach out of coal human health, they are also many times higher
ash and scrubber sludge 49 The EPA's conclusions than the leaching levels that the EPA previously
greatly altered our understanding of the toxicity of reported: for arsenic,more than 76 times higher
• coal ash leachate. than the highest levels reported and for antimony,
The report analyzed 73 samples of coal ash more than 916 times the earlier levels.51 In short,
waste of different types and analyzed the physi- the new and more sensitive test shows far higher
cal properties, the content of elements, and the levels of leaching of known toxic substances.
• leaching characteristics.What the report found The report notes that the leach test results •
was that for some coal ashes and under some represent a theoretical range of the potential con-
' circumstances, the levels of toxic constituents centrations of toxics that might occur in leachates
leaching out of coal ash can be hundreds to rather than an estimate of the amount of a toxic •
thousands of times greater than federal drink- that would actually reach any given aquifer or
ing water standards. Several toxic pollutants, drinking water well. It cautions that"comparisons
including arsenic and selenium, leached in some with regulatory health values, particularly drink-
circumstances at levels exceeding those which the ing water values, must be done with caution."52

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT tr. 11
Figure 2. Coal Ash is EVEN MORE TOXIC than Previously Thought
am the drinking
Coal ash contains metals like arsenic,antimony,chromium and selenium that can pose serious water$fano ted,;
threats to human health,including increased risk of cancer,stomach ailments,and lung and heart
problems.The question is,how much of these toxic metals does coal ash contain?Recent data �r
generated by the U.S.EPA using new testing methods show that toxic metal concentrations found in
coal ash samples are as much as 1,800 limes greater then federal safe drinking water standards. kltiO
That's of serious concern,considering that current methods of coal ash disposal often lead to
contaminated drinking water.Though you may not be able to taste elevated levels of arsenic or
other metals in your tap water your health may very well feel the effects.To better understand the
magnitude of these ddfferences,consider how a 200-pound Miami Dolphin measures up with some of =.; 4
the sea's largest creatures.
Levels of chromium found in coal ash samples were 73 times
higher than the federal drinking water standard.A large MI
grown arca weighs roughly 73 times more than a 200-
pound Miami Dolphin,
x 73 =
Levels of cadmium found in coal ash samples were
380 times higher than the federal drinkin&water
t _ •• standard.A right whale weighs roughly att0 times
•x 8 — more than a 200-pound Miami Dolphin.
L
x 1800 =
It
Levels of arsenic and antimony found in coal ash samples were 181)0
times higher than the federal drinking water standard.A blue whale
weighs roughly 1800 times more than a 200-pound Miami Dolphin.
st,atan au Josnua r.:,tn,r
However,the new leach tests consider a number of the wider range of conditions and values that the
factors that earlier tests didn't take into ac ount. new tests take into account, the EPA itself found
These include the pH (acidity) of the ash tself, the that the prediction of leaching was done"with
acidity of the environment,and the variet of other much greater reliability."53 For these reasons,we
conditions that coal ash encounters in the field accept the new data as the basis for addressing the
when it is disposed or recycled.The EPA oted potential impacts coal ash has on human health.
that an evaluation using a single set of ass mptions
is insufficient to reflect real-life condition. and Consumption of fish
"will, in'many cases,lead to inaccurate c. clu- Even if people are'not drinking contaminated water,
sions about expected leaching in the fitel.."With their health may be threatened if they eat fish from

12 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
water sources contaminated by coal ash toxicants.
There are several pathways by which the water (and 4
the fish) can become contaminated:runoff and ero-
sion;airborne ash particles that settle on the water;
contaminated groundwater that migrates into sur-
face water;direct discharge of coal ash runoff due to `est s
,, 4104
heavy preciitation or flooding;and direct discharge
of ash pond water and landfill leachate through »*4" v.
pipes from waste units.Once the toxics are in the ..+'
water or sediment,fish can absorb them through
1010
their gills or by eating contaminated food sources
(algae,worms,and other fish food sources have all ..�.
been shown to absorb coal ash toxicants),passing t 7110
these pollutants up the food chain to humans.54
A well documented case of toxic fish contami •
-
nation is that of Belews Lake. Belews Lake, near •
• Winston-Salem,North Carolina,served as a cool- be allowed to dry,resulting in wind dispersion
ing reservoir for a large coal-fired power plant. of dried ash. Landfills may not be covered daily
Fly ash produced by the power plant was disposed or capped,also resulting in unsafe levels of ash
in a settling basin,which released selenium- blowing from the disposal site.Where coal ash is
laden water back to the lake. Due to the selenium used for fill in construction sites and engineering
• contamination: projects,or on agricultural fields as a"soil amend-
ment,"it can blow or erode and travel over land •
• 19 of the 20 fish species originally present in the as well as through surface waters.Windblown par-
reservoir were entirely eliminated,including all ticulates from dry disposal—so-called"fugitive
the primary sport fish. dust"—can also arise when coal wastes are loaded
and unloaded, transported,or when vehicles travel
• Selenium fish impacts persisted for 11 years. through ash disposal sites and nearby communities
and coal ash is spread or compacted.
• Eight years after the flow of selenium-laden Coal ash is dangerous if inhaled,making fugi-
water to the lake was ended,the state issued tive dust a serious health concern.The health
a fish advisory for selenium,urging people to threat arises from minute particles of dust known
reduce their consumption of fish from Belews as particulate matter,which may be composed of
Lake.The advisory remained in effect for seven various substances.Airborne particles of fly ash,
more years.55 if breathed in,can affect the lungs and bronchii.
Of particular concern are the extremely small par-
• Adverse impacts to birds feeding on contami- titles known as"fine particulate matter" (PM2.5).
nated fish persist,decades after the coal ash was These can lodge deep within the lung,where they
released into the cooling pond. can affect the lung lining,causing inflammation,
•
altering immunological mechanisms,and increas-
Over land and by air ing the risk of cardiopulmonary disease.56 They
Coal ash also follows land and air pathways to can or even pass through the lungs into the blood,
result in human exposure. Coal ash disposal op- causing serious adverse health effects ranging
erations can generate dangerous quantities of air- from triggered asthma attacks to increased mortal-
borne ash,due to mismanagement of both ponds ity rates. People with pre-existing chronic obstruc-
and landfills.Ash ponds in arid environments may tive pulmonary disease,lung infection or asthma

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ 13
are particularly susceptible to coal ash effects,as nificant risks,"adding that"Even at the median risk,
are people with type II diabetes mellitus.57 yearly management leads to a PM10 concentration
When coal ash blows from dry storage sites, almost an order of magnitude above the NAAQS....
particulate matter can readily exceed the national [It is even] "uncertain whether weekly controls
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) that exist would have the potential to cause NAAQS ex-
for levels of particulate matter in the air. In the ceedences...only daily controls can definitively
EPA's own words, "there is not only a possibility, be said not to cause excess levels of particulates in
but a strong likelihood that dry-handling [of coal isolation."59 Yet,as the EPA itself notes,many states
ash] would lead to the NAAQS being exceeded do not require daily cover to control fugitive dust
absent fugitive dust controls."58 To compound the at coal ash landfills and most states do not require
problem, high background levels of particulate caps on coal ash ponds to control dust.fi0
matter may add to the potential for fugitive dust Workers and nearby residents run the risk of
from coal ash to lead to significant human being exposed to significant amounts of fugitive
health risks. dust. Residents living near power plants,as well
Protective practices to control dust,such as as workers at the plants,may be subject to expo-
moistening dry coal ash or covering it,can minimize sure to dust when coal ash is loaded. Residents
the dangers to health from this source.Yet at some living along transport routes may be exposed
coal ash dump sites,dust controls are applied only to emissions during transportation. Residents
monthly or even yearly.The EPA found such infre- living near dry landfills and eroding ash ponds
quent practices to"have the potential to lead to sig- may be exposed both during ash unloading and
r a ,
k `'' t +l . 'i k ' ' S ! '.� '4_ s 5
,4°,-,,:: :
4 • t�.
v,
,/: v_ ,
� .. .
iti
� sir � .1...,....,g-,
..-0: , � �•
i -M t i4,�� y;• S
' ' ',1-- - liciik-2-4*To, ' v ".;_i::::,, _.. . -.:..,;,,,,atkii, if 4/44,1,,7,,,
,:i4%;r:i ../ t, 1 I
" . `N'ti 4 '‘ t f,1
rr
Reuse of coal ash as fill in rural Illinois encroaches on private property and threatens drinking water wells at the •
Rocky Acres fill site in Oakville, Illinois. Th Illinois EPA advised residents to stop drinking their well water.

14 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
• subsequently due to windblown emissions. Due COAL ASH REUSE: ADDITIONAL
•
to multiple routes of exposure, residents who live PATHWAYS TO EXPOSURE
near landfills are likely to be exposed to more dust
Approximately 40 percent of coal ash is"recycled"
for longer periods of time.
in engineering,manufacturing,agricultural and
other applications rather than being disposed.12
EXPOSURE AND PEAK CONCENTRATIONS .Fly ash,which hardens when mixed with water
In addition to being geographically widespread, and limestone,can be used in making concrete.
coal ash is also persistent over time,raising long- Bottom ash is sometimes used as an aggregate in
term concerns and challenges in regard to health. road construction and concrete,and FGD gyp-
Chemicals move at different rates through ground sum sometimes substitutes for mined gypsum in
water,so when contaminants leach out of coal ash agricultural soil amendments and in making wall-
disposal sites,some take longer than others to board.Ash is also used in structural fills and road
•
reach places where they may expose humans to construction projects,spread as an anti-skid sub-
risk.The EPA has conducted sophisticated mod- stance on snowy roads,and is even used as cinders
eling to estimate how long leaching substances on school running tracks.And perhaps as much
would take to reach their maximum Concentra- as 20 percent of the total coal ash generated in the
tions in well water.For unlined surface impound- U.S. is dumped in mines as fill.
ments, the median average years until peak well- This recycling offers a significant economic
water concentrations would occur is estimated to benefit to the utilities and industries that generate
be 74 years for selenium, 78 years for arsenic,and coal ash: they generate income from its sale and
avoid costs of its disposal. However,some forms of
97 years for cobalt. In comparison, if the surface
coal ash recycling raise health concerns, especially
impoundment were clay-lined, the median aver-
age years until peak concentration rises to 90 years where the ash is not"encapsulated," that is,not
for boron and selenium, 110 years for arsenic,and bound to other materials and ina loose particulate
•
270 years for cobalt.The comparable time periods or sludge form. Unencapsulated coal ash when ex-
for these materials escaping from composite-lined posed to water is subject to leaching.This poses a
units are in the thousands of years.b' potential problem in several forms of coal ash recy-
The implication of these projections is that coal cling,such as when coal ash is sprinkled on snowy
roads or used to fill mines,or when used as fill in
ash toxicants are going to be with us—and with
our descendants—for a very long time.Because construction projects.Other forms of recycling ap-
many coal ash contaminants are persistent in the pear to minimize the potential threats to health.
environment, they do not disintegrate or lose their Applications where the ash is encapsulated (bond-
toxicity.They may be contained or may disperse ed with other substances) such as in concrete and
into the environment but they never really"go wallboard•
seem to be the most stable and least
away."They remain in the environment and con- likely to leach. However these uses may still pose a
tinue to pose exposure risks for years,even genera- hazard to the construction workers who must cut,
drill or perform other dust-generating activities. In
tions. Unless coal ash disposal is required to Com-
general,further testing is needed on many forms
ply with modern engineering safeguards,we can
expect to see increased levels of human exposure of coal ash recycling,especially the unencapsulat-
ed ones,in order to establish with greater certainty
to coal ash toxics in the future.Taking a longer
view, the persistence of coal ash toxics is a health- their potential impacts on human health.
based argument for reducing our reliance on coal
as a means of generating electricity.

3. Evidence of Harm:
The Damage Cases
• he potential risk of coal ash to our standards known as Maximum Contaminant
health and environment is clear. But is Levels(MCL's).MCLs are the highest level of a
the risk only theoretical? Or has coal contaminant that is allowed in drinking water
ash actually caused harm to real people and are enforceable standards;67
in real communities?
The law requires the EPA to examine docu- • These toxics must be found at a distance from
mented cases of the disposal of coal combustion the waste storage unit"sufficient...to indicate •
wastes"in which danger to human health or the that hazardous constituents have migrated to
environment has been proved."63 Where proven the extent that they could cause human health
damage is found,the EPA can require corrective concerns;"
measures such as closure of the unit,capping the
unit,installation of new liners,groundwater treat- ■ A scientific study has provided documented
ment,groundwater monitoring,or combinations evidence of another type of damage to human
of these'measures.The EPA has formally identified health or the environment;or
63"proven and potential"damage cases where coal
ash poison has contaminated drinking water,wet- ■ An administrative ruling or court decision
lands,creeks,or rivers.64 In addition, two nonprofit presents an explicit finding of specific damage
organizations,Earthjustice and the Environmental to human health or the environment."
Integrity Project,using monitoring data and other
information in the files of state agencies,have docu- In addition to cases of"proven damage," the
mented an additional 70 cases shown to ha e caused EPA also recognizes cases of"potential damage."
contamination.65 This brings the total num er of The EPA defines potential damage cases as "those
• damage cases to almost 140,with more still to be cases with documented MCL exceedances"—
• investigated.In 38 of these cases,toxics ar known toxics levels exceeding the allowable standard •
—
to have migrated beyond the property bel nging to "that were measured in ground water beneath
the utility company and into a nearby com unity.66 or close to the waste source."69 In these potential
The EPA does not make damage case etermi- damage cases, the association with coal combus-
nations lightly.For"proven damage" to b found, tion wastes is established, but the hazardous sub-
evidence must show one or more of the f llowing: stances have not migrated to the extent that they
could cause human health concerns—yet.As the
• Toxics have been found and measuredi in earlier discussion of peak concentrations indi-
ground water,at levels above health-based cates, leaching from coal ash often continues for

•
16 IN COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
Figure 3. Coal Ash Groundwater and/or Surface Water Contamination Sites
1111*
el=
:ri .
• Environmental Integrity Project,
Sierra Club and Earthjustice
Damage Cases70611*
■ EPA Damage Cases" 4
411.
years and may endanger local residents years or failure. This is a small reminder that where
even generations later. toxic substances are concerned, accidents do
Taken together,these requirements cre- happen, and may lead to ecological and health-
ate a high bar for the designation of a damage threatening consequences.
case—making it all the more disturbing that so
many damage cases have been identified. PROFILES OF SELECTED DAMAGE CASES
Two-thirds of the proven damage cases show
damage to ground water—a serious concern, When a damage case occurs,what does it look
since ground water feeds drinking water wells. like?What impacts does it have on local communi-
The leaching occurred at different types of ties?The majority of damage cases result not from
storage facilities: four unlined landfills, five breakages,but from leaching.This process is invis-
unlined surface impoundments, six unlined ible and gradual,often occurring over a number
sand and gravel pits, and one due to a liner of years. It is detected by monitoring and testing of
failure at a surface impoundment.72 This dein- ground and/or surface waters,procedures that are
onstrates that unlined storage was far and away not routinely conducted at most coal ash disposal
the leading cause of ground water contamina- sites.The damage cases profiled here begin'to tell
tion. But even a lined storage pond resulted in the story of how coal ash impacts our health and
contamination, in the case of an unanticipated our environment.

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ 17
LEACHING FROM DISPOSAL SITES manganese,chloride,and iron at levels above the
state's Enforcement Standards and arsenic above
Virginia:Residential wells contaminated
with vanadium and selenium the state's Preventive Action Level. State environ-
•
From the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s,Virginia mental officials considered this one of the most
seriously affected coal ash sites in Wisconsin.
Power operated a disposal site for the Yorktown
Power Station,storing fly ash from coal and petro- New York:Landfill contaminates wells with lead,
leum coke in abandoned sand and gravel pits.Six a potent neurotoxicant
years after the last load of coal ash was disposed of, A leaking dump containing fly ash,bottom ash,
area residents reported that the water in their drink- and other material generated by the Dunkirk
ing wells had turned green. Studies found their
Steam Station on Lake Erie contaminated drink-
wells were contaminated with nickel,vanadium,ar- ing water wells with lead,a very potent neurotoxi-
senic,beryllium,chromium,copper,molybdenum,
cant that can harm the developing nervous system
and selenium.Fifty-five homes had to be placed on
at even low levels of exposure.
public water,as their well water was too dangerous The landfill owner was required to cease receiv-
• to drink.In addition,heavy metal contamination
ing coal ash wastes, to conduct extensive remedia-
1 • existed in ground water around the fly ash disposal •
tion,and to close the facility. Post-closure ground
areas,in onsite ponds,and in the sediments of a
water and surface water monitoring and mainte-
nearby creek.Six hundred feet of the creek had to
nance were expected to continue for 30 years after
be relocated to minimize contact with the fly ash final closure of the entire facility.74
disposal areas,even though years had passed.This
site became the Chisman Creek Superfund Site,• COAL ASH USED AS FILL MATERIAL
which was listed on the nation's list of most polluted IN CONSTRUCTION
Superfiind sites, the National Priorities List (NPL)."
Indiana: Town is declared a Superfund site
Montana:Leaking unlined coal ash pond due to coal ash
contaminates drinking wells, ranches The Northern Indiana Public Service Corporation
At the PPL Montana Power Plant in Colstrip, (NIPSCO) deposited an estimated 1 million tons
Montana,leaking unlined coal ash ponds of fly ash in Town of Pines,Indiana.The ash was
contaminated drinking water wells with high levels buried in a leaking landfill and used as construc-
of metals,boron,and sulfate. The community lo- .tion fill in the town,where it contaminated drink
cated near the power plant had to be supplied with ing water wells throughout the town with toxic
safe drinking water. The plume of contamina- chemicals,including arsenic,cadmium,boron and
• tion stretches at least a mile from the pow r plant, molybdenum. Hundreds of residents were put on
affecting ranchers far from the waste pon s. municipal water,and Town of Pines was declared a
Superfund site.
Wisconsin: Contamination migrates offsite
into private drinking-water wells Virginia: Use of coal ash in constructing a golf course
• At the WEPCO Highway 59 Landfill,fly a h and leads to groundwater contamination with heavy metals
• bottom ash were dumped into an old san and A 216-acre golf course in Chesapeake,Virginia, •
gravel pit.The facility was unlined and th under- was built using 1.5 million cubic yards of fly ash.
lying soil consisted of sands and gravel wi h minor When groundwater at the golf course was tested,
amounts of silt and clay,believed to be re atively arsenic,boron,chromium,copper,lead,and vana-
permeable. Contamination from the faci ity ap- dium were detected,indicating a potential threat
pears to have migrated to off-site private ells: to nearby residential drinking water wells.As the
Ground water monitoring of those wells found contaminants had not yet been detected off of the
them to be contaminated with sulfate, boron, site, this was classified as a potential damage case.75

18 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
COAL ASH IMPACTING LIVES: PORTRAIT OF R.G. HUNT
R. G. Hunt lives in Nampoommium hair began to fall out, and
Waterftow, New Mexico, on = their eyesight worsened.
land his family has owned A i The children's teachers
for four generations. As ~ reported that the kids also
Y.
the town's name suggests, ' had difficulty with simple
they drank from a fresh- tasks of concentration and
water well on the property, �) comprehension.
and for years his sheep 1- N For two years, the
grazed nearby and drank family bought drinking
from natural springs andwater and carried it
an arroyo (a dry creek bed '"" : into their home until
that runs during the rainy :y,. a they could afford the •
season)—until the mid- connection fees for the
1970's. ', ►, public water system.
In 1972 a utility company ' "Once we stopped using
r
built the San Juan Power -,,,? ,r• kt'f;�"" the well," Hunt recounts,
Plant next to Hunt's land .'•--„i"-•"«,.„ °r.,°: r ,.ti . ,�,'..:,-.0:11-0,- "we began, slowly, to
' and began using the dry s ~ „ �;' • tl t'�;• ,0 3,.'.., improve.” He, his wife, and
arroyo to discharge their n, r�r ; t<' V.z�' ,.��'(4 -: their kids had been sick
wastewater. The company ►Y'`'��"y� 1%"y ' for more than ten years.
1, .A..is Fy
also buried coal ash in Ort :* i,' N' I Hunt's animals suffered
nearby dry streambeds, `�'- ' • ' '*•=1-k.A 14,14.54:?' as well. "I watched 1,400
rather than building surface sheep slowly suffer and
impoundments with protective liners. Lacking die from the lack of safe drinking water," he
effective containment, the ash leached into told Congress. "Within two years I lost my
underground aquifers, contaminating Hunt's entire sheep herd and took outside jobs,
water with high levels of arsenic, selenium, rather than risk selling contaminated meat to .
potassium, chromium, lead, sulfate, and other my customers."
toxicants. In 1984 the EPA fined the utility company
"By 1975 after the dumping of the coal and required it to line the ponds. However,
ash began, my family started to get sick," the utility arranged to bury their fly ash in
Hunt told the U.S. House of Representatives unlined pits in the neighboring San Juan Coal
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment Mine. As a result, fly ash and scrubber sludge
in formal testimony in December 2009. "I continue to contaminate the Hunts' arroyo
was diagnosed with heavy metal poisoning and groundwater.
with extremely high arsenic, iron, lead, and Hunt's closing words to Congress indicate
selenium levels. I lost nearly 100 pounds in less his deep disillusionment: "My experience is
than a year. I was so weak I couldn't stand or that the energy industry cannot be entrusted
work, and wasn't expected to live." with innocent lives or to regulate themselves,
Hunt did survive, although he and his wife for the good of the community, in lieu of a
suffered from indigestion, diarrhea, nausea, profit for their stockholders. I urge you to take
and vomiting and had problems with mental every measure available to you to prevent this
focus and comprehension.Their children also from happening to anyone, anywhere in our
had constant indigestion and diarrhea, their nation, ever again."76

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT • 19
UNPREDICTABLE FAILURES and contaminate the environment.An unlined
North Dakota: Lined coal ash ponds leak coal ash pond in Cartersville, Georgia, developed
arsenic and selenium a sinkhole that ultimately reached four acres and a
depth of 30 feet.An estimated 2.25 million gallons
At the United Power Coal Creek Station, a power
of coal ash and water were released into the tribu-
plant in North Dakota, surface impoundments
were built with protective linings. However, the
tart'of a local creek,causing a temporary arsenic
spike in a public drinking water source. Remedial
linings of several impoundments developed severe
action followed, involving dredging coal ash from
leaks within a few years of construction. Ground 7s
the creek.
water monitoring at the site showed arsenic and
selenium in excess of health-based levels. The state
eventually required that the ponds be relined with
CONTAMINATION OF WATER AND FISH
a composite liner.' Texas: Selenium contamination leads to fish kills
and fish consumption advisories
Georgia:Millions of gallons spill into creek Discharges from coal ash ponds poisoned fish
from a huge sinkhole with high levels of selenium at three reservoirs in
This sinkhole highlights the many ways in which Texas—and, through the fish, the selenium poten-
toxic substances can escape from storage areas tially reached human beings. The reservoirs—the
COAL ASH IMPACTING LIVES: PORTRAIT OF GAYLE QUEEN
During the ten years that Gayle Queen lived financial security and her health. "My biggest
in Gambrills, Maryland, a small community monetary asset, my home, is worthless," she
south of Baltimore, a power company dumped stated. "I may have to file for bankruptcy." In
4.1 million tons of coal ash near her home. addition, according to the 56-year-old Mrs.
Trucked in from another community, the coal Queen, "My doctor has told me I have the
ash was deposited into an unlined sand and lungs of an 80-year-old woman because of
gravel pit with excavations as deep as 80 feet. breathing in the coal ash. I am terrified about
The dumping created two problems. Ash my future health."
dust went airborne, meaning "we all breathed She also worries about the health of her
the dust in," according to Mrs. Queen. And children and grandchildren. "They drank the
while there was supposed to be no contact water, bathed in it, brushed their teeth and
between the coal ash and surface or ground breathed in this dust. Will they get a disease,
water, dangerous chemicals did leach out too? No one can tell me for sure. But I do
of the unlined pit. From 1999 through 2007, know they never should have been exposed
tests showed that arsenic, iron, manganese, to this stuff."
and sulfate were leaching at dangerous levels, Mrs. Queen, testifying before the U.S.
eventually entering an aquifer that supplies the Congress, called on the government to pre-
community's drinking water and contaminat- vent coal ash contamination from happening
ing residents' private wells. again, adding, "If the Environmental Protec-
Mrs. Queen, who has a well at her home, tion Agency had the authority to require liners
noted, "I rely on my well water to provide and force power companies not to dump close
cooking, drinking and bathing water," to drinking water systems, what happened to
Because of the coal ash contamination, me and my community would not happen to
Mrs. Queen fears that she has lost both her anyone else."79

20 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
Brandy Branch Reservoir in northeastern Texas become pregnant not to consume any fish from the
along the Louisiana border, the Welsh Reservoir reservoir whatsoever.That advisory remained in
northeast of Dallas, and the Martin Iake Reservoir effect for 12 years."
southeast of Dallas—all received contaminated
run-off from power plants. In response to elevated Tennessee: "Toxics damage fish, plants,
levels of selenium in fish in the reservoirs, the and small mammals
Texas Department of Health issued fish ronsump- At the Department of Energy's Chestnut Ridge
tion advisories, in one case warning people to eat Operable Unit 2 in Oak Ridge,Tennessee, coal ash
no more than eight ounces of fish from the res- slurry was stored in a pond created by building an
•
ervoir per week.Another advisory urged children earthen dam across a creek. Constructed to hold 20
under six and women who were pregnant or might years'worth of ash,after only 12 years it was filled
SCIENTIFIC STUDIES OF ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE FROM COAL ASH
Besides being documented banded water snakes, slider
in damage cases, the effects •• ,i turtles, barn swallows and
of coal ash residues on wild- 4; : muskrats. Bullfrogs accumulate
life have been the focus of t• `. both selenium and arsenic.82
published scientific studies. 1"> 3 Exposure to coal ash con-
These studies show that coal .; •'_ '* D taminants may lead to death
ash presents significant risks, . ` • a or cause other, lesser effects.
especially to aquatic and semi- • Coal ash toxicants often build
aquatic organisms. Its effects up in animals' organs, including
range from producing physical Duck embryosdamaged by the reproductive organs, where
deformities in fish and am- selenium contamination they can negatively influence
phibians, to wiping out entire (Utah). reproductive rates. Sublethal •
populations.81 effects also include physi-
Plants and animals that inhabit coal ash- cal abnormalities that can influence critical
contaminated sites accumulate toxic ele- behaviors, such as feeding, swimming speed
ments, including arsenic, cadmium, copper, and predator-avoidance reflexes. In one
and lead, sometimes in very high concentra- study,83 scientists raised Southern Leopard
tions. Among plants, high levels of accumula- Frog tadpoles on either sand or coal ash •
-
tion have been noted in algae (for copper); contaminated sediment. Ninety percent of the
arrowhead (copper and lead); cattails (cop- tadpoles exposed to the contaminated sedi-
per), and sago pondweed (for arsenic and ment displayed abnormalities of the mouth,
chromium). Among invertebrates, plankton while none of the control individuals did.
accumulate high levels of selenium; cad- Contaminated tadpoles also had decreased
disflies of cadmium, chromium and cop- developmental rates and weighed signifi-
per; Asiatic clams of cadmium and copper; cantly less. These and other abnormalities can
crayfish of copper and selenium; crickets have a negative impact on population survival
of chromium; and earthworms of arsenic, rates. Coal ash contaminants can also affect
chromium, and selenium. Moving up the food the abundance, diversity and quality of food
chain, bullhead minnows, sunfish, largemouth resources, thus creating substantial indirect
bass, and bluegill have all been documented effects that ripple up through food chains to
to accumulate high levels of selenium, as have impact higher life forms.

•
COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT 2 21
SELENIUM
Scientific studies have shown that selenium that is 580 times the drinking water standard,
can have devastating impacts on fish popula- 29 times the hazardous waste threshold, and
tions. Selenium can bioaccumulate in fish until 5,800 times the water quality standard.86
it is up to 5,000 times as concentrated in their In the coal ash-contaminated Belews Lake
bodies as in the surrounding water, causing in North Carolina,19 of 20 fish species were •
anemia; heart, liver,and breathing problems; eliminated due to selenium contamination.
and deformities.84 Surviving fish ex-
Because selenium concentrates in the yolk hibited deformities
of developing embryos, stunting their devel- and serious patho-
• opment and causing organ abnormalities in logical problems.87
• the larval fish, it can contribute to death in
the affected fish and reproductive failure of The photograph shows
the local species population.85 a spinal deformity in
These effects reflect the extremely high fish, attributed to sele- i
levels of selenium found in coal ash. While 10 nium from coal ash.
• micrograms of selenium per liter of water—a
concentration of 10 ppb—can cause total
population collapse in a reservoir, coal ash
can produce leachate with selenium concen-
trations of 29,000 parts per billion, a level
•
to within four feet of the top of the dam. Once the percentages of deformed heads and eroded fins.
pond was full,slurry was released over the dam Elevated concentrations of selenium,arsenic,and
directly into the creek,resulting in contamination possibly thallium were found in largemouth bass.
of the creek,spring water and groundwater,with Selenium was also absorbed by plants,creating a
• toxics.The local creek was found to be under se- possible pathway to exposure for soil invertebrates
vere stress,with no fish populations in some areas and small mammals.Elevated-readings of arsenic, •
and downstream sunfish populations having high selenium and lead were found in small mammals.R"

lk •
4. Policy ImplicationsB 111 II ■ ■ II II ■ III Illecause of its array of severe effects
on human health and the environ-
ment, "`
•
coal—across all of its life cycle,
including coal ash—must be addressed / .. f447, y'
in a public health context. Use of coal is also an ,a', ''
ethical issue. Corporations that burn coal and t< 1 1t '#•°'
generate coal ash must not be free of responsibil- } `>`
ity for the consequences they unleash on human
and environmental health. Rather,coal's contami-
nants must be handled in ways that minimize their
impacts on human health and the planet.The
responsibility for that handling must fall first on
those who produce, utilize,dispose,and reuse coal /
and its waste products.
Because coal ash contains such high levels of Q- _ ,/
dangerous toxics,its disposal and reuse call for l
high levels of prudence and care.From a health
and medical perspective, the situation calls for .:If
application of the"precautionary principle."The ,.�.....�
precautionary principle states that where an action
risks causing harm to the public or to the environ-
114116111
merit, the burden of proof that it is not harmful L`
falls on those who would take the action. In other
words,rather than waiting until harm has oc-
curred,we should require those who want to use
coal ash to demonstrate that the proposed use is 00*
safe.It is the same principle applied by the Food
and Drug Administration to keep our food supply we tolerate?" the precautionary principle asks,
safe,and it is a wise one to apply when dealing with "What actions can we take to prevent harm?"
leaking,leaching, toxic substances. When we distribute arsenic, lead, mercury,
In contrast to a classical risk assessment or selenium into the environment,we expose
approach,which asks, "How much harm can ourselves and our children to compounds that

COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ 23
rob us all of our potential for full development, ash should only be permitted when research
• while also harming the much broader biotic indicates that the toxic chemicals in coal ash
community.Yet our duty as health professionals will not migrate from the ash in quantities that •
and environmental stewards includes the pose a threat to human health or the environ-
responsibility to protect people from harm, meat during the entire lifecycle of the reuse
especially those who cannot protect themselves, application.
such as children. The precautionary principle
supports an approach to policy-making that ■ Particular care must be taken to assess the
emphasizes our responsibility to actively promote health and environmental impact of the unen-
human'and environmental health, for ourselves capsulated use of coal ash before such uses are
as well as for future generations."9 allowed to continue.90 This includes the reuse
We have the knowledge and resources to make of coal combustion waste in agriculture and as
appropriate decisions to protect public health and anti-skid material on roads. Large unencapsulat-
the environment,and therefore, the responsibility ed uses,such as unlined and unmonitored fills,
to do so. Prudent, precautionary options available must be prohibited or treated as disposal sites
that should guide the handling of coal ash include: and be required to maintain all the necessary
safeguards.
■ Incorporating the best available elements of pre-
ventative hazard design in storage and disposal ■ Research is needed to determine the possible
facilities.These include engineered.composite health effects from coal combustion waste on
liner•systems,leachate collection systems,long- workers who are exposed to ash and sludge at
term ground water monitoring,and corrective disposal facilities,construction projects and
action (cleanup standards), if these systems fail. manufacturing plants.
■ Phase out the wet storage of coal ash, the dispos- ■ In view of the immense amount of coal ash
al of coal ash in mines and unprotected landfills, generated in the U.S.and its disposal and reuse •
and the disposal or reuse of unencapsulated ash in nearly every state and territory of the nation,
where it is exposed to surface or ground water. it is essential that the EPA enact federally
enforceable safeguards that protect the health
■ Pursuing further independent research and and environment of every citizen equally
assessment of coal ash recycling. Reuse of coal and effectively.

24 le COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT •
NOTES Proposed rule.http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industtial/
special/fossil/ccr-rule/fr-corrections.pdf.
•
1 Testimony'of Stephan A. Smith, DVM, Executive Director, 14 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste
Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. Submitted to the U.S. and Emergency Response,Office of Resource Conservation
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. and Recovery"Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of Coal
January 8, 2009. http://epw.senate.gov/public/index. Combustion Wastes."Draft EPA document.P.ES-7.April2010.
cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=e918d2f7-9e8b-
411e-b2449a3a7c3359d9. 15 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous and
Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of
2 Ibid. Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from
• 3 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste Electric Utilities." [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640; FRL-9149-4] •
and Emergency Response,Office of Resource Conservation Proposed rule.
and Recovery. "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of 16 All except molybdenum are listed as toxics by the Agency for
Coal Combustion Wastes."Draft EPA document.April 2010. Toxic Substances and Disease Regisuy (ATSDR), a federal
Page 2-4. public health agency of the U.S.Department of Health and
4 Testimony of Lisa Evans,Attorney, Earthjustice, before the Human Services.Some molybdenum compounds have been
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources,Committee shown to be toxic to rats.Although human toxicity data are
on Natural Resources, U.S. House of Representatives.June unavailable,animal studies have shown that chronic ingestion
10, 2008. http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/ of more than 10 mg/day of molybdenum can cause diarrhea,
evans-testimony-emrsubcom.pdf. slowed growth,low birth weight,and infertility and can affect
5 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.Information Request the lungs,kidneys and liver.
Responses from Electric Utilities: Responses from Electric 17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1999). Report to
Utilities to EPA Information Request Letter:Database of Sur- Congress,Wastes From the Combustion of Fossil Fuels.Vol-
vey Responses.http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/ time 2—Methods,findings,and recommendations.,Office of
special/fossil/surveys/index.htm#surveyresults. Solid Waste and Emergency Response,Washington,DC.EPA
•
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Regulatory Impact 530-R-99-010.March 1999.
Analysis for EPA's Proposed Regulation of Coal Combustion 18 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste •
Residues (CCR) Generated by the Electric Utility Industry. and Emergency Response,Office of Resource Conservation
April 30,2010 at 34. and Recovery."Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of Coal
7 U.S.Department of Energy.Coal Combustion Waste Manage- Combustion Wastes."Draft EPA document.April 2010.
ment Study,ICF Resources,Incorporated,February 1993 at 19 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Research and
page 1 of Executive Summary. Development,Characterization of Coal Combustion Residues
• 8 Earthjustice.Waste Deep:Filling Mines is Profit for Industry, from Electric Utilities—Leaching and Characterization Data
But Poison for People, February 2009, http://earthjustice. (EPA 600/R-09/151).December 2009.p.ii. •
openissue.com/sites/default/files/library/reports/ 20 Ibid.
earthjustice_waste_deep.pdf. 21 Casarett&Doull's Toxicology:The Basic Science of Poisons.
9 In 2008, coal's share of total net electricity generation in Ed. Curtis D. Klaassen. 7th edition, 2007. McGraw-Hill
the U.S.was 48.2 percent.U.S.Energy Information Admin- Corporation.
istration.Independent Statistics and Analysis.Electric Power 22 Kosnett Mi."Chronic Health Effects of Arsenic in Drinking
Industry 2008:Year in Review,http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/ Water:A Brief Summary."PowerPoint.University of Colorado •
electricity/epa/epa_sum.html. Health Sciences Center.Undated.
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Regulatory Impact 23 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry(ATSDR),
Analysis for EPA's Proposed Regulation of Coal Combustion U.S.Department of Health&Human Services.ToxFAQs for
Residues (CCR) Generated by the Electric Utility Industry. Arsenic.http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts2.html.
April 30,2010 at 21.
24 Chen GL,Chiou H-Y,Hsu L-I,HsuehY-M,Wu M-M,WangY-H,
11 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."Summary of Proven and Chen GJ."Arsenic in Drinking Water and Risk of Urinary
Cases with Damages to Groundwater and to Surface Water," Tract Cancer:A Follow-up Study from Northeastern Taiwan."
Appendix,"Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prey;19(1)January 2010.
Identification and Listing of Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities."Proposed rule. 25 Ibid.
•
http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ 26 International Programme on Chemical Safety(IPCS):"Execu-
ccr-rule/fr-corrections.pdf. tive Summary of the Environmental Health Criteria for Boron
12 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste. (EHC 204)."1998.http://www.greenfacts.org/en/boron/I-3/
Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9, boron-5.htm#OpO.
2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as- 27 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Integrated Risk Infor-
sets/pdf/CoalAsh-Docl.pdf. mation System,Lead and Compounds (inorganic) (CASRN
13 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."Hazardous and Solid 7439-92-1),available at http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0277.
ghum.
Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of
Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from 28 Gilbert S.G. and Weiss B. A Rationale for Lowering the
Electric Utilities." [EPA-HQ'RCRA-2009-0640; FRL-9149-4] Blood Lead Action Level From 10 to 2µg/dL.Neurotoxicol-

•
• J
•
COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ■ 25
ogy Vol 27/5,September 2006, pp 693-701. http://dx.doi. 43 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous and
org/10.1016/j.neuro.2006.06.008. Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of
29 Gilbert S.G. (lead author)."Scientific Consensus Statement Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from •
on Environmental Agents Associated with Neurodevelop- Electric Utilities." [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640; FRL-9149-4]
mental Disorders."Developed by the Collaborative on Health Proposed rule,Appendix,page 430.http://www.epa.gov/osw/
and the Environment's Learning and Developmental Dis- nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/frcorrections.pdf.
abilities Initiative.Released February 20,2008. http://www. 44 Fact Sheet: Coal Combustion Residues (CCR)—Surface
healthandenvironment.org/working_groups/learning/r/ Impoundments with High Hazard Potential Ratings,EPA530-
• consensus. F-09-006.June 2009 (updated August 2009). http://www.
• 30 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry(ATSDR), epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccrs-fs/
U.S.Department of Health&Human Services.ToxFAQs for index.htm.
Thallium,CAS#7440-28-0.http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfags/ 45 Kosson D,Sanchez F,Kariher P,Turner L.H.,Delapp R,Sei-
tf.asp?id=308&tid=49. gnette P.2009.Characterization of Coal Combustion Residues
31 Ibid. from Electric Utilities—Leaching and Characterization Data.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
32 Mary A.Fox,PhD,MPH,Assistant Professor,Johns Hopkins and Development.EPA-600/R-09/151.http://www.epa.gov/
• Bloomberg School of Public Health.Written testimony before nrmrl/pubs/600r09151/600r09151.pdf Page xi.
the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy
and Commerce,Subcommittee on Energy and Environment 46 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
Hearing.December 10,2009. "Coal Combustion Waste,Damage Case Assessments."July 9,
2007.
33 Foran J.A. "Comments on the Draft U.S. EPA Human and
Ecological Risk Assessment of Coal Combustion Wastes." 47 Kosson D,Sanchez F,Kariher P,Turner L.H.,Delapp R,Sei-
February 5,2008.Earthjustice. gnette P.2009.Characterization of Coal Combustion Residues
from Electric Utilities—Leaching and Characterization Data.
34 Barry Breen,Acting Assistant Administrator,Office of Solid U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
• Waste and Emergency Response,U.S.Environmental Protec- and Development.EPA-600/R-09/151.http://www.epa.gov/ •
tion Agency.Testimony delivered to Committee on Transporta- nrmrl/pubs/600r09151/600r09151.pdf.
tion and Infrastnrcture,Subcommittee on Water Resources
and the Environment, U.S.House of Representatives,April 48 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."Hazardous and Solid
30, 2009. http://transportation.house.gov/Media/lite/wa- Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of Spe-
ter/20090430/EPA`Yo20Testirnony.pdf. cial Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Elec-
tric Utilities."Proposed rule,Appendix,page 425.http://www.
• 35 RTI. "Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of Coal epa.gov/wastes/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/
Combustion Wastes. Draft document." Prepared for ro ccr-rule- df.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
ccr-rule-prop.pdf.
p
Waste. 2007. http://www.publicintegrity.org/assets/pdf/ 49 Kosson D,Sanchez F,Kariher P,Turner L.H.,Delapp R,Sei-
CoalAsh-Doc2.pdf. gnette P.2009.Characterization of Coal Combustion Residues
from Electric Utilities—Leaching and Characterization Data.
36 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
"Coal Combustion Waste,Damage Case Assessments."July 9, and Development.EPA-600/R-09/151.http://www.epa.gov/
2007. nrmrl/pubs/600r09151/600r09151.pdf.
37 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,"Information Request 50 Evans L."Failing the Test.The Unintended Consequences of
Responses from Electric Utilities."http://www.epa.gov/epa- Controlling Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal-Fired Power •
waste/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/surveys/index.htm,
Plants."Earthjustice.May 2010. http://www.earthjustice.org/
38 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Regulatory Impact sites/default/files/library/reports/failing_the_test_5-5-10.pdf.
Analysis for EPA's Proposed Regulation of Coal Combustion 51 U.S.EPA,Report to Congress:Wastes from the Combustion of
Residues (CCR) Generated by the Electric Utility Industry. Fossil Fuels.March 1999.Cited in Evans L."Failing the Test.
April 30,2010 at 34. The Unintended Consequences of Controlling Hazardous
• 39 Id.at 16-17. Air Pollutants from Coal-Fired Power Plants."'Earthjustice.
• 40 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.Hazardo s and Solid May 2010, http://www.earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/
Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of Spe- library/reports/failing_the_test_5-5-10.pdf.
cial Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From 52 Kosson D,Sanchez F,Kariher P,Turner L.H.,Delapp R,Sei-
Electric Utilities;Proposed Rule,75 Federal Register 35128, gnette P.2009.Characterization of Coal Combustion Residues
June 21,2010 at 35230. from Electric Utilities—Leaching and Characterization Data.
41 American Coal Ash Association Educational Foul ation."Coal U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research
• Ash Facts."http://www.coalashfacts.org/. and Development.EPA-600/R-09/151.http://www.epa.gov/
• 42 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ha ardous and nrmrl/pubs/600r0915l/600r09151.pdf Page xi.
•
Solid Waste Management System Identificatio and Listing 53 Ibid,page ix.
of Special Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustiion Residuals 54 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,"What Are the Envi-
from Electric Utilities.Proposed rule.Page'344.http://www. ronmental and Health Effects Associated with Disposing of
epa.gov/wastes/nonhaz/industrial/special/lossil/ccr-rule/ CCRs in Landfills and Surface Impoundments?" EPA-HQ-
ccr.rule-prop.pdf. RCRA-2009-0640-0078.

26 ■ COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
•
55 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste. 68 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous and
Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9, Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of
2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as- Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from
sets/pdf/CoalAsh-Docl.pdf. Electric Utilities." [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640; FRL-9149-4]
56 Ruhl L,Vengosh A,Dwyer G.S.,Hsu-Kim H.,Deonarine A., Proposed rule. Page 8. http://www•.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/
• Bergin M.and Kravchenko J."Survey of the Potential Envi-
industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/fr-corrections.pdf.
ronmental and Health Impacts in the Immediate Aftermath 69 In addition, EPA defines a"potential damage case" as one
of the Coal Ash Spill In Kingston,Tennessee."Environmental where offsite exceedances of secondary drinking water
Science&Technology,volume 43,No. 16, 2009.American standards are found. See: U.S. Environmental Protection
Chemical Society. Agency. "Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System;
57 Ibid. Identification and Listing of Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal
Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities. [EPA-HQ-
58 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,"Inhalation of Fugi- RCRA-2009-0640;FRL-9149-4]Proposed rule.Page 7.http:// '
• tive Dust:A Screening Assessment of the Risks Posed by Coal www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/industrial/special/fossil/ccr-nile/
Combustion Waste Landfills."September 2009. fr-corrections.pdf.
59 Ibid. 70 These damage cases include the 39 documented in this report
60 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."Estimation of Costs and the 31 cases described in:The Environmental Integrit
for Regulating Fossil Fuel Combustion Ash Management at Project(E1P) and Earthjustice.2010.Out of Control:Mount-
Large Electric Utilities Under Part 258."Prepared by DPRA ing Damages from Coal Ash Waste Sites (Feb. 24, 2010),
Incorporated.November 30,2005. http://www.environ men talintegrity.org/news_'reports/
• 61 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."What Are the Envi- news_02_24_10.php.
ronmental and Health Effects Associated with Disposing of 71 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.2010.Hazardous and
•
CCRs in Landfills and Surface Impoundments?" EPA-HQ- Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of
RCRA-2009-0640-0078. Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From
62 Barry Breen, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Electric Utilities;Proposed Rule,75 Fed.Reg.35128,(June 21,
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. Environmental 2010),and USEPA.2007.Office of Solid Waste,Coal Combus-
Protection Agency..Testimony delivered to Committee on don Waste Damage Case Assessments(July 9,2007)..
Transportation and Infrastructure,Subcommittee on Water 72 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
•
Resources and the Environment,U.S.House of Representa- "Coal Combustion Waste,Damage Case Assessments."July 9,
tives,April 30,2009.http://transportation.house.gov/Media/ 2007.
file/water/20090930/EPA%a20Testimony.pdf. 73 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
63 "Regulatory Determination on Wastes from the Combustion Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9,
of Fossil Fuels(Final Rule)."Federal Register 65:99(May 22, 2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as-
2000)p.32218 sets/pdf/CoalAsh-Docl.pdf
64 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous and 74 Ibid.
Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing of •
75 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Hazardous and
Special Wastes;Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Solid Waste Management System;Identification and Listing
Electric Utilities." [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2009-0640; FRL-9149-4] of Special Wastes; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals
Proposed rule. Page 8. http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/ from Electric Utilities."Proposed rule,Appendix,page 426.
industrial/special/fossil/ccr-rule/fr corrections pdf. http://www.epa.gov/wastes/nonhaz/industrial/special/fos-
65 StantJ."Out of Control:Mounting Damages from Coal Ash sil/ccr-rule/ccr-rule-prop.pdf.
Waste Sites."February 24,2010.Environmental Integrity Proj- 76 Testimony of R.G.Hunt before the U.S.House of Represents-
ecuand Earthjtu tire.http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/ tives,Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.December
news_reports/news_02_24_l0.php.StantJ. Editor. In Harm's 10,2009.
Way: Lack of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Ameri-
cans and Their Environment. Environmental Integrity Project, 77 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
Earthjustice and Sierra Club. August 26,2010.http://www. Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9,
earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/report-in-harms-way. 2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as
pdf sets/pdf/CoalAsh-Doc l.pdf.
66 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste. 78 Ibid.
"Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments."July 9, 79 Testimony of Gayle Queen before the U.S.House of Represen-
2007.See also 75 Fed.Reg.816,869 n.78&80(Jan.6,2010). tatives,Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.December •
See also StantJ. "Out of Control: Mounting Damages from 10,2009.
Coal Ash Waste Sites." February 24, 2010. Environmental 80 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
Integrity Project and Earthjustice. http://www.environmen- Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9,
talintegrity.org/news_reports/news_02_24_10.php. 2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as-
67 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency."Drinking Water Con- sets/pdf/CoalAsh-DocI.pdf.
• taminants." http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/ 81 Rowe C.L.,Hopkins W.A.,CongdonJ.D.2002.Ecotoxicological •
index.html. Implications of Aquatic Disposal of Coal Combustion Residues .

•
•
•
COAL ASH: THE TOXIC THREAT TO OUR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ® 27
in the United States:A Review. Environmental Moult"'lug Controlling Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal-Fired Power
and Assessment.8-0:207-276,2002. Plants."Earthjustice.May 2010.http://www.earthjustice.org/
82 Ibid. sites/default/files/library/reports/failing_the_test_5-5-10.pdf.
83 John D.Peterson,Vikki A.Peterson,Mary T.Mendonca(2008). 87 Lemly A.D.(2002)."Symptoms and implications of selenium
Growth and Developmental Effects of Coal Combustion toxicity in fish:the Belews Lake case example."Aquatic Toxi-
Residues on Southern Leopard Frog(Rana sphenocephala) cology 57.
Tadpoles Exposed throughout Metamorphosis.Copeia:Vol. 88 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Solid Waste.
2008,No.3,pp.499-503. (American Society of lcthyologists Coal Combustion Waste Damage Case Assessments.July 9,
and Herpetologists) http://www.asihcopeiaonline.org/doi/ 2007. Downloaded from http://www.publicintegrity.org/as-
abs/10.1643/CG-07-047?journalCode=cope. sets/pdf/CoalAsh-Doc 1.pdf.
84 Lemly A.D. (December 8,2009)."Coal Combustion Waste is 89 Gilbert S.G."Public Health and the Precautionary Principle."
a Deadly Poison to Fish."Prepared for United States Office Northwest Public Health.Spring/Summer 2005.University of
of Management and Budget Washington,D.C. Washington School of Public Health&Community Medicine.
85 Ibid. 90 The term"unencapsulated use"refers to the reuse of coal
86 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency., Characterization ash in an unaltered form,such as use as fill,soil amendment,
of Coal Combustion Residues from Electric Utilities Using anti-skid material and blasting grit.In contrast,encapsulated
Multi-Pollutant Control Technology—Leaching and Charac- uses,such as the incorporation of coal ash in concrete or
terization Data (EPA-600/R-09/151) Dec 2009, http://www. wallboard,involve manufacturing processes that may effec-
• epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r09151/600r09151.html. See also, tively alter or provide long-term containment of hazardous
Evans L."Failing the Test—The Unintended Consequences of contaminants.
•
•
' I

) A
RECEIVEDIDENRIDWR
AUG 022018
Water Resources
Permitting Section
ATTACHMENT 3
Letter from EPA to
DEQ (Dec. 14, 2015)

EA RT H J U S T I C E PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
Tar Because the earth needs a good lawyer 1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1012
„" Washington, DC 20009
1625 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 702 Telephone: [phone]
Washington, DC 20036 Fax: [phone]
Telephone: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail]
Fax: [phone] Web:www.psr.org
Web:www.earthjustice.org
‘Ij NOBEL�t
�l PEACE \/
��-PRIZEi�
US Affiliate of International Physicians for
the Prevention of Nuclear War

•
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
$ g ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
"NL Peolt"'s ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303-8960
Mr. Tom Reeder DEC 14 2015
Assistant Secretary for the Environment
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1601
Subject: Decanting of Duke Energy Coal Ash Impoundments to Mitigate Seepage
Dear Mr. Reeder:
The purpose of this Ietter is to provide the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4's views
regarding Duke's letter of December 10, 2015, requesting approval from the North Carolina Department
of Environment Quality (DEQ) to decant free-standing water from certain ash basins in accordance with
existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater discharge permits,
subject to conditions imposed by the DEQ. Duke's letter sought DEQ's concurrence that the proposed
decanting could proceed under a standard NPDES permit condition that imposes on Duke a"dutyy to
mitigate."The"duty to mitigate" condition requires the permittee to "take all reasonable steps to
minimize or prevent any discharge . . . in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of
adversely affecting human health or the environment." In accordance with this standard condition, Duke
proposed to minimize and prevent discharges from seeps by decanting free-standing water from the ash
basins and lowering the water levels in the basins. Duke's letter notes that decanting of free-standing
water at these basins will lower the water level and reduce the hydraulic head driving the seepage,
thereby slowing and eliminating the seeps.
Based on the unique circumstances of the ash basins subject to the request, and the protective conditions
which would be imposed by DEQ and which are outlined in the Duke letter, EPA Region 4 agrees that
the proposed activity would be consistent with, and can be carried out under, the"duty to mitigate"
conditions of the applicable permits.
Specifically, we note that Duke has provided data to DEQ and EPA Region 4 demonstrating that the
concentrations of constituents of concern are essentially uniform throughout the water column in these
basins, so the quality of the water discharged can be expected to remain consistent throughout the
decanting process and to be comparable to the quality of water discharged while these basins were active.
Further, Duke has agreed to abide by a variety of conditions to be imposed by DEQ that will further
ensure that the decanting does not result in violations of effluent limits in the permits, violations of water
quality standards in the receiving waters, or other adverse impacts to the environment. Specifically, we
understand that the decanting process will occur at the following facilities through the designated
outfalls: Asheville,NPDES Permit Nos.NC0000396, Outfall 001; Buck, NC0004774, Outfall 002;
Internet Address(URL)•http:ftwww,epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable•Printed with Vegetable 0I Based Inks on Recycled Paper(Minimum 309.6 Postconsumer)

k
Cape Fear,NC0003433, Outfalls 001, 005 and 007; Dan River, NC0003468, Outfall 002;
H. F. Lee,N00003417, Outfall 001; Riverbend, NC0004961, Outfall 002; and Weatherspoon,
NC0005363, Outfall 001. Further, we understand that the decanting process will occur in compliance
with the following conditions:
• discharge rates during decanting will be lower than average historical discharge rates from
permitted outfalls from these basins;
• drawdown will be limited to one foot per seven days to ensure structural stability;
• use of floating pump suction with free water skimmed from basin surface using an adjustable
weir;
• daily monitoring of flow;
• continuous monitoring of Total Suspended Solids(TSS) with auto pump shut-off if limits are
exceededi;
• real time pH monitoring with auto shut-off if 15 minute running average pH falls below 6.1
standard units or rises above 8.9 standard units;
• during pumping, in addition to the monitoring required by each facility's NPDES permit, weekly
monitoring for the following parameters: total arsenic, total selenium, total mercury(Method
1631 E), total chromium, total lead, total cadmium, total copper, total zinc, and total dissolved
solids;
• notice to Agencies and ability to monitor/verify;
• all other terms and conditions of each facility's existing NPDES permit shall be met; and
• water quality standards in the receiving stream shall not be contravened.
We agree that these are appropriate conditions to be imposed during the decanting process. However, we
recommend that DEQ include the following additional conditions to which Duke has agreed in principle:
• for the Asheville facility, decanting will be limited to those discrete sections of the basins which
do not receive wastewater inflows;
• for the condition related to automatic shut-off of the decanting pump based on TSS concentration,
define that the limit that will trigger shut-off is a TSS concentration(15 minute average)that
exceeds half the maximum daily TSS limit specified in the facility's NPDES permit;and
• drawdown to no less than three feet above the ash.
We also recommend that DEQ specify that, in addition to the Discharge Monitor Reporting requirements
of each facility's existing NPDES report,additional monitoring results required during the decanting
process will be provided as a special report on a monthly basis.

f
•
We find that, given the unique circumstances of these ash basins and the conditions that will be imposed,
the proposed decanting may proceed under the duty to mitigate clause of the permits.
Please contact me at [phone] if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
ames D. Giattina
Director
Water Protection Division
cc: Mr. Harry Sideris, Senior Vice President
Duke Energy
1The pumping will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.

RECEIVED/DENR/DWR
AUG RECEIVED;
2 2018
Water Resources
Permitting Section
ATTACHMENT 4
Final Permit for Sutton
(Sept. 27, 2017)

i
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretory
Water Resources S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Dfrecfor
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
September 29, 2017
Mr. Paul Draovitch, Senior Vice President
Environmental, Health and Safety
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
Mail Code EC13K
P O Box 1006
Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006
Subject Issuance of NPDES Permit
Permit NC0001422
L V. Sutton Energy Complex
New Hanover County
Facility Class I
Dear Mr Draovitch.
The Division of Water Resources is forwarding herewith the Final NPDES permit for L V Sutton Energy
Complex. This permit renewal is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute
143-215 1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U S Environmental
Protection Agency dated October 15, 2007 (or as subsequently amended)
A public heanng was held on June 22, 2017 in Wilmington seeking comments on the Draft permit This
Final permit incorporates recommendations of the DWR Hearing Officer and EPA as well as other
changes.
• A separate effluent page for the dewatering of the New Ash Pond (Outfall 004) was added to the
permit (Please see Special Condition A (5.))
• Limits for Total Copper were added to the permit based on the results of the Reasonable Potential
Analysis (Outfall 001, Outfall 002, and Outfall 004)
• Limits for Total Nickel were added to the permit based on the results of the Reasonable Potential
Analysis (Outfall 001, Outfall 002, and Outfall 004)
• Limits for Total Iron were removed from the permit based on the updates to the North Carolina
standards (Outfall 001, Outfall 002, and Outfall 004)
• Limits for Total Cadmium were removed from the permit based on the results of the Reasonable
Potential Analysis (Outfall 001)
• Limits for Total Lead were removed from the permit based on the results of the Reasonable
Potential Analysis (Outfall 001-normal operation)
• Limits for Chlorides were added to the permit based on the results of the Reasonable Potential
Analysis (Outfall 001 - dewatering)
• Monitoring for Hexavalent Chromium was added to the permit based on the results of the
Reasonable Potential Analysis (Outfall 001 - dewatering).
• The daily maximum limit for Total Lead was increased based on the updates to the North
Carolina standards (Outfall 001 -dewatering)
• Limits for Total Mercury were removed from the permit based on the results of the Mercury
Evaluation (Outfall 001-normal operation, Outfall 002-normal operation, Outfall 004-normal
operation)
%Nothing Compares—.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resources
512 N Salisbury Street 11611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,NC 27699-1611
919 7079000

• Limits for Total Arsenic,Total Copper, and Total Selenium were added to the permit based on the
results of the Reasonable Potential Analysis (Outfall 008)
• The Acute Toxicity monitoring frequency was reduced to Monthly(Outfall 002 and Outfall 004) to
be consistent with other Duke permits.
• The Special Conditions Fish Tissue Monitoring near Ash Pond Discharge and Clean Water Act
Section 316(b) have been updated,please see A (19 ) and A (21.).
• The Clean Water Act Section 316(a'r Special Condition was added to the permit, please see A.
(20.).
• The Outfall 010 and 011 were added to the permit to accommodate discharges of stormwater
from the future coal ash landfill
• The Ash Pond Closure Special Condition was removed from the permit since the facility submitted
Closure Plan in 2016
• The Biocide Special Condition was updated to be consistent with other Duke permits, please see
A (18 )
• The compliance schedule for Total Copper limit,Total Arsenic Limit, and Total Selenium limit was
added (Outfall 008), please see A. i29.).
• The compliance schedule for Total Copper limit, and Total Nickel limit was added (Outfall 001)
• The compliance boundary map was added to the permit
If any parts,measurement frequencies,or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable
to you,you have the right to an adjudicatory heanng upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes, and:lied with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714 Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final
and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division of Water Resources
The Division may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not
affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water
Resources, the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act, or any other federal or local
governmental permit
If you have any questions on this permit, please contact Sergei Chernikov at 919-807-6386
Sincerely, /
♦ 4 op
S. Jay •merman, P.G.
Director, Division of Water Resources
Hardcopy Central Files,
NPDES Files
Wilmington Regional Office, Water Quality
E-copy. US EPA, Region IV
PYg
WSS/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
WSS/Ecosystems Branch
Nothing Compares---
State
ompares_-State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resources
512 N Salisbury Street 11611 Mail Service Center I Raleigh.NC 27699-1611
9197079000

Permit NC0001422
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Water Quality
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Duke Energy Progress, LLC
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
L. V. Sutton Energy Complex
801 Sutton Steam Plant Road, Wilmington
New Hanover County
to receiving waters designated as the Cape Fear River and Sutton Lake in the Cape Fear
River Basin in accordance with the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements,
compliance boundary map, and other applicable conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III.
This permit modification shall become effective October 1, 2017.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on September 30,
2022.
Signed this day September 29, 2017.
S. J. Zi/merman P.G., Director
Division of Water Resources
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Page 1 of 24

Permit NC0001422
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby
revoked. As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer
effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under
the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to discharge cooling water, low volume wastes, stormwater, and
treated wastewater from internal wastewater outfalls 005, 006, 007, and 009
to the Effluent Channel, and internal stormwater outfalls SW001, SW002,
SW003, SW004, SW005, SW006, and SW007 to the Effluent Channel (the
Effluent Channel discharges via external Outfall 008 to the Sutton Lake); ash
pond discharge, groundwater, treated wastewater, landfill leachate, and
stormwater runoff (Outfall 001, Outfall 002 and Outfall 004); Outfall 001 may
also include cooling water from Outfall 008; at a facility located at Sutton
Steam Electric Plant, 801 Sutton Steam Plant Road, Wilmington, New Hanover
County, and
2. Discharge wastewater (via Outfall 002, Outfall 004, and Outfall 008) at the
locations specified on the attached map into the Sutton Lake which is
classified C-Swamp waters in the Cape Fear River Basin.
3. Discharge non-contact stormwater (via Outfall 010 - North Pond Emergency
Spillway and Outfall 011 - South Pond Emergency Spillway) from landfill (after
landfill is capped) at the locations specified on the attached map into the
Sutton Lake which is classified C-Swamp waters in the Cape Fear River Basin.
Discharge is only allowed for storm events that exceeds 25-year 24-hour storm
events.
4. Discharge treated wastewater, ash pond discharge, stormwater, landfill
leachate, and groundwater (via Outfall 001) at'the location specified on the
attached map into the Cape Fear River, classified C-Swamp waters in the Cape
Fear River Basin.
Page 2 of 24

Permit NC0001422
Part I
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall 001-
normal operation/decanting) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge to the Cape Fear River from Outfall 001 - removing the free
water above the settled ash layer that does not involve mechanical disturbance of the ash
(recirculation cooling water, non-contact cooling water, and treated wastewater from outfalls
002, and 004). Such discharges shall be limited and monitored6 by the Permittee as specified
below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location'
Flow, MGD Daily Estimate or Effluent
pump logs
Temperature1,2, °C Quarterly Grab U, D
Temperature2, °C Daily Grab Effluent
pH7 6.0 <_ pH _< 9.0 Weekly Grab Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids, 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
mg/L8
Total Nitrogen Weekly Grab Effluent
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN), mg/L
Total Phosphorus, mg/L WeeklyGrab Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Acute Toxicity3 Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Mercury4 Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic 10.0 µg/L 50.0 lig/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium 5.0 µg/L 56.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Iron, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Lead, 1..tg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Cadmium Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Aluminum, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Copper9 7.88 }ig/L 10.47 ug/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Nickel9 25.0 1g/L 335.2 }ig/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, pg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Turbidity5 \ Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Hardness, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. U: Upstream, 2700 feet above outfall (intake structure on the Cape Fear River). D: Downstream,
1.25 miles below outfall. Instream monitoring is provisionally waived in light of the
permittee's participation in the Lower Cape Fear River Basin Association. Instream
monitoring shall be conducted as stated in this permit should the permittee end its
participation in the Association.
2. The receiving water's temperature shall not be increased by more than 2.8°C above ambient
water temperature and in no case exceed 32°C, except in the mixing zone described as follows:
Extending from the eastern shore to the centerline of the river and extending not more than
1.25 miles downstream nor more than 2700 feet from the point of discharge. The cross-
sectional area of the mixing zone shall not exceed 9% of the total cross sectional area of the river
at the point of discharge nor 2.5% at the mouth of Toomer's Creek.
3. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (13.).
4. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E.
5. The discharge from this facility shall not cause turbidity in the receiving stream to exceed 50
NTU. If the instream turbidity exceeds 50 NTU due to natural background conditions, the
discharge cannot cause turbidity to increase in the receiving stream.
Page 3 of 24

Permit NC0001422
6. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
1111 7. The facility shall continuously monitor pH when the decanting process commences (and the
pump is operating) and the decanting pump shall be shutoff automatically when 15 minutes
running average pH falls below 6.1 standard units or rises above 8.9 standard units. Pumping
will be allowed to continue if e.interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
p g g
8. The facility shall continuously monitor TSS concentration when the decanting process
commences (and the pump is operating) and the decantmg pump shall be shutoff automatically
when the one half of the Daily Maximum limit (15 minutes average) is exceeded. Pumping will
be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
9. The limits will become effective 36 months from the permit effective date. Please see Special
Condition A. (30.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless
approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program. The facility shall use a floating pump suction pipe
with free water skimmed from the basin surface using an adjustable weir.
The facility is allowed to drawdown the wastewater in the ash pond to no less than three feet
above the ash.
When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility
shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ponds using the physical-chemical
treatment facilities.
No later than August 1, 2019 separate the discharge of treated wastewaters from the
discharge of waters from Sutton Lake. Treated wastewaters include wastewaters from the
ash pond discharge, groundwater extraction, landfill leachate, stormwater runoff, and any
additional wastewaters from Outfalls 002 and 004. Treated wastewaters shall continue to be
discharged through Outfall 001 and subject to the Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Requirements in Section A. (1.)
Page 4 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
001-dewatering phase) [15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the commencement date of the dewatering operation and lasting
until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge to the Cape Fear River from Outfall 001
Dewatering-removinq the interstitial water/ash pore water(recirculation cooling water, non-
contact cooling water, and treated wastewater from outfalls 002, and 004). Such discharges
shall be limited and monitored6 by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location'
Flow 2.1 MGD Daily Estimate or Effluent
(applies only to ash pump logs
pond discharge)
Flow Daily Estimate or Effluent
pump logs
Temperature 1,2,OC _ Quarterly Grab U, D
Temperature2,°C Daily Grab Effluent
pH9 6.0 5pH <_ 9.0 Daily Daily Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
nag/L1.0
Total Nitrogen Weekly Grab Effluent
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN), mg/L
Total Phosphorus, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Chlorides? 230.0 mg/L 230.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Acute Toxicity' Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Iron, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Cadmium, µg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Chromium (VI), µg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Aluminum 8.0 mg/L 8.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Nickels 25.0 pg/L 335.2 pg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Lead 2.94 µg /L 75.4 µg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic 10.0 µg/L 50.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium 5.0 µg/L 56.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Mercury4 47.0 ng/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Copper, µg/Ls 7.88 µg/I, 10.47 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Turbidity5 Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Hardness, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. U: Upstream, 2700 feet above outfall (intake structure on the Cape Fear River). D: Downstream,
1.25 miles below outfall. Instream monitoring is provisionally waived in light of the
permittee's participation in the Lower Cape Fear River Basin Association. Instream
monitoring shall be conducted as stated in this permit should the permittee end its
participation in the Association.
2. The receiving water's temperature shall not be increased by more than 2.8°C above ambient
water temperature and in no case exceed 32°C, except in the mixing zone descnbed as follows:
Extending from the eastern shore to the centerline of the river and extending not more than
1.25 miles downstream nor more than 2700 feet from the point of discharge. The cross-
sectional area of the mixing zone shall not exceed 9% of the total cross sectional area of the river
at the point of discharge nor 2.5% at the mouth of Toomer's Creek.
3. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (13.).
4. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E, this is an annual average limit.
Page 5 of 24

+ 1 1
Permit NC0001422
5. The discharge from this facility shall not cause turbidity in the receiving stream to exceed 50
NTU. If the instream turbidity exceeds 50 NTU due to natural background conditions, the
discharge cannot cause turbidity to increase in the receiving stream.
6. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
7. The discharge from this facility shall not cause the Chlorides level in the receiving stream to
exceed 230 mg/L. If the Chlorides level exceeds 230 mg/L due to natural background
conditions, the discharge cannot cause Chlorides to increase in the receiving stream.
8. The limits will become effective 36 months from the permit effective date. Please see Special
Condition A. (30.).
9. The facility shall continuously monitor pH when the decanting process commences (and the
pump is operating) and the decanting pump shall be shutoff automatically when 15 minutes
running average pH falls below 6.1 standard units or rises above 8.9 standard units. Pumping
will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
10.The facility shall continuously monitor TSS concentration when the decanting process
commences (and the pump is operating) and the decanting pump shall be shutoff automatically
when the one half of the Daily Maximum limit (15 minutes average) is exceeded. Pumping will
be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless
approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program.
When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility
shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ponds using the physical-chemical
treatment facilities.
Discharge to Sutton Lake during dewatering is not authorized.
No later than August 1, 2019 separate the discharge of treated wastewaters from the
discharge of waters from Sutton Lake. Treated wastewaters include wastewaters from the
ash pond discharge, groundwater extraction, landfill leachate, stormwater runoff, and any
additional wastewaters from Outfalls 002 and 004. Treated wastewaters shall continue to be
discharged through Outfall 001 and subject to the Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Requirements in Section A. (2.)
Page 6 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (3.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
002-normal operation)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge to Sutton Lake and/or to the 1984 ash pond from Outfall 002 -
removal of free water above the settled ash layer that does not involve mechanical disturbance of the
ash (Old Ash Pond - low volume wastes, ash sluice water, and stormwater runoff). Such
discharges to Sutton Lake shall be limited and monitored3 by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample Location
Average Maximum Frequency Type
Flow, MGD Weekly Pump Logs Effluent
or similar
Temperature,°C4 Weekly Grab Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Solids
pH 6.0 <_ pH s 9.0 Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Copper 7.88 µg/L 10.47 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic 10.0 µg/L 50.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium 5.0 µg/L 56.0 pg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Mercury' Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Iron, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Nickel 25.0 µg/L 335.2 pg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Aluminum, Weekly Grab Effluent
mg/L
Acute Toxicity 2 Monthly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E.
2. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (13.).
3. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
4. The receiving water's temperature shall not be increased by more than 2.8°C above ambient
water temperature and in no case exceed 32°C.
The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless
approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program. The facility shall use a floating pump suction pipe
with free water skimmed from the basin surface using an adjustable weir.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 7 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (4.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
004-normal operation/decanting)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge to Sutton Lake and/or to Outfall 001 from Outfall 004-removal
of free water above the settled ash layer that does not involve mechanical disturbance of the ash
(1984 New Ash Pond-ash sluice water, groundwater, landfill leachate, low volume wastes, and
stormwater runoff). Such discharges to Sutton Lake shall be limited and monitored3 by the
Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum , Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Weekly Pump Logs Effluent
or similar
Temperature,0C Weekly Grab Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Solids4
pH5 6.0 s pH s 9.0 Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Copper 7.88 µgf L 10.47 Ng/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic 10.0 µg/L 50.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium 5.0 µg/L 56.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Mercuryl Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Iron, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Nickel 25.0 µg/L 335.2 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Aluminum, Weekly Grab Effluent
mg/L
Acute Toxicity 2 Monthly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E.
2. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (13).
3. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
4. The facility shall continuously monitor TSS concentration when the dewatering process
commences (and the pump is operating) and the dewatering pump shall be shutoff
automatically when the one half of the Daily Maximum limit (15 minutes average) is exceeded.
Pumping will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
5. The facility shall continuously monitor pH when the dewatering process commences (and the
pump is operating) and the dewatering pump shall be shutoff automatically when 15 minutes
running average pH falls below 6.1 standard units or rises above 8.9 standard units. Pumping
will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless
approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program. The facility shall use a floating pump suction pipe
with free water skimmed from the basin surface using an adjustable weir.
The facility is allowed to drawdown the wastewater in the ash pond to no less than three feet
above the ash.
When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility
shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ponds using the physical-chemical
treatment facilities.
Page 8 of 24

Permit NC0001422
8. The limits will become effective 36 months from the permit effective date. Please see Special
Condition A. (30.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
The level of water in the ash pond should not be lowered more than 1 ft/week, unless
approved by the DEQ Dam Safety Program.The facility shall use a floating pump suction pipe
with free water skimmed from the basin surface using an adjustable weir.
When the facility commences the ash pond/ponds decommissioning process, the facility
shall treat the wastewater discharged from the ash pond/ponds using the physical-chemical
treatment facilities.
A. (6.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
005)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
Beginning with the commencement of this discharge and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 005(Combined Cycle Plant- ultrafilter water
treatment system filter backwash, closed coolingwater cooler blowdown, Reverse
Osmosis/Electrodeionization system reject wastewater, and other low volume wastewater) to
the Effluent Channel. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored' by the Permittee as
specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
EFFLUENT Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
CHARACTERISTICS Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Daily Pump Logs or Influent or
similar Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L 2/Month Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L 2/Month Grab Effluent
pH 6.0 < pH < 9.0 2/Month Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 10 of 24

.
Permit NC0001422
A. (5.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
004-dewatering phase)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the commencement date of the dewatering operation and lasting
until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge to Outfall 001 from Outfall 004
Dewatering-removin_q the interstitial water/ash pore water(1984 New Ash Pond- ash sluice
water, groundwater, landfill leachate, low volume wastes, and stormwater runoff). Such
discharges shall be limited and monitoreds at Outfall 001 by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow 2.1 MGD Daily Estimate Effluent
(applies only to ash or pump
pond discharge) logs
Temperature,0C1 Weekly Grab Effluent
pH7 6.0 5 off 5 9.0 Daily Daily Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
mg/Le
Total Nitrogen Weekly Grab Effluent
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN), mg/L
Total Phosphorus, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Chlorides 230.0 mg/ mg/L
230.0 m L
Acute Toxicity2 Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Iron, mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Cadmium, µg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Chromium (VI), µg /L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Aluminum 8.0 mg/L 8.0 mg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Nickel8 25.0 p.g/L 335.2 pg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Lead _ 2.94 µg /L 75.4 µg JL Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic 10.0 µg/L 50.0 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium L 56.0 µ L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Mercury3 Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Copper8 7.88 µg/L 10.47 µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, µg/L Weekly Grab Effluent
Turbidity4 Weekly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The receiving water's temperature shall not be increased by more than 2.8°C above ambient
water temperature and in no case exceed 32°C.
2. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (13 )
3. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E, this is an annual average limit.
4. The discharge from this facility shall not cause turbidity in the receiving stream to exceed 50
NTU. If the instream turbidity exceeds 50 NTU due to natural background conditions, the
discharge cannot cause turbidity to increase in the receiving stream.
5. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
6. The facility shall continuously monitor TSS concentration when the dewatering process
commences (and the pump is operating) and the dewatering pump shall be shutoff
automatically when the one half of the Daily Maximum limit (15 minutes average) is exceeded.
Pumping will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
7. The facility shall continuously monitor pH when the dewatering process commences (and the
pump is operating) and the dewatering pump shall be shutoff automatically when 15 minutes
running average pH falls below 6.1 standard units or rises above 8.9 standard units. Pumping
will be allowed to continue if interruption might result in a dam failure or damage.
Page 9 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (7.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
006)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
Beginning with the commencement of this discharge and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 006(Combined Cycle Plant - low volume
wastewater including the Heat Recovery Steam generator blowdown and auxiliary boiler
blowdown) to the Effluent Channel. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored' by the
Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
EFFLUENT Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
CHARACTERISTICS Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Daily Pump Logs or Influent or
similar Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L 2/Month Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L 2/Month Grab Effluent
pH 6.0 < pH < 9.0 2/Month Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitonng Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
A. (8.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
007)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 007(stormwater flows from the closure
activities for coal-fired units, separate from stormwater outfalls SW001 through SW007) to the
Effluent Channel. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored2 by the Permittee as specified
below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Weekly Pump Logs Effluent
or similar
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Solids
Total Arsenic, µg/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium, µg/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Nitrate/nitrite as N, Quarterly Grab Effluent
mg/L
Total Mercury" ng/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E.
2. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's eDMR
application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Page 11 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (9.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
009)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge from Internal Outfall 009 (low volume wastes from a new
simple cycle combustion turbine) to the Effluent Channel. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored) by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Weekly Pump Logs Effluent
or similar
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Solids
pH 6.0 < pH < 9.0 2/Month Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
A. (10.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
(Outfall 008)5
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge to Sutton Lake from Outfall 008 (from internal wastewater
outfalls 005, 006, 007, and 009, and internal stormwater outfalls SWO01 through SW007).
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored6 by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Type Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Location'
Flow, MGD Daily Estimate or Effluent
pump logs
Temperature 0C Daily Instantaneous Effluent
Temperature 1,2, OC Daily Grab Instream
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Total Nitrogen Monthly Grab Effluent
(NO2 + NO3 + TKN), mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
pH 6.0 s pH s 9.0 Daily Grab Effluent
Total Phosphorus, mg/L Monthly Grab Effluent
Acute Toxicity3 Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Mercury4, ng/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Arsenic? 10.0 µg/L 50.0 µg/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Selenium? 5.0 µg/L 56.0 pg/L. Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Copper? 7.88 µg/L 10.47 µg/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Total Zinc, µg/L Quarterly Grab Effluent
Notes:
1. Instream: 1000 feet from outfall.
Page 12 of 24

Pennit NC0001422
2. The receiving water's temperature shall not be increased by more than 2.8°C above ambient
water temperature and in no case exceed 32°C. The limit is not being implemented until
further notice (Please see A. (20.)).
3. Acute Toxicity Limit (Fathead Minnow, 24 hour at 90%); Part I, Condition A. (23.).
4. The facility shall use EPA method 1631E.
5. The facility shall install a screen or a barrier at the end of the Effluent Channel to minimize
fish migration into the Channel. The screen/barrier shall be installed by July 1, 2017.
6. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
7. The limits become effective 36 months from the effective date of the permit (Please see A.
(29.)).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
A. (11.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
010)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge non-contact stormwater from Outfall 010-the North Pond
Emergency Spillway of the capped landfill. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored' by the
Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Per discharge event Estimate Effluent
pH 6.0 5 pH 5 9.0 Per discharge event Grab Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Per discharge event Grab Effluent
TSS 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Per discharge event Grab Effluent
1. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
Discharge is only allowed for storm events that exceeds 25-year 24-hour storm events.
A. (12.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (Outfall
011)
[15A NCAC 02B .0400 et seq., 02B .0500 et seq.]
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge non-contact stormwater from Outfall 011 - the South Pond
Emergency Spillway of the capped landfill. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored' by the
Permittee as specified below.
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample
Average Maximum Frequency Type Location
Flow, MGD Per discharge event Estimate Effluent
pH 6.0 5 pH <_ 9.0 Per discharge event Grab Effluent
Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 20.0 mg/L Per discharge event Grab Effluent
TSS 30.0 mg/L 100.0 mg/L Per discharge event Grab Effluent
1. The permittee shall submit Discharge Monitoring Reports electronically using NC DWR's
eDMR application system. Please See Special Condition A. (25.).
Discharge is only allowed for storm events that exceeds 25-year 24-hour storm events.
Page 13 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (13.) ACUTE TOXICITY LIMIT (MONTHLY)- OUTFALLS 001, 002, and 004.
[15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.]
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a monthltt basis using protocols defined in the
North Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute
Toxicity In A Single Effluent Concentration" (Revised-July, 1992 or subsequent versions). The
monitoring shall be performed as a Fathead Minnow (Ptmephales promelas) 24 hour static test. The
effluent concentration at which there may be at no time significant acute mortality is 90% (defined
as treatment two in the procedure document). Effluent samples for self-monitoring purposes must
be obtained during representative effluent discharge below all waste treatment.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGE6C. Additionally, DWR Form AT-2 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than
30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
measurements performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data.
Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is
employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT)
test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of
the report with the notation of"No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be
submitted to the Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit
may be re-opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month
following the month of the initial monitoring.
A. (14.) STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY INSPECTIONS OF ASH POND DAMS
The facility shall meet the dam design and dam safety requirements per 15A NCAC 2K.
A. (15.) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES PLAN
The Permittee shall continue to implement a Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan to control the
discharge of oils and the hazardous and toxic substances listed in 40 CFR, Part 117 and Tables II
and III of Appendix D to 40 CFR, Part 122, and shall maintain the Plan at the plant site and shall
be available for inspection by EPA and DWR personnel.
A. (16.) INTAKE SCREEN BACKWASH
Continued intake screen backwash discharge is permitted without limitations or monitoring
requirements.
Page 14 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (17.) NO DISCHARGE OF PCBs
As specified by 40 CFR 423.13 (a), there shall be no discharge of polychlorinated biphenyl
compounds such as those commonly used for transformer fluid.
A. (18.) BIOCIDE CONDITION
The permittee shall not use any biocides except those approved in conjunction with the permit
application. The permittee shall notify the Director in writing not later than ninety (90) days prior to
instituting use of any additional biocide used in cooling systems which may be toxic to aquatic life
other than those previously reported to the Division of Water Resources. Such notification shall
include completion of Biocide Worksheet Form 101 and a map locating the discharge point and
receiving stream. Completion of Biocide Worksheet Form 101 is not necessary for those outfalls
containing toxicity testing. Division approval is not necessary for the introduction of new biocides
into outfalls currently tested for whole effluent toxicity.
A. —
(19.) FISH TISSUE MONITORING NEAR ASH POND DISCHARGE OUTFALL
001, and OUTFALLS 002/004
The facility shall conduct fish tissue monitoring at two locations (Sutton Lake and Cape Fear River)
annually and submit the results with the NPDES permit renewal application. The objective of this
monitoring is to evaluate potential uptake of pollutants by fish tissue near the ash pond discharge.
The parameters analyzed in fish tissue shall be arsenic, selenium, and mercury. The monitoring shall
be conducted in accordance with the sampling plan approved by the Division. The plan should be
submitted to the Division within 180 days from the effective date of the permit. Upon approval, the
plan becomes an enforceable part of the permit.
Copies of all the study plans, study results, and any other applicable materials should be submitted
to:
1) Electronic Version Only (pdf and CD)
Division of Water Resources
WQ Permitting Section - NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
2) Electronic Version (pdf and CD) and Hard Copy
Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
A. (20.) CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 316 (a) THERMAL VARIANCE
In order to obtain thermal variance/mixing zone for Lake Sutton/Cape Fear the facility shall
develop and conduct comprehensive 316(a) studies. The 316(a) studies shall be performed in
accordance with the Division of Water Resources approved plan. The temperature analysis and the
balanced and indigenous study plan shall conform to the specifications outlined in 40 CFR 125
Subpart H and the EPA's Draft 316(a) Guidance Manual, dated 1977, and the Region 4 letter to
NCDENR, dated June 3, 2010.
The study shall be performed in accordance with the following schedule:
1) Effective date of the permit +60 days- submit the Draft Study Plan to the DEQ and EPA, the
DEQ will perform the Plan review and provide the comments to Duke within 30 days of the
Plan receipt.
2) Effective date of the permit +120 days-meet with the DEQ to provide responses to the
DEQ/EPA comments and discuss the Study Plan.
3) Effective date of the permit +150 days- submit the Final Study Plan to the DEQ and to the
EPA.
4) After obtaining an approval of the Study Plan, conduct 2 years of monitoring.
Page 15 of 24

Permit NC0001422
5) 270 days after completing the monitoring, submit the study results and an application for
316(a) variance to DEQ.
Copies of all the study plans, study results, and any other applicable materials should be submitted
to:
1) Electronic Version Only (pdf and CD)
Division of Water Resources
WQ Permitting Section - NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
2) Electronic Version (pdf and CD) and Hard Copy
Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
A. (21.) CLEAN WATER ACT SECTION 316(b)
The permittee shall comply with the Cooling Water Intake Structure Rule per 40 CFR 125.95. The
permittee shall submit all the materials required by the Rule with the next renewal application.
Copies of all the study plans, study results, and any other applicable materials should be submitted
to:
1) Electronic Version Only (pdf and CD)
Division of Water Resources
WQ Permitting Section - NPDES
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
2) Electronic Version (pdf and CD) and Hard Copy
Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
A. (22.) LOWER CAPE FEAR MODELING
The permittee may elect to conduct a water quality model of the dilution factor for Outfall 001.
Contingent upon EPA approval of the Lower Cape Fear Modeling and its results, the Reasonable
Potential Analysis will be conducted again and the permit limits will be based on the new flow
numbers established by the model.
A. (23.)ACUTE TOXICITY LIMIT (QUARTERLY)—OUTFALL 008
[15A NCAC 02B .0200 et seq.]
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a quarterly basis using protocols defined in the
North Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Fail Methodology for Determining Acute Toxicity
In A Single Effluent Concentration" (Revised December 2010 or subsequent versions). The
monitoring shall be performed as a Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) 24-hour static test.The
effluent concentration at which there may be at no time significant acute mortality is 90% (defined
as treatment two in the procedure document). The tests will be performed during the months of
February, May, August, and November. These months signify the first month of each three-month
toxicity testing quarter assigned to the facility. Effluent sampling for this testing must be obtained
during representative effluent discharge and shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final
effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then
monthly monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon
passing, this monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Page 16 of 24

Permit NC0001422
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGE6C. Additionally, DWR Form AT-2 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Resources
Water Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Water Sciences Section no later than
30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
measurements performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data.
Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is
employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring is
required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity (AT)
test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of
' the report with the notation of"No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be
submitted to the Water Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then
monthly monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon
passing, this monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Assessment of toxicity compliance is based on the toxicity testing quarter, which is the three-month
time interval that begins on the first day of the month in which toxicity testing is required by this
permit and continues until the final day of the third month.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Water Resources indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit
may be re-opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month
following the month of the initial monitoring.
A. (24.) INSTREAM MONITORING
The facility shall conduct semi-annual instream monitoring (intake structure on the Cape Fear
River (approximately 3 miles upstream) and 2.6 miles downstream of the Outfall 001, and
approximately 1000 ft. from Outfall 004 (Bay 8) for total arsenic, total selenium, total mercury
(method 1631E), total chromium, chlorides, dissolved lead, dissolved cadmium, dissolved copper,
dissolved zinc and total hardness (as CaCO3). For the purpose of this requirement, semi-annual
means that samples are collected twice per year with at least 120 calendar days between sampling
events. The monitoring results shall be reported on the facility's Discharge Monitoring Reports and
included with the NPDES permit renewal application. Instream monitoring is provisionally
waived considering the permittee's participation in the Lower Cape Fear River Basin
Association provided the Association agrees to sample for all the parameters listed in this
condition and at the specified locations. Instream monitoring shall be conducted as stated in
this permit should the permittee end its participation in the Association.
Page 17 of 24

Permit NC0001422
A. (25.) ELECTRONIC REPORTING OF DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORTS
[G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
Federal regulations require electronic submittal of all discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) and program reports
and specify that,if a state does not establish a system to receive such submittals,then permittees must submit
monitoring data and reports electronically to the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) The final NPDES
Electronic Reporting Rule was adopted and became effective on December 21,2015.
NOTE This special condition supplements or supersedes the following sections within Part II of this permit
(Standard Conditions for NPDES Pernnts)•
• Section B. (11.) Signatory Requirements
• Section D. (2.) Reporting
• Section D. (6) Records Retention
• Section E. (5.) Monitoring Reports
1. Reporting Requirements [Supersedes Section D. (2,) and Section E. (5.) (a)1
Effective December 21,2016,the permittee shall report discharge monitoring data electronically using the NC
DWR's Electronic Discharge Monitoring Report(eDMR) internet application
Monitoring results obtained during the previous month(s) shall be summarized for each month and submitted
electronically using eDMR The eDMR system allows permitted facilities to enter monitoring data and submit
DMRs electronically using the Internet Until such time that the state's eDMR application is compliant with
EPA's Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR),permittees will be required to submit all
discharge monitoring data to the state electronically using eDMR and will be required to complete the eDMR
submission by panting,signing,and submitting one signed original and a copy of the computer printed eDMR
to the following address:
NC DEQ /Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION: Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
If a pernnttee is unable to use the eDMR system due to a demonstrated hardship or due to the facility being
physically located in an area where less than 10 percent of the households have broadband access,then a
temporary waiver from the NPDES electronic reporting requirements may be granted and discharge
monitoring data may be submitted on paper DMR forms (MR 1, 1 1,2, 3) or alternative forms approved by
the Director Duplicate signed copies shall be submitted to the mailing address above See"How to Request a
Waiver from Electronic Reporting"section below
Regardless of the submission method,the first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the
issuance of the permit or in the case of a new facility,on the last day of the month following the
commencement of discharge
Starting on December 21,2020, the permittee must electronically report the following compliance monitoring
data and reports,when applicable.
. • Sewer Overflow/Bypass Event Reports;
• Pretreatment Program Annual Reports; and
• Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 316(b) Annual Reports.
The permittee may seek an electronic reporting waiver from the Division(see"How to Request a Waiver from
Electronic Reporting"section below)
Page 18 of 24

Permit NC0001422
2. Electronic Submissions
In accordance with 40 CFR 122 41(1)(9),the permittee must identify the initial recipient at the time of each
electronic submission The permittee should use the EPA's website resources to identify the initial recipient
for the electronic submission.
Initial recipient of electronic NPDES information from NPDES-regulated facilities means the entity(EPA or
the state authorized by EPA to Implement the NPDES program) that is the designated entity for receiving
electronic NPDES data [see 40 CFR 127 2(b)]
EPA plans to establish a website that will also link to the appropriate electronic reporting tool for each type of
electronic submission and for each state Instructions on how to access and use the appropriate electronic
reporting tool will be available as well Information on EPA's NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule is found at:
https //www federalregister gov/documents/2015/10/22/2015-24954/national-pollutant-discharge-
elurnnation-system-npdes-electronic-reporting-rule
Electronic submissions must start by the dates listed in the"Reporting Requirements"section above.
3. How to Request a Waiver from Electronic Reporting
The permittee may seek a temporary electronic reporting waiver from the Division To obtain an electronic
reporting waiver,a permittee must first submit an electronic reporting waiver request to the Division
Requests for temporary electronic reporting waivers must be submitted in writing to the Division for written
approval at least sixty(60) days prior to the date the facility would be required under this permit to begin
submitting monitoring data and reports The duration of a temporary waiver shall not exceed 5 years and shall
thereupon expire. At such time,monitoring data and reports shall be submitted electronically to the Division
unless the permittee re-applies for and is granted a new temporary electronic reporting waiver by the Division
Approved electronic reporting waivers are not transferrable Only permittees with an approved reporting
waiver request may submit monitoring data and reports on paper to the Division for the period that the
approved reporting waiver request is effective
Information on eDMR and the application for a temporary electronic reporting waiver are found on the
following web page.
http//deq nc gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edmr
4. Signatory Requirements [Supplements Section B. (11.) (b) and Supersedes Section B. (11.)
4
All eDMRs submitted to the permit issuing authority shall be signed by a person described in Part II,Section
B (11)(a) or by a duly authorized representative of that person as described in Part II,Section B (11)(b) A
person,and not a position,must be delegated signatory authority for eDMR reporting purposes
For eDMR submissions, the person signing and submitting the DMR must obtain an eDMR user account and
login credentials to access the eDMR s stern For more information on North Carolina's eDMR system,
registering for eDMR and obtaining an eDMR user account,please visit the following web page:
http//deq nc gov/about/divisions/water-resources/edmr
Certification Any person submitting an electronic DMR using the state's eDMR system shall make the
following certification [40 CFR 122 22]. NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL BE
ACCEPTED
"I cert,underpenalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in
accordance with a rystem designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted Based
Page 19 of 24

Permit NC0001422
on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the eystem, or those persons directly re.pon,rzble forgathering the information,
the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, acairate, and complete. I am aware that there are
sign:cant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
5. Records Retention [Supplements Section D. (6)]
The permittee shall retain records of all Discharge Monitoring Reports,including eDMR
submissions. These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the
date of the report. This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time [40 CFR
122.41].
A. (26.) APPLICABLE STATE LAW (STATE ENFORCEABLE ONLY) [G.S. 143-215.1(b)]
This facility shall meet the requirements of Senate Bill 729 (Coal Ash Management Act). This permit
may be reopened to include new requirements imposed by Senate Bill 729.
A. (27.) STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
The permittee shall develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP). The
SPPP shall be maintained on site unless exempted from this requirement by the Division. The SPPP
is public information. The SPPP should also specifically and separately address deconstruction,
demolition, coal, and/or coal ash hauling or disposal activities The SPPP shall include, at a
minimum, the following items:
1. Site Overview. The Site Overview shall provide a description of the physical facility and the
potential pollutant sources that may be expected to contribute to contamination of stormwater
discharges. The Site Overview shall contain the following:
(a) A general location map (USGS quadrangle map or appropriately drafted equivalent map),
showing the facility's location in relation to transportation routes and surface waters; the
name of the receiving waters to which the stormwater outfalls discharge, or if the discharge
is to a municipal separate storm sewer system, the name of the municipality and the
ultimate receiving waters; and accurate latitude and longitude of the points of stormwater
discharge associated with industrial activity The general location map (or alternatively the
site map) shall identify whether any receiving waters are impaired (on the state's 303(d) list
of impaired waters) or if the site is located in a watershed for which a TMDL has been
established, and what the parameters of concern are.
(b) A narrative description of storage practices, loading and unloading activities, outdoor
process areas, dust or particulate generating or control processes, and waste disposal
practices. A narrative description of the potential pollutants that could be expected to be
present in the stormwater discharge from each outfall. The narrative should also reference
deconstruction, demolition, coal. and/or coal ash hauling or disposal activities where
applicable.
(c) A site map drawn at a scale sufficient to clearly depict: the site property boundary; the
stormwater discharge outfalls; all on-site and adjacent surface waters and wetlands;
industrial activity areas (including storage of materials, disposal areas, process areas,
loading and unloading areas, and haul roads); site topography and finished grade; all
drainage features and structures; drainage area boundaries and total contributing area for
each outfall; direction of flow in each drainage area; industrial activities occurring in each
drainage area; buildings; stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs); and impervious
surfaces. The site map must indicate the percentage of each drainage area that is
impervious, and the site map must include a graphic scale indication and north arrow.
(d) A list of significant spills or leaks of pollutants during the previous three (3) years and any
corrective actions taken to mitigate spill impacts.
Page 20 of 24

•
Permit NC0001422
(e) Certification that the stormwater outfalls have been evaluated for the presence of non-
stormwater discharges. The permittee shall submit the first certification no later than
90 days after the effective date of this permit to the Stormwater Permitting Program
Central Office and shall re-certify annually that the stormwater outfalls have been
evaluated for the presence of non-stormwater discharges. For any non-stormwater
discharge identified, the permittee shall indicate how that discharge is permitted or
otherwise authorized. The certification statement will be signed in accordance with the
requirements found in Part II, Standard Conditions, Section B, Paragraph 11.
2. Stormwater Management Strategy. The Stormwater Management Strategy shall contain a
narrative description of the materials management practices employed which control or
minimize the stormwater exposure of significant materials, including structural and
nonstructural measures. This strategy should also address deconstruction, demolition, coal,
and/or coal ash hauling or disposal activities where applicable. The Stormwater Management
Strategy, at a minimum, shall incorporate the following:
(a) Feasibility Study. A review of the technical and economic feasibility of changing the
methods of operations and/or storage practices to eliminate or reduce exposure of materials
and processes to rainfall and run-on flows. Wherever practical, the permittee shall prevent
exposure of all storage areas, material handling operations, and manufacturing or fueling
operations. In areas where elimination of exposure is not practical, this review shall
document the feasibility of diverting the stormwater run-on away from areas of potential
contamination.
(b) Secondary Containment Requirements and Records. Secondary containment is required
for: bulk storage of liquid materials; storage in any amount of Section 313 of Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) water priority chemicals; and
storage in any amount of hazardous substances, in order to prevent leaks and spills from
contaminating stormwater runoff. A table or summary of all such tanks and stored
materials and their associated secondary containment areas shall be maintained. If the
secondary containment devices are connected to stormwater conveyance systems, the
connection shall be controlled by manually activated valves or other similar devices (which
shall be secured closed with a locking mechanism). Any stormwater that accumulates in
the containment area shall be observed for color, foam, outfall staining, visible sheens and
dry weather flow, prior to release of the accumulated stormwater. Accumulated stormwater
shall be released if found to be uncontaminated by any material. Records documenting the
individual making the observation, the description of the accumulated stormwater, and the
date and time of the release shall be kept for a period of five (5) years. For facilities subject
to a federal oil Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC), any portion of
the SPCC Plan fully compliant with the requirements of this permit may be used to
demonstrate compliance with this permit.
In addition to secondary containment for tankage, the permittee shall provide drip pans or
other similar protection measures for truck or rail car liquid loading and unloading stations.
(c) BMP Summary. A listing of site structural and non-structural Best Management Practices
(BMPs) shall be provided. The installation and implementation of BMPs shall be based on
the assessment of the potential for sources to contribute significant quantities of pollutants
to stormwater discharges and on data collected through monitoring of stormwater
discharges. The BMP Summary shall include a written record of the specific rationale for
installation and implementation of the selected site BMPs. The BMP Summary should also
address deconstruction, demolition, coal, and/or coal ash hauling or disposal activities
where applicable. The permittee shall refer to the BMPs described in EPA's Multi-Sector
Permit (MSGP) and Industrial Stormwater Fact Sheet for Steam Electric Power Generating
Facilities (EPA-833-F-06-030) for guidance on BMPs that may be appropriate for this site.
The BMP Summary shall be reviewed and updated annually.
Page 21 of 24

Permit NC0001422
3. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. The Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
(SPRP) shall incorporate an assessment of potential pollutant sources based on a materials
inventory of the facility. Facility personnel responsible for implementing the SPRP shall be
identified in a written list incorporated into the SPRP and signed and dated by each individual
acknowledging their responsibilities for the plan. A responsible person shall be on-site at all
times during facility operations that have increased potential to contaminate stormwater runoff
through spills or exposure of materials associated with the facility operations. The SPRP must
be site stormwater specific. Therefore, an oil Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure plan
(SPCC) may be a component of the SPRP, but may not be sufficient to completely address the
stormwater aspects of the SPRP. The common elements of the SPCC with the SPRP may be
incorporated by reference into the SPRP.
4. Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Program. A preventative maintenance
and good housekeeping program shall be developed and implemented. The program shall
address all stormwater control systems (if applicable), stormwater discharge outfalls, all on-site
and adjacent surface waters and wetlands, industrial activity areas (including material storage
areas, material handling areas, disposal areas, process areas, loading and unloading areas, and
haul roads), all drainage features and structures, and existing structural BMPs.
The program shall establish schedules of inspections, maintenance, and housekeeping activities
of stormwater control systems, as well as facility equipment, facility areas, and facility systems
that present a potential for stormwater exposure or stormwater pollution where not already
addressed under another element of the SPPP. Inspection of material handling areas and
regular cleaning schedules of these areas shall be incorporated into the program. Compliance
with the established schedules for inspections, maintenance, and housekeeping shall be
recorded and maintained in the SPPP. The program should also address deconstruction,
demolition, coal, and/or coal ash hauling or disposal activities where applicable. The Good
Housekeeping Program shall also include, but not be limited to, BMPs to accomplish the
following:
(a) Minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from oil-bearing equipment in
switchyard areas;
(b) Minimize contamination of stormwater runoff from delivery vehicles and rail cars
arriving and departing the plant site;
(c) Inspect all residue-hauling vehicles for proper covering over the load, adequate gate-
sealing, and overall integrity of the container body. Repair vehicles as necessary;
and
(d) Reduce or control the tracking of ash and residue from ash loading and storage
areas;
5 Facility Inspections. Inspections of the facility (including tanks, pipes, and equipment) and all
stormwater systems shall occur as part of the Preventative Maintenance and Good
Housekeeping Program at a minimum on a semi-annual schedule, once during the first half of
the year (January to June), and once during the second half(July to December), with at least 60
days separating inspection dates (unless performed more frequently than semi-annually).
6. Employee Training. Training programs shall be developed and training provided at a
minimum on an annual basis for facility personnel with responsibilities for: spill response and
cleanup, preventative maintenance activities, and for any of the facility's operations that have
the potential to contaminate stormwater runoff. The facility personnel responsible for
implementing the training shall be identified, and their annual training shall be documented by
the signature of each employee trained.
7. Responsible Party. The SPPP shall identify a specific position or positions responsible for the
overall coordination, development, implementation, and revision of the SPPP. Responsibilities
for all components of the SPPP shall be documented and position assignments provided.
Page 22 of 24

Permit NC0001422
8. SPPP Amendment and Annual Update. The permittee shall amend the SPPP whenever there is
a change in design, construction, operation, site drainage, maintenance, or configuration of the
physical features which may have a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of
pollutants to surface waters. All aspects of the SPPP shall be reviewed and updated on an
annual basis. The annual update shall include:
(a) an updated list of significant spills or leaks of pollutants for the previous three (3)
years, or the notation that no spills have occurred (element of the Site Overview);
(b) a written re-certification that the stormwater outfalls have been evaluated for the
presence of non-stormwater discharges (element of the Site Overview);
(c) a documented re-evaluation of the effectiveness of the on-site stormwater BMPs (BMP
Summary element of the Stormwater Management Strategy).
(d) a review and comparison of stormwater sample analytical data to any applicable
limits or benchmark values (if applicable) over the past year.
If the Director notifies the permittee that the SPPP does not meet one or more of the minimum
requirements of the permit, the permittee shall have 30 days to respond. Within 30 days of
such notice, the permittee shall submit a time schedule to the Director for modifying the SPPP
to meet minimum requirements. The permittee shall provide certification in writing to the
Director that the changes have been made.
9. SPPP Implementation. The permittee shall implement the Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan and all appropriate BMPs consistent with the provisions of this permit, in order to control
contaminants entering surface waters via stormwater. Implementation of the SPPP shall
include documentation of all monitoring, measurements, inspections, maintenance activities,
and training provided to employees, including the log of the sampling data and of actions taken
to implement BMPs associated with the industrial activities, including vehicle maintenance
activities. Such documentation shall be kept on-site for a period of five (5) years and made
available to the Director or the Director's authorized representative immediately upon request.
A. (28.) ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS AND DEFINITIONS -
1. EPA methods 200.7 or 200.8 (or the most current versions) shall be used for analyses of all
metals except for total mercury.
2. All effluent samples for all external outfalls shall be taken at the most accessible location
after the final treatment but prior to discharge to waters of the U.S (40 CFR 122.41(j)).
3. The term low volume waste sources means wastewater from all sources except thouse for
which specific limitations are otherwise established in this part (40 CFR 423.11 (b)).
4. The term chemical metal cleaning waste means any wastewater resulting from cleaning any
metal process equipment with chemical compounds, including, but not limited to, boiler
tube cleaning (40 CFR 423.11 (c)).
5. The term metal cleaning waste means any wastewater resulting from cleaning [with or
without chemical cleaning compounds] any metal process equipment including, but not
limited to, boiler tube cleaning, boiler fireside cleaning, and air preheater cleaning (40 CFR
423.11 (d)).
6. For all outfalls where the flow measurement is to be "estimated" the estimate can be done by
using calibrated V-notch weir, stop-watch and graduated cylinder, or other method
approved by the Division.
7. During normal operations removing of the free water above the settled wet ash layer shall
not involve mechanical disturbance of the ash.
A. (29.) COPPER(Cu), ARSENIC(As), and SELENIUM(Se) COMPLIANCE
SCHEDULE (Outfall 008)
1. Nine months from the permit effective date, submit to DEQ an evaluation study plan
describing steps to be undertaken to identify the source of Cu, As, and Se at Outfall 008
Page 23 of 24

Permit NC0001422
discharge in order to comply with the limits set forth in section A.(10.) of the permit. The
study should consider potential wastewater sources, practices such as vegetation
management, and background sources.
2. Eighteen months from the permit effective date, submit a progress report describing the
findings of the study. If a source of Cu, As, and Se has been identified, the interim report
shall include proposed measures that will be evaluated to treat or eliminate the source of
pollutants. If a source of Cu, As, and Se has not been identified, the interim report shall
provide additional steps planned or necessary to comply with the limits set forth in section
A.(10.) of the permit.
3. Twenty-seven months from the permit effective date submit a progress report. If a source of
Cu, As, and Se was identified in the 18-month report, this report should discuss the success
of the efforts to treat or eliminate sources of Cu, As, and Se. If a source of Cu, As, and Se
has not been identified, the interim report shall provide additional steps planned or
necessary to comply with the limits set forth in section A.(10.) of the permit.
4. Thirty-six months from the permit effective date the discharge shall be in compliance with
the Cu, As, and Se limitations.
A. (30.) COPPER (Cu) and NICKEL (Ni) COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE (Outfall
001/Outfall 004)
1. Nine months from the permit effective date, submit to DEQ an evaluation study plan
describing steps to be undertaken to identify the source of Cu and Ni at Outfall 001 in order
to comply with the limits set forth in sections A.(1.) or A.(2.) of the permit. The study should
consider potential wastewater sources, practices such as vegetation management, and
background sources.
2. Eighteen months from the permit effective date, submit a progress report describing the
findings of the study. If a source of Cu and Ni has been identified, the interim report shall
include proposed measures that will be evaluated to treat or eliminate the source of the
pollutants. If a source of Cu and Ni is not identified, the interim report shall provide
additional steps planned or necessary to comply with the limits set forth in sections A.(1.) or
A. (2.) of the permit.
3. Twenty-seven months from the permit effective date submit a progress report. If a source of
Cu and Ni was identified in the 18-month report, this report should discuss the success of
the efforts to treat or eliminate sources of the pollutants. If a source of Cu and Ni has not
been identified, the interim report shall provide additional steps planned or necessary to
comply with the limits set forth in sections A.(1.) or A.(2.) of the permit.
4. Thirty-six months from the permit effective date the discharge shall be in compliance with
the Cu and Ni limitations.
A. (31.) COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY
The compliance boundary for the disposal system shall be specified in accordance with 15A
NCAC 02L .0107(a) or (b) dependent upon the date permitted. An exceedance of groundwater
standards at or beyond the compliance boundary is subject to remediation action according to
15A NCAC 02L .0106(c), (d), or (e) as well as enforcement actions in accordance with North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A through 143-215.6C.
Page 24 of 24

Duke Energy Progress, LLC. NPDES Permit NC00001422
L.V. Sutton Electric Plant 2016 Permit Renewal Application
N
(------)
i)
Dike
North Pond
emergency
spillway
Makeup C
Pump
o
/
��
o
a■s o
S..
e, ) o
Q- 0 o�
Outfall 004
m`
c,
4.
Sutton Cooling Pond
a Ash
U Landfill
/ 1984(New)Ash ootprint
I/l Pond
ir
OOuHall 002 (i.g
N
outfall 008 • 1971(Old) 0�4
Ash Pond d�
\) o
Internal
Outfall 007 Spu hgPOna
o Final(external)Outfalls •emergency
Effluent Bcellway
ergen
® Internal Outfalls Channel to
Cooling
O Stormwater ` Pond
s Internal Outfall 009
•
•
.....y.--
0 1000 2000 3000 Recirculating
I t t I ®• Condenser
Outfall 001 Cooling Water
Feet
Release
CC Block _
Internal Outfall 006
CC Block
Sutton Energy Internal Outfall 005
Complex
Attachment 1- Site Map _ _
NORTH CAROLINA L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
New Hanover County
Al- 1

Duke Energy Progress, LLC. NPDES Permit NC00001422
L.V. Sutton Electric Plant 2016 Permit Renewal Application
o Outfal l 002
Old Ash
Outfall 008 Pond (1971)
Cooling Pond to
Internal
Outfall 007
(approx) South Pond
emergency
• spillway
ISW-1 •
ISW-2 • Internal
ISW-3 • Outfall 009
(approx)
t0
ISW-4••• ISW-6
d.•. Recirculated
Outfall 001 cooling water
o Final(external)Outfalls �L and ISW-5
t0�
o Internal Outfalls
°
Stormwater Internal Outfalls
005, 006
Attachment 1-Site Map
L.V.Sutton Energy Complex
New Hanover County
A1- 2

•
- NOTES
r'� •I AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY OBINNED FROM USDA SA NAP DATED O&1252016
•
PARCEL BOUlDARY WAS OBTAINED FROM THE NC CENTER FOR GEOGAAP1AC
�. Alf DRMATION AND ANALYSE.AT(No M;cA°rcN n.p 9Y
�� PARCELDRAWNG HAS BEEN SET PATH A PROJECTION Of NORTH CAROAMA STATE
PJNE COORDNATE SISTEM FRS 3200 RADA
IL
,1. �, $' }
• I t
. 0 '
• w
. ' : \ ,,b,4,..
- .„0„. .4.
- - , ....00 ..,
k .,.„.,,,,,„.. ,
...
„ . . I ..... . :, .
1 . • ,
COOLING POND 1'
(WATERS OF w ?
THE U.S.)
. Y
1984 ASH , �r
BASIN , 4`t
( (LINED) I ,
Aw* i t - ,4
It
4
T- .YS a 4. � .. -`'' -• �...4-
i.
�w �` � 1984 ASN .$ , q ' ''
'> i "BASIN ,:r,,,
: �'T. , tk. �t `. x" '"-
f" - . (LINED) "`
1971 ASH A
BASIN �g
Al >YrA ,?,,
` ��
04,
1983
� ,EXTENSION *:. L
G�Cly
L 22 y . AlA
N
NFA '� s
COOLING POND ' i
(WATERS OF THE U.S.) i
ti
L.
200 Rx c goo .m FIGURE 1
LEGEND m E SO
0REVISED WASTE AND
WASTE BOUNDARY AN��Fa sTAFfH s�irtf no
___ COMPLIANCE BOUNDARIES
' COMPLIANCE BOUNDARY +':mfASSAS.°9D0 L.V.SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
L...1 DUKE ENERGY SITE BOUNDARY 7y r Te fl .. dr.0,7>101' WILMINGTON,NORTH CAROLINA

•
NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page l of 18
PART II
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR NPDES PERMITS
Section A. Definitions
2/Month
Samples are collected twice per month with at least ten calendar days between sampling events These samples shall be
representative of the wastewater discharged during the sample period •
3/Week
Samples are collected three times per week on three separate calendar days These samples shall be representative of
the wastewater discharged during the sample period.
Act or"the Act"
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act,also known as the Clean Water Act(CWA),as amended,33 USC 1251,et
seq.
Annual Average
The arithmetic mean of all"daily discharges"of a pollutant measured during the calendar year In the case of fecal
coliform,the geometric mean of such discharges.
Arithmetic Mean •
The summation of the individual values divided by the number of individual values. •
Bypass
The known diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility including the collection system,which is
not a designed or established or operating mode for the facility
Calendar Day
The period from midnight of one day until midnight of the next day.However,for purposes of this permit,any
consecutive 24-hour period that reasonably represents the calendar day may be used for sampling
Calendar Week
The period from Sunday through the following Saturday
Calendar Quarter •
One of the following distinct periods January through March,April through June,July through September,and
October through December
Composite Sample
A sample collected over a 24-hour period by continuous sampling or combining grab samples of at least 100 mL in
such a manner as to result in a total sample representative of the wastewater discharge during the sample period.The
Director may designate the most appropriate method(specific number and size of aliquots necessary,the time interval
between grab samples,etc)on a case-by-case basis Samples may be collected manually or automatically.Composite
samples may be obtained by the following methods
(1) Continuous a single,continuous sample collected over a 24-hour period proportional to the rate of flow
(2) Constant time/variable volume a series of grab samples collected at equal time intervals over a 24 hour period
of discharge and combined proportional to the rate of flow measured at the time of individual sample •
collection,or
•
(3) Variable time/constant volume. a series of grab samples of equal volume collected over a 24 hour period with
the time intervals between samples determined by a preset number of gallons passing the sampling point Flow
measurement between sample intervals shall be determined by use of a flow recorder and totahzer,and the
preset gallon interval between sample collection fixed at no greater than 1/24 of the expected total daily flow at
the treatment system,or
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 2 of 18
(4) Constant time/constant volume:a series of grab samples of equal volume collected over a 24-hour period at a
constant time interval.Use of this method requires prior approval by the Director.This method may only be
used in situations where effluent flow rates vary less than 15 percent The following restrictions also apply:
> Influent and effluent grab samples shall be of equal size and of no less than 100 milliliters
Influent samples shall not be collected more than once per hour
➢ Permittees with wastewater treatment systems whose detention time<24 hours shall collect effluent grab
samples at intervals of no greater than 20 mmutes apart during any 24-hour period.
➢ Permittees with wastewater treatment systems whose detention time exceeds 24 hours shall collect effluent
grab samples at least every six hours;there must be a minimum of four samples during a 24-hour sampling
period
Continuous flow measurement
Flow monitoring that occurs without interruption throughout the operating hours of the facility Flow shall be
monitored continually except for the infrequent times when there may be no flow or for infrequent maintenance
activities on the flow device
Daily Discharge
The discharge of a pollutant measured during a calendar day or any 24-hour penod that reasonably represents the
calendar day for purposes of samplmg For pollutants measured in units of mass,the"daily discharge"is calculated as
the total mass of the pollutant discharged over the day.For pollutants expressed in other units of measurement,the
"daily discharge"is calculated as the average measurement of the pollutant over the day.(40 CFR 122 2,see also
"Composite Sample,"above)
Daily Maximum
The highest"daily discharge"dunng the calendar month
Daily Sampling
Parameters requiring daily sampling shall be sampled 5 out of every 7 days per week unless otherwise specified in the
permit. Sampling shall be conducted on weekdays except where holidays or other disruptions of normal operations
prevent weekday sampling. If sampling is required for all seven days of the week for any permit parameter(s),that
requirement will be so noted on the Effluent Limitations and Monitonng Page(s)
DWR or"the Division"
The Division of Water Resources,Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Effluent
Wastewater discharged following all treatment processes from a water pollution control facility or other point source
whether treated or untreated
EMC
The North Carolina Environmental Managen#ent Commission
EPA
The United States Environmental Protection Agency
Facility Closure
Cessation of all activities that require coverage under this NPDES permit Completion of facility closure will allow this
permit to be rescinded.
Geometric Mean
The Nth root of the product of the mdividua values where N=the number of individual values For purposes of
calculating the geometric mean,values of" "(or"<[detection level]")shall be considered= 1
Grab Sample
Individual samples of at least 100 mL colle ted over a period of time not exceeding 15 minutes.Grab samples can be
collected manually Grab samples must be representative of the discharge(or the receiving stream,for mstream
samples).
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 3 of 18
Hazardous Substance
Any substance designated under 40 CFR Part 116 pursuant to Section 311 of the CWA.
Instantaneous flow measurement
The flow measured during the minimum time required for the flow measuring device or method to produce a result in
that instance To the extent practical,instantaneous flow measurements coincide with the collection of any grab
samples required for the same sampling period so that together the samples and flow are representative of the discharge
during that sampling penod
Monthly Average(concentration limit)
The arithmetic mean of all"daily discharges"of a pollutant measured during the calendar month In the case of fecal
coliform or other bacterial parameters or indicators,the geometric mean of such discharges
Permit Issuing Authority
The Director of the Division of Water Resources.
Quarterly Average(concentration limit)
The arithmetic mean of all samples taken over a calendar quarter.
Severe property damage
Substantial physical damage to property,damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable,or
substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a
bypass Severe property damage excludes economic loss caused by delays in production
Toxic Pollutant:
Any pollutant listed as toxic under Section 307(a)(1)of the CWA
Upset
An incident beyond the reasonable control of the Permittee causing unintentional and temporary noncompliance with
permit effluent limitations and/or momtonng requirements An upset does not include noncompliance caused by
operational error,improperly designed treatment facilities,inadequate treatment facilities,lack of preventive
maintenance,or careless or improper operation.
Weekly Average(concentration limit)
The arithmetic mean of all"daily discharges"of a pollutant measured during the calendar week.In the case of fecal
coliform or other bacterial parameters or indicators,the geometric mean of such discharges.
Section B. General Conditions
I. Duty to Comply
The Permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of
the CWA and is grounds for enforcement action,for permit termination,revocation and reissuance,or
modification,or denial of a permit renewal application[40 CFR 122 41]
a The Permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under section 307(a)of the
CWA for toxic pollutants and with standards for sewage sludge use or disposal established under section
405(d)of the CWA within the time provided m the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions or
standards for sewage sludge use or disposal,even if the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the
requirement
b The CWA provides that any person who violates section[s] 301,302,306,307,308,318 or 405 of the Act,or
any permit condition or limitation implementing any such sections m a permit issued under section 402,or any
requirement imposed in a pretreatment program approved under sections 402(a)(3)or 402(b)(8)of the Act,is
subject to a civil penalty not to exceed$37,500 per day for each violation [33 USC 1319(d)and 40 CFR
122 41(a)(2)]
c The CWA provides that any person who negligently violates sections 301,302,306,307,308, 318,or 405 of
the Act,or any condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section 402
of the Act,or any requirement imposed in a pretreatment program approved under section 402(a)(3)or
402(b)(8)of the Act,is subject to criminal penalties of$2,500 to$25,000 per day of violation,or
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 4 of 18
imprisonment of not more than 1 year,or both In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a negligent
violation,a person shall be subject to criminal penalties of not more than$50,000 per day of violation,or by
imprisonment of not more than 2 years,or both [33 USC 1319(c)(1)and 40 CFR 122 41(a)(2)]
d Any person who knowingly violates such sections,or such conditions or limitations is subject to criminal
penalties of$5,000 to$50,000 per day of violation,or impnsonment for not more than 3 years,or both In the
case of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing violation,a person shall be subject to criminal
penalties of not more than$100,000 per day of violation,or imprisonment of not more than 6 years, or both
[33 USC 1319(c)(2)and 40 CFR 122 41(a)(2)]
e Any person who knowingly violates section 301,302,303,306,307,308,318 or 405 of the Act,or any permit
condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section 402 of the Act,and
who knows at that time that he thereby places another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily
injury,shall,upon conviction,be subject to a fine of not more than$250,000 or impnsonment of not more than
15 years,or both In the case of a second or subsequent conviction for a knowing endangerment violation,a
person shall be subject to a fine of not more than$500,000 or by imprisonment of not more than 30 years,or
both An organization,as defined in section 309(c)(3)(B)(m)of the CWA,shall,upon conviction of violating
the imminent danger provision,be subject to a fine of not more than$1,000,000 and can be fined up to
$2,000,000 for second or subsequent convictions [40 CFR 122 41(a)(2)]
f Under state law,a civil penalty of not more than$25,000 per violation may be assessed against any person
who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms,conditions,or requirements of a permit [North
Carolma General Statutes § 143-215 6A]
g Any person may be assessed an administrative penalty by the Administrator for violating section 301,302,
306,307,308,318 or 405 of this Act,or any permit condition or limitation implementing any of such sections
in a permit issued under section 402 of this Act Administrative penalties for Class I violations are not to
exceed$16,000 per violation,with the maximum amount of any Class I penalty assessed not to exceed
$37,500 Penalties for Class II violations are not to exceed$16,000 per day for each day during which the
violation continues,with the maximum amount of any Class II penalty not to exceed$177,500 [33 USC
1319(g)(2)and 40 CFR 122 41(a)(3)]
2 Duty to Mitigate
The Permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge or sludge use or disposal in
violation of this permit with a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment[40
CFR 122 41(d)]
3 Civil and Criminal Liability
Except as provided in permit conditions on"Bypassing"(Part II C 4),"Upsets"(Part II.0 5)and"Power Failures"
(Part II.0 7),nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the Permittee from any responsibilities,liabilities,
or penalties for noncompliance pursuant to NCGS 143-215.3, 143-215 6 or Section 309 of the Federal Act, 33 USC
1319 Furthermore,the Permittee is responsible for consequential damages,such as fish kills,even though the
responsibility for effective compliance may be temporarily suspended
4. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the Permittee
from any responsibilities,liabilities,or penalties to which the Permittee is or may be subject to under NCGS 143-
215.75 et seq or Section 311 of the Federal Act,33 USG 1321.Furthermore,the Permittee is responsible for
consequential damages,such as fish kills,even though the responsibility for effective compliance may be
temporarily suspended
5 Property Rights
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property nghts in either real or personal property,or any exclusive
privileges,nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights,nor any
infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations[40 CFR 122 41(g)]
6 Onshore or Offshore Construction
This permit does not authorize or approve the construction of any onshore or offshore physical structures or
facilities or the undertaking of any work in any navigable waters
Version 11/09/2011 1

• NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 5 of 18
7 Severability
The provisions of this permit are severable If any provision of this permit,or the apphcation of any provision of
this permit to any circumstances,is held invalid,the application of such provision to other circumstances,and the
remainder of this permit,shall not be affected thereby[NCGS 15OB-23].
8 Duty to Provide Information
The Permittee shall furnish to the Permit Issuing Authority,within a reasonable time,any information which the
Permit Issuing Authority may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying,revoking and reissuing,or
terminating this permit or to determine compliance with this permit.The Permittee shall also furnish to the Permit
Issuing Authority upon request,copies of records required by this permit[40 CFR 122 41(h)]
9 Duty to Reapply
If the Permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit,the
Permittee must apply for and obtain a new permit[40 CFR 122 41(b)]
10 Expiration of Permit
The Permittee is not authorized to discharge after the expiration date.In order to receive automatic authorization to
discharge beyond the expiration date,the Permittee shall submit such information,forms,and fees as are required
by the agency authorized to issue permits no later than 180 days prior to the expiration date unless permission for a
later date has been granted by the Director.(The Director shall not grant permission for applications to be
submitted later than the expiration date of the existing permit)[40 CFR 122 21(d)]Any Pernuttee that has not
requested renewal at least 180 days prior to expiration,or any Permittee that does not have a permit after the
expiration and has not requested renewal at least 180 days prior to expiration,will subject the Pernuttee to
enforcement procedures as provided in NCGS 143-215.6 and 33 USC 1251 et seq
11 Signatory Requirements
All applications,reports,or information submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority shall be signed and certified[40
CFR 122 41(k)]
a. All permit applications shall be signed as follows
(1) For a corporation by a responsible corporate officer For the purpose of this Section,a responsible
corporate officer means. (a)a president,secretary,treasurer or vice president of the corporation in charge
of a principal business function,or any other person who performs similar policy or decision making
functions for the corporation,or(b)the manager of one or more manufacturing,production,or operating
facilities,provided, the manager is authorized to make management decisions which govern the operation
of the regulated facility including having the explicit or implicit duty of making major capital investment
recommendations,and initiating and directing other comprehensive measures to assure long term
environmental compliance with environmental laws and regulations,the manager can ensure that the
necessary systems are established or actions taken to gather complete and accurate information for permit
application requirements,and where authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the
manager in accordance with corporate procedures
(2) For a partnership or sole proprietorship by a general partner or the proprietor,respectively,or
(3) For a municipality,State,Federal,or other public agency by either a principal executive officer or
ranking elected official[40 CFR 122.22]
b All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Permit Issuing Authority shall be
signed by a person described in paragraph a above or by a duly authorized representative of that person A
person is a duly authorized representative only if
(1) The authorization is made in writing by a person described above;
(2) The authorization specified either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation
of the regulated facility or activity,such as the position of plant manager,operator of a well or well field,
superintendent,a position of equivalent responsibility,or an individual or position having overall
responsibility for environmental matters for the company (A duly authorized representative may thus be
either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position),and
(3) The written authonzation is submitted to the Permit Issuing Authority[40 CFR 122.22]
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 6 of 18
c Changes to authorization If an authorization under paragraph(b)of this section is no longer accurate because
a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility,a new authorization
satisfying the requirements of paragraph(b)of this section must be submitted to the Director pnor to or
together with any reports,information,or applications to be signed by an authorized representative[40 CFR
122 22]
d Certification Any person signing a document under paragraphs a or b of this section shall make the following
certification[40 CFR 122 22] NO OTHER STATEMENTS OF CERTIFICATION WILL BE ACCEPTED
"1 cert fy, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete 1 am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility offines and imprisonment for knowing violations "
12. Permit Actions
This permit may be modified,revoked and reissued,or terminated for cause The filing of a request by the
Permittee for a permit modification,revocation and reissuance,or termination,or a notification of planned changes
or anticipated noncompliance does not stay any permit condition[40 CFR 122.41(f)]
13 Permit Modification.Revocation and Reissuance,or Termination
The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the permit issuing authority from reopening and modifying the permit,
revoking and reissuing the permit,or terminating the permit as allowed by the laws,rules,and regulations
contained in Title 40,Code of Federal Regulations,Parts 122 and 123,Title 15A of the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Subchapter 02H.0100,and North Carolina General Statute 143 215.1 et al
14 Annual Admuustenng and Compliance Monitoring Fee Requirements
The Permittee must pay the annual administering and compliance momtonng fee within thirty days after being
billed by the Division Failure to pay the fee in a timely manner in accordance with 15A NCAC 02H.0105(b)(2)
may cause this Division to initiate action to revoke the permit.
Section C. Operation and :Maintenance of Pollution Controls
1 Certified Operator
Owners of classified water pollution control systems must designate operators,certified by the Water Pollution
Control System Operators Certification Commission(WPCSOCC),of the appropriate type and grade for the
system,and for each classification must T15A NCAC 08G 0201].
Y L
a designate one Operator In Responsible Charge(ORC)who possesses a valid certificate of the type and grade at
least equivalent to the type and grade of the system,
b designate one or more Back-up Operator(s)in Responsible Charge(Back-up ORCs)who possesses a valid
certificate of the type of the system and no more than one grade less than the grade of the system,with the
exception of no backup operator in responsible charge is required for systems whose minimum visitation
requirements are twice per year,and
c submit a signed completed"Water Pollution Control System Operator Designation Form"to the Commission
(or to the local health department for owners of subsurface systems)countersigned by the designated certified
operators,designating the Operator Responsible Charge(ORC)and the Back-up Operator in Responsible
Charge(Back-up ORC)
(1) 60 calendar days pnor to waste ater or residuals being introduced into a new system,or
(2) within 120 calendar days folio ing
> receiving notification of a hange in the classification of the system requiring the designation of a new
Operator in Responsible C arge(ORC)and Back-up Operator in Responsible Charge(Back-up ORC)
of the proper type and grade;or
➢ a vacancy in the position of Operator in Responsible Charge(ORC)or Back-up Operator in
Responsible Charge(Back-up ORC)
Version 11/09/2011 1

•
NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 7 of 18
(3) within seven calendar days of vacancies in both ORC and Back-up ORC positions replacing or designating
at least one of the responsibilities
The ORC of each Class I facility(or the Back-up ORC,when acting as surrogate for the ORC)must
• Visit the facility as often as is necessary to insure proper operation of the treatment system,the treatment
facility must be visited at least weekly
D Comply with all other conditions of 15A NCAC 08G 0204
The ORC of each Class II,III and IV facility(or the Back-up ORC,when acting as surrogate for the ORC)must:
• Visit the facility as often as is necessary to insure proper operation of the treatment system,the treatment
facility must be visited at least five days per week,excluding holidays
• Properly manage and document daily operation and maintenance of the facility
➢ Comply with all other conditions of 15A NCAC 08G.0204
2. Proper Operation and Maintenance
The Permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control
(and related appurtenances)which are installed or used by the Permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions
of this permit.Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and appropnate quality
assurance procedures This provision requires the Permittee to install and operate backup or auxiliary facilities only
when necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit[40 CFR 122.41(e)]
NOTE Properly and officially designated operators are fully responsible for all proper operation and maintenance
of the facility,and all documentation required thereof,whether acting as a contract operator[subcontractor]or a
member of the Permittee's staff
3 Need to Halt or Reduce not a Defense
It shall not be a defense for a Permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or
reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the condition of this permit[40 CFR 122 41(c)].
4 Bypassing of Treatment Facihties
a. Bypass not exceeding limitations[40 CFR 122.41(m)(2)]
The Permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded,but
only if it also is for essential mamtenance to assure efficient operation.These bypasses are not subject to the
provisions of Paragraphs b and c of this section
b Notice[40 CFR 122.41(m)(3)]
(1) Anticipated bypass If the Permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass,it shall submit prior notice,
if possible at least ten days before the date of the bypass, including an evaluation of the anticipated quality
and effect of the bypass
(2) Unanticipated bypass.The Permittee shall submit notice of an unanticipated bypass as required m Part
II E 6.(24-hour notice)
c Prohibition of Bypass
(1) Bypass from the treatment facility is prohibited and the Permit Issuing Authority may take enforcement
' action against a Permittee for bypass,unless
(A) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,personal injury or severe property damage,
(B) There were no feasible alternatives to the bypass,such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities,
retention of untreated wastes or maintenance during normal periods.of equipment downtime.This
condition is not satisfied tf adequate backup equipment should have been installed in the exercise of
reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of
equipment downtime or preventive maintenance,and
(C) The Permittee submitted notices as required under Paragraph b of this section
(2) Bypass from the collection system is prohibited and the Permit Issuing Authority may take enforcement
action against a Permittee for a bypass as provided in any current or future system-wide collection system
permit associated with the treatment facility
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 8 of 18
(3) The Permit Issuing Authority may approve an anticipated bypass,after considering its adverse effects, if
the Permit Issuing Authority determines that it will meet the three conditions listed above in Paragraph c.
(1)of this section
5. •Upsets
a Effect of an upset[40 CFR 122 41(n)(2)] An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for
noncompliance with such technology based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph b of
this condition are met No determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was
caused by upset,and before an action for noncompliance,is final administrative action subject to judicial
review
b Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset:Any Permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative
defense of upset shall demonstrate,through properly signed,contemporaneous operating logs,or other relevant
evidence that
(1)An upset occurred and that the Permittee can identify the cause(s)of the upset;
(2)The Permittee facility was at the time being properly operated,and
(3)The Permittee submitted notice of the upset as required in Part 11 E 6(b)of this permit
(4)The Permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part II B 2 of this permit
c Burden of proof[40 CFR 122 41(n)(4)] The Permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has
the burden of proof in any enforcement proceeding
6 Removed Substances
Solids,sludges,filter backwash,or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of wastewaters
shall be utilized/disposed of in accordance with NCGS 143-215.1 and in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant
from such materials from entering waters of the State or navigable waters of the United States except as permitted
by the Commission The Permittee shall comply with all applicable state and Federal regulations governing the
disposal of sewage sludge,including 40 CFR 503,Standards for the Use and Disposal of Sewage Sludge,40 CFR
Part 258,Criteria For Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,and 15A NCAC Subchapter 2T, Waste Not Discharged To
Surface Waters The Permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authonty of any significant change in its sludge use
or disposal practices
7 Power Failures
The Permittee is responsible for maintaining adequate safeguards(as required by 15A NCAC 02H 0124)to
prevent the discharge of untreated or inadequately treated wastes during electrical power failures either by means
of alternate power sources,standby generators or retention of inadequately treated effluent
Section D. Monitoring and Records
1. Representative Sampling
Samples collected and measurements taken,as required herein,shall be representative of the penmtted discharge.
Samples collected at a frequency less than daily shall be taken on a day and time that is representative of the
discharge for the period the sample represents.All samples shall be taken at the monitoring points specified in this
permit and, unless otherwise specified,before the effluent joins or is diluted by any other wastestream,body of
water,or substance Monitoring points shall not be changed without notification to and the approval of the Permit
Issuing Authority[40 CFR 122 41(0]
2 Reporting
Momtonng results obtained during the previous month(s)shall be summarized for each month and reported on a
monthly Discharge Monitoring Report(DMR)Form(MR 1, 1 1,2,3)or alternative forms approved by the
Director,postmarked no later than the last calendar day of the month following the completed reporting period.
The first DMR is due on the last day of the month following the issuance of the permit or in the case of a new
facility,on the last day of the month following the commencement of discharge Duplicate signed copies of these,
and all other reports required herein,shall be submitted to the following address
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 9 of 18
NC DENR/Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
3. Flow Measurements
Appropriate flow measurement devices and methods consistent with accepted scientific practices shall be selected
and used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of measurements of the volume of monitored discharges The
devices shall be installed,calibrated and maintained to ensure that the accuracy of the measurements is consistent
with the accepted capability of that type of device.Devices selected shall be capable of measuring flows with a
maximum deviation of less than 10%from the true discharge rates throughout the range of expected discharge
volumes Flow measurement devices shall be accurately calibrated at a minimum of once per year and maintained
to ensure that the accuracy of the measurements is consistent with the accepted capability of that type of device.
The Director shall approve the flow measurement device and monitoring location prior to installation
Once-through condenser cooling water flow monitored by pump logs,or pump hour meters as specified in Part I of
this permit and based on the manufacturer's pump curves shall not be subject to this requirement
4 Test Procedures
Laboratories used for sample analysis must be certified by the Division.Permittees should contact the Division's
Laboratory Certification Section(919 733-3908 or http//portal nedenr org/web/wq/lab/cert)for information
regarding laboratory certifications
Facilities whose personnel are conducting testing of field-certified parameters only must hold the appropriate field
parameter laboratory certifications.
Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to the EMC regulations(published pursuant to NCGS
143-215 63 et. seq),the Water and Air Quality Reporting Acts,and to regulations published pursuant to Section
304(g),33 USC 1314,of the CWA(as amended),and 40 CFR 136;or in the case of sludge use or disposal,
approved under 40 CFR 136,unless otherwise specified in 40 CFR 503,unless other test procedures have been
specified in this permit[40 CFR 122 41]
To meet the intent of the monitoring required by this permit,all test procedures must produce minimum detection
and reporting levels that are below the permit discharge requirements and all data generated must be reported down
to the minimum detection or lower reporting level of the procedure.If no approved methods are determined
capable of achieving minimum detection and reporting levels below permit discharge requirements,then the most
sensitive(method with the lowest possible detection and reporting level)approved method must be used.
5 Penalties for Tampering
The CWA provides that any person who falsifies,tampers with,or knowingly renders inaccurate,any monitoring
device or method required to be maintained under this permit shall,upon conviction,be punished by a fine of not
more than$10,000 per violation,or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,or by both If a
conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person under this paragraph,
punishment is a fine of not more than$20,000 per day of violation,or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years,
or both[40 CFR 122 41]
6 Records Retention
Except for records of monitoring information required by this permit related to the Perri uttee's sewage sludge use
and disposal activities,which shall be retained for a period of at least five years(or longer as required by 40 CFR
503),the Permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information,including.
> all calibration and maintenance records
• all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation
> copies of all reports required by this permit
> copies of all data used to complete the application for this permit
These records or copies shall be maintained for a period of at least 3 years from the date of the sample,
measurement,report or application.This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time[40 CFR
122 41]
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 10 of 18
7 Recording Results
For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requirements of this permit,the Permittee shall record the
following information[40 CFR 122 41]•
a. The date,exact place, and time of sampling or measurements,
• b The individual(s)who performed the sampling or measurements,
P g
c The date(s)analyses were performed,
d The individual(s)who performed the analyses,
e The analytical techniques or methods used,and
f The results of such analyses
. 8 Inspection and Entry
The Permittee shall allow the Director,or an authorized representative(including an authorized contractor acting as
a representative of the Director),upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by
law,to,
a Enter,at reasonable times,upon the Permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or
• conducted,or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit,
• b Have access to and copy, at reasonable times,any records that must be kept under the conditions of this permit, •
c Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment(including monitoring and control equipment),practices,
or operations regulated or required under this permit,and
d Sample or monitor at reasonable times,for the purposes of assuring permit compliance or as otherwise
authorized by the CWA,any substances or parameters at any location[40 CFR 122.41(i)]
• Section E Reporting Requirements •
1 Change in Discharge
All discharges authorized herein shall be ccnsistent with the terms and conditions of this permit.The discharge of
any pollutant identified in this permit more frequently than or at a level in excess of that authorized shall constitute
a violation of the permit
• 2. Planned Changes
The Permittee shall give notice to the Director as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions
to the permitted facility[40 CFR 122 41(1)] Notice is required only when.
a The alteration or addition to a permitted facility may meet one of the criteria for new sources at 40 CFR
122.29(b),or
b The alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the quantity of pollutants
discharged.This notification applies to pollutants subject neither to effluent limitations in the permit,nor to •
notification requirements under 40 CFR 122 42(a)(1); or
c The alteration or addition results m a significant change in the Permittee's sludge use or disposal practices,and
such alteration,addition or change may justify the application of permit conditions that are different from or
absent in the existing permit, including notification of additional use or disposal sites not reported during the
• permit application process or not reported pursuant to an approved land application plan
3 Anticipated Noncompliance •
The Permittee shall give advance notice to the Director of any planned changes to the permitted facility or other
activities that might result in noncompliance with the permit[40 CFR 122.41(1X2)]
4 Transfers
This permit is not transferable to any person without prior written notice to and approval from the Director in
accordance with 40 CFR 122 61 The Director may condition approval in accordance with NCGS 143-215 1,in
•
particular NCGS 143-215.1(b)(4)b 2,and may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit,or
a minor modification,to identify the new permittee and incorporate such other requirements as may be necessary
under the CWA [40 CFR 122 41(1)(3), 122 61] or state statute.
Version 11/09/2011 1

• NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 11of18
5. Monitoring Reports
Monitoring results shall be reported at the intervals specified elsewhere m this permit[40 CFR 122 41(1)(4)]
a Monitoring results must be reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report(DMR)(See Part II.D 2)or forms
provided by the Director for reporting results of monitoring of sludge use or disposal practices
b If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit using test procedures
approved under 40 CFR Part 136 and at a sampling location specified in this permit or other appropriate
mstrument governing the discharge, the results of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation and
reporting of the data submitted on the DMR
6 Twenty-four Hour Reporting
a. The Permittee shall report to the Director or the appropriate Regional Office any noncompliance that
potentially threatens public health or the environment Any information shall be provided orally within 24
hours from the time the Permittee became aware of the circumstances A written submission shall also be
provided within 5 days of the time the Permitteebecomes aware of the circumstances The written submission
shall contain a descnption of the noncompliance,and its cause,the period of noncompliance,including exact
dates and times,and if the noncompliance has not been corrected,the anticipated time it is expected to
continue,and steps taken or planned to reduce,eliminate,and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance[40
CFR 122 41(1)(6)]
b The Director may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis for reports under this section if the oral
report has been received within 24 hours.
c Occurrences outside normal business hours may also be reported to the Division's Emergency Response
personnel at(800)662-7956,[phone] or(919)733-3300.
7 Other Noncompliance
The Permittee shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under Part II E.5 and 6.of this permit at the
time monitoring reports are submitted.The reports shall contain the information listed in Part II E 6 of this permit
[40 CFR 122.41(1)(7)].
8 Other Information
Where the Permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application,or submitted
incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the Director,it shall promptly submit such facts or
information[40 CFR 122 41(1)(8)]
9 Noncompliance Notification
The Permittee shall report by telephone to either the central office or the appropriate regional office of the Division
as soon as possible,but in no case more than 24 hours or on the next working day following the occurrence or first
knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following
a. Any occurrence at the water pollution control facility which results in the discharge of significant amounts of
' wastes which are abnormal in quantity or characteristic,such as the dumping of the contents of a sludge
digester,the known passage of a slug of hazardous substance through the facility, or any other unusual
circumstances.
b Any process unit failure,due to known or unknown reasons,that render the facility incapable of adequate
wastewater treatment such as mechanical or electrical failures of pumps,aerators,compressors,etc.
c Any failure of a pumping station,sewer line,or treatment facility resulting in a by-pass without treatment of all
or any portion of the mfluent to such station or facility
Persons reporting such occurrences by telephone shall also file a wntten report within 5 days following first
knowledge of the occurrence Also see reporting requirements for municipalities in Part IV C 2 c of this permit.
10. Availability of Reports
Except for data determined to be confidential under NCGS 143-215 3 (a)(2)or Section 308 of the Federal Act,33
USC 1318,all reports prepared in accordance with the terms shall be available for public inspection at the offices
of the Division As required by the Act,effluent data shall not be considered confidential.Knowingly making any
false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in NCGS 143-
215.1(b)(2)or in Section 309 of the Federal Act
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 12of18
11 Penalties for Falsification of Reports
The CWA provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement,representation,or certification in
any record or other document submitted or required to be maintained under this permit,including monitoring
reports or reports of compliance or noncompliance shall,upon conviction,be punished by a fine of not more than
$25,000 per violation,or by imprisonment for not more than two years per violation,or by both[40 CFR 122.41]
12 Annual Performance Reports
Permittees who own or operate facilities that pnmarily collect or treat municipal or domestic wastewater and have
an average annual flow greater than 200,000 gallons per day shall provide an annual report to the Permit Issuing
Authority and to the users/customers served by the Permittee(NCGS 143-215 1C) The report shall summanze the
performance of the collection or treatment system,as well as the extent to which the facility was compliant with
applicable Federal or State laws,regulations and rules pertaining to water quality The report shall be provided no
later than sixty days after the end of the calendar or fiscal year,depending upon which annual penod is used for
evaluation
The report shall be sent to
NC DENR/Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting Section
ATTENTION.Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
•
•
•
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 13 of 18
PART III
OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Section A. Construction
a. The Permittee shall not commence construction of wastewater treatment facilities,nor add to the plant's treatment
capacity,nor change the treatment process(es)utilized at the treatment plant unless(1)the Division has issued an
Authorization to Construct(AtC)permit or(2)the Permittee is exempted from such AtC permit requirements
under Item b.of this Section.
b. In accordance with NCGS 143-215.1(a5)[SL 2011-394],no permit shall be required to enter into a contract for the
construction,installation,or alteration of any treatment work or disposal system or to construct,install,or alter any
treatment works or disposal system within the State when the system's or work's principle function is to conduct,
treat,equalize,neutralize,stabilize,recycle,or dispose of mdustnal waste or sewage from an industrial facility and
the discharge of the mdustnal waste or sewage is authorized under a permit issued for the discharge of the
industrial waste or sewage into the waters of the State. Notwithstanding the above,the permit issued for the
discharge may be modified if required by federal regulation
c Issuance of an AtC will not occur until Final Plans and Specifications for the proposed construction have been
submitted by the Permittee and approved by the Division.
Section B. Groundwater Monitoring
The Permittee shall,upon wntten notice from the Director,conduct groundwater monitoring as may be required to
determine the compliance of this NPDES permitted facility with the current groundwater standards.
Section C. Changes in Discharges of Toxic Substances
The Permittee shall notify the Permit Issuing Authority as soon as it knows or has reason to believe(40 CFR 122 42)•
a That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge,on a routine or frequent basis,of
any toxic pollutant which is not limited m the permit,if that discharge will exceed the highest of the following
"notification levels";
(1) One hundred micrograms per liter(100µg/L),
(2) Two hundred micrograms per liter(200µg/L)for acrolein and acrylonitrile,five hundred micrograms per liter
(500µg/L)for 2,4-dinitrophenol and for 2-methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol,and one milligram per liter(1 mg/L)for
antimony,
(3) Five times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application
b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result m any discharge,on a non-routine or infrequent
basis,of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit,if that discharge will exceed the highest of the
following"notification levels";
(1) Five hundred micrograms per liter(500µg/L),
(2) One milligram per liter(1 mg/L)for antimony;
(3) Ten times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application.
Section D. Facility Closure Requirements
The Permittee must notify the Division at least 90 days prior to the closure of any wastewater treatment system covered
by this permit The Division may require specific measures during deactivation of the system to prevent adverse
impacts to waters of the State This permit cannot be rescinded while any activities requiring this permit continue at the
permitted facility
Version 11/09/2011 1

NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 14 of 18
PART IV
SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR MUNICIPAL FACILITIES
Section A. Definitions
In addition to the definitions in Part II of this permit,the following definitions apply to municipal facilities
Indirect Discharge or Industrial User
Any non-domestic source that discharges wastewater containing pollutants into a POTW regulated under section
307(b),(c)or(d)of the CWA. [40 CFR 403.3 (i)and 6)and 15A NCAC 02H.0903(b)(11)]
Interference
Inhibition or disruption of the POTW treatment processes,operations; or its sludge process,use,or disposal which
causes or contributes to a violation of anyrequirement of the Permittee's(or anysatellite POTW's if different from the
q
Permittee)NPDES,collection system,or non-discharge permit or prevents sewage sludge use or disposal m
compliance with specified applicable State and Federal statutes,regulations,or permits [15A NCAC 02H
.0903(b)(14)]
Pass Through
A discharge which exits the POTW into waters of the State in quantities or concentrations which,alone or with
discharges from other sources,causes a violation,including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation,of
the Pernnttee's(or any satellite POTW's,if different from the Permittee)NPDES,collection system,or non-discharge
permit. [15A NCAC 02I1 0903(b)(23)]
Publicly Owned Treatment Works(POTW)
A treatment works as defined by Section 212 of the CWA,which is owned by a State or local government organization
This definition includes any devices and systems used m the storage,treatment,recycling and reclamation of municipal
sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature It also includes the collection system,as defined in 15A NCAC 2T
.0402,only if it conveys wastewater to a POTW treatment plant.The term also means the local government
organization,or municipality,as defined in section 502(4)of the CWA,which has jurisdiction over indirect discharges
to and the discharges from such a treatment works In this context,the organization may be the owner of the POTW
treatment plant or the owner of the collection system into which an indirect discharger discharges This second type of
POTW may be referred to as a"satellite POTW organization." [ISA NCAC 02H 0903(b)(26)]
"Significant Industrial User" or"SIU"
An Industrial User that discharges wastewater mto a publicly owned treatment works and that[15A NCAC 02H
0903(b)(33)]
1 Discharges an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the POTW(excluding sanitary,
noncontact cooling and boiler blowdown wastewaters);or
2 Contributes process wastewater which makes up five percent or more of the NPDES or non-discharge permitted
flow limit or organic capacity of the POTW treatment plant In this context,organic capacity refers to BOD,TSS
and ammonia,or
3 Is subject to categorical standards under 40 CFR Part 403 6 and 40 CFR Parts 405-471,or
4. Is designated as such by the Permittee qn the basis that the Industrial User has a reasonable potential for adversely
affecting the POTW's operation or for violating any pretreatment standard or requirement,or the POTW's effluent
limitations and conditions in its NPDES or non-discharge permit,or to limit the POTW's sludge disposal options,
5 Subject to approval under 15A NCAC 02H.0907(b),the Permittee may determine that an Industrial User meeting
the cntena in paragraphs 1 or 2 of this de3nition above has no reasonable potential for adversely affecting the
POTW's operation or for violating any pretreatment standard or requirement,the POTW's effluent limitations and
conditions in its NPDES or non-discharge permit,or to limit the POTW's sludge disposal options,and thus is not a
Significant Industrial User(SIU),or
6 Subject to approval under 15A NCAC 021-1 0907(b),the Permittee may determine that an Industrial User meeting
the criteria in paragraph 3 of this definition above meets the requirements of 40 CFR Part 403.3(v)(2)and thus is a
non-significant categorical Industrial User
Section B. Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs)
Version 11/09/2011 1

• • NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 15 of 18
All POTWs must provide adequate notice to the Director of the following[40 CFR 122 42(b)]
1. Any new introduction of pollutants into the POTW from an indirect discharger,regardless of the means of
transport,which would be subject to section 301 or 306 of CWA if it were directly discharging those pollutants;
and
2 Any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced by an indirect discharger as
influent to that POTW at the time of issuance of the permit.
3. For purposes of this paragraph,adequate notice shall include information on(1)the quality and quantity of effluent
introduced into the POTW,and(2)any anticipated impact that may result from the change of the quantity or
quality of effluent to be discharged from the POTW
•
Section C. Municipal Control of Pollutants from Industrial Users.
1 Effluent limitations are listed in Part 1 of this permit.Other pollutants attributable to inputs from Industrial Users
discharging to the POTW may be present in the Permittee's discharge At such time as sufficient information
becomes available to establish limitations for such pollutants,this permit may be revised to specify effluent
limitations for any or all of such other pollutants in accordance with best practicable technology or water quality
standards
2 Prohibited Discharges
a The Permittee shall develop and enforce their Pretreatment Program to implement the prohibition against the
introduction of pollutants or discharges into the waste treatment system or waste collection system which
cause or contribute to Pass Through or Interference as defined in 15A NCAC 02H 0900 and 40 CFR 403 [40
CFR 403 5(a)(1)]
b The Permittee shall develop and enforce their Pretreatment Program to implement the prohibitions against the
introduction of the following wastes in the waste treatment or waste collection system[40 CFR 403 5(b)]
(1) Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW, including,but not limited to,
wastestreams with a closed cup flashpomt of less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit or 60 degrees Centigrade
using the test methods specified in 40 CFR 261 21;
(2) Pollutants which cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW,but in no case discharges with pH lower
than 5.0,unless the works is specifically designed to accommodate such discharges,
(3) Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW resulting in
Interference;
(4) Any pollutant,including oxygen demanding pollutants(BOD,etc.)released in a Discharge at a flow rate
and/or pollutant concentration which will cause Interference with the POTW,
(5) Heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in Interference,but in no
case heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTW Treatment Plant exceeds 40°C(104°F)
unless the Division,upon request of the POTW,approves alternate temperature limits,
(6) Petroleum oil,non-biodegradable cutting oil,or products of mineral oil ongm in amounts that will cause
Interference or Pass Through;
(7) Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases,vapors,or fumes within the POTW in a quantity that
may cause acute worker health and safety problems,or
(8) Any trucked or hauled pollutants,except at discharge points designated by the POTW
c. The Permittee shall investigate the source of all discharges into the POTW,including slug loads and other
unusual discharges,which have the potential to adversely impact the Permittee's Pretreatment Program and/or
the operation of the POTW
The Permittee shall report such discharges into the POTW to the Director or the appropnate Regional Office.
Any information shall be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the Permittee became aware of the
circumstances A written submission shall also be provided within 5 days of the time the Permittee becomes
aware of the circumstances The written submission shall contain a description of the discharge,the
investigation into possible sources;the period of the discharge,including exact dates and times,if the
discharge has not ceased,the anticipated time it is expected to continue;and steps taken or planned to reduce,
eliminate,and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance,
Version 11/09/2011 1

•
NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 16 of 18
3 With regard to the effluent requirements listed in Part I of this permit,it may be necessary for the Permittee to
supplement the requirements of the Federal Pretreatment Standards(40 CFR,Part 403)to ensure compliance by
the Perrmttee with all applicable effluent limitations. Such actions by the Permittee may be necessary regarding
some or all of the industries discharging to the municipal system •
4 The Permittee shall require any Industrial User(IU)discharging to the POTW to meet Federal Pretreatment
Standards developed under Section 307(b)of the Act as amended(which includes categorical standards and
specific local limits,best management practices and narrative requirements) Prior to accepting wastewater from
any Significant Industrial User(SIU),the Permittee shall either develop and submit to the Division a new
Pretreatment Program or,as necessary,a modification of an existing Pretreatment Program,for approval as
required under section D below as well as 15A NCAC 02H 0907(a)and(b) [40 CFR 122 44(1)(2)]
5 This permit shall be modified,or alternatively,revoked and reissued,to incorporate or modify an approved POTW
Pretreatment Program or to include a compliance schedule for the development of a POTW Pretreatment Program
• as required under Section 402(b)(8)of the CWA and implementing regulations or by the requirements of the •
approved State pretreatment program,as appropriate.
Section D. Pretreatment Programs
Under authority of sections 307(b)and(c)and 402(b)(8)of the CWA and implementing regulations 40 CFR 403,
. North Carolina General Statute 143-215 3(14)and implementing regulations 15A NCAC 02H.0900,and in accordance
with the approved pretreatment program,all provisions and regulations contained and referenced in the pretreatment
program submittal are an enforceable part of this permit.-[40 CFR 122 44(1)(2)]
The Permittee shall operate its approved pretreatment program in accordance with Section 402(b)(8)of the CWA,40
CFR 403, 15A NCAC 02H 0900,and the legal authorities,policies,procedures,and financial provisions contained in
its pretreatment program submission and Division approved modifications thereof. Such operation shall include but is
not limited to the implementation of the following conditions and requirements Terms not defined in Part II or Part IV
of this permit are as defined in 15A NCAC 02H 0903 and 40 CFR 403 3
1 Sewer Use Ordinance(SUO)
The Permittee shall maintain adequate legal authority to implement its approved pretreatment program [15 A
NCAC 02H.0903(b)(32), 0905 and 0906(b)(1);40 CFR 403 8(0(1)and 403.9(b)(1)and(2)]
2. Industrial Waste Survey(IWS1
The Permittee shall implement an IWS consisting of the survey of users of the POTW collection system or •
treatment plant,as required by 40 CFR 403 8(f)(2)(i-i10 and 15A NCAC 02H 0905 [also 40 CFR 122.440)(1)],
including identification of all Industrial Users that may have an impact on the POTW and the character and amount
of pollutants contributed to the POTW by these Industrial Users and identification of those Industrial Users
meeting the definition of SIU Where the Permittee accepts wastewater from one or more satellite POTWs,the
IWS for the Permittee shall address all satellite POTW services areas,unless the pretreatment program in those
satellite service areas is administered by a separate Permittee with an approved Pretreatment Program The
Permittee shall submit a summary of its IWS activities to the Division at least once every five years,and as
required by the Division.The IWS submission shall include a summary of any investigations conducted under
paragraph C 2 c of this Part [15A NCAC 02H 0903(b)(13), 0905 and.0906(b)(2),40 CFR 403 8(0(2)and 403 9]
3. Monitoring Plan
• The Permittee shall implement a Division-approved Monitonng Plan for the collection of facility specific data to
be used in a wastewater treatment plant Iadworks Analysis(HWA)for the development of specific pretreatment
local limits Effluent data from the Plan shall be reported on the DMRs(as required by Parts II D and II E 5) [15A
NCAC 02H 0903(b)(16), .0906(b)(3)and.0905]
4 Headworks Analysis(HWA)and Local Limits
The Permittee shall obtain Division approval of a HWA at least once every five years,and as required by the
Division Within 180 days of the effective date of this permit(or any subsequent permit modification)the
• Permittee shall submit to the Division a written technical evaluation of the need to revise local limits(i e,an
updated HWA or documentation of why one is not needed) [40 CFR 122 44].The Permittee shall develop, in
accordance with 40 CFR 403.5(c)and 15A NCAC 02H 0909,specific Local Limits to implement the prohibitions
listed in 40 CFR 403 5(a)and(b) and 15A NCAC 02H 0909 Pursuant to 40 CFR 403 5,local limits are
Version 11/09/2011 1 •

4
NPDES Permit Standard Conditions •
Page 17 of 18 •
• enforceable Pretreatment Standards as defined by 40 CFR 403 3(1) [15A NCAC 02H 0903(b)(10),.0905,and
.0906(b)(4)]
5 Industrial User Pretreatment Permits (IUP)&Allocation Tables •
In accordance with NCGS 143-215 1,the Permittee shall issue to all Significant Industrial Users,permits for
operation of pretreatment equipment and discharge to the Permittee's collection system or treatment works These
permits shall contain limitations,sampling protocols,reporting requirements,appropriate standard and special
conditions,and compliance schedules as necessary for the installation of treatment and control technologies to
assure that their wastewater discharge will meet all applicable pretreatment standards and requirements The
• Permittee shall maintain a current Allocation Table(AT)which summarizes the results of the HWA and the limits
from all IUPs Permitted IUP loadmgs for each parameter cannot exceed the treatment capacity of the POTW as
determined by the HWA [15A NCAC 02H.0906(b)(6),.0909, 0916,and 0917,40 CFR 403 5,403 8(f)(1)(iii),
NCGS 143-215 67(a)]
6 Authorization to Construct(AtC)
The Permittee shall ensure that an Authorization to Construct permit(AtC)is issued to all applicable Industrial
Users for the construction or modification of any pretreatment facility Prior to the issuance of an AtC,the
proposed pretreatment facility and treatment process must be evaluated for its capacity to comply with all
Industrial User Pretreatment Permit(IUP)limitations. [15A NCAC 02H.0906(b)(7)and 0905;NCGS 143-
215 1(a)(8)]
7 POTW Inspection&Monitoring of their lUs
The Permittee shall conduct inspection,surveillance,and monitoring activities as described in its Division
• approved pretreatment program in order to determine,independent of information supplied by Industrial Users, •
compliance with applicable pretreatment standards [15A NCAC 02H 0908(e),40 CFR 403.8(f)(2)(v)] The •
Permittee must
a. Inspect all Significant Industrial Users(SIUs)at least once per calendar year,
b Sample all Significant Industrial Users(SIUs)at least once per calendar year for all SIU permit-limited
parameters including flow except as allowed under 15A NCAC 0908(e), and
c At least once per year,document an evaluation of any non-significant categorical Industrial User for
compliance with the requirements in 40 CFR 403 3(v)(2),and either continue or revoke the designation as non-
significant.
8 IU Self Monitoring and Reporting
The Permittee shall require all Industrial Users to comply with the applicable monitoring and reporting
requirements outlined m the Division-approved pretreatment program,the industry's pretreatment permit,or in 15A
NCAC 02H 0908 [15A NCAC 02H 0906(b)(5)and 0905,40 CFR 403 8(f)(1)(v)and(2)(m),40 CFR
122.44(1)(2)and 40 CFR 403 12]
9. Enforcement Response Plan(ERP)
The Permittee shall enforce and obtain appropriate remedies for violations of all pretreatment standards
promulgated pursuant to section 307(b)and(c)of the CWA(40 CFR 405 et.seq),prohibitive discharge standards
as set forth in 40 CFR 403 5 and I5A NCAC 02H 0909,specific local limitations,and other pretreatment
requirements All remedies, enforcement actions and other,shall be consistent with the Enforcement Response
Plan(ERP)approved by the Division. [15A NCAC 02H 0903(b)(7), 0906(b)(8)and 0905,40 CFR 403 8(f)(5)]
10. Pretreatment Annual Reports(PAR)
The Permittee shall report to the Division in accordance with 15A NCAC 02H 0908.In lieu of submitting annual
reports,Modified Pretreatment Programs developed under 15A NCAC 02H.0904(b)may be required to submit a
partial annual report or to meet with Division personnel periodically to discuss enforcement of pretreatment
•
requirements and other pretreatment implementation issues
For all other active pretreatment programs,the Permittee shall submit two copies of a Pretreatment Annual Report
(PAR)describing its pretreatment activities over the previous calendar year to the Division at the following
address
•
Version 11/09/2011 1

•
NPDES Permit Standard Conditions
Page 18 of 18
• NC DENR/Division of Water Resources/Water Quality Permitting Section
• Pretreatment,Emergency Response,and Collection Systems(PERCS)Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
•
Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617
These reports shall be submitted by March 1 of each year and shall contain the following
a Narrative
A narrative summary detailing actions taken,or proposed,by the Permittee to correct significant non-
compliance and to ensure compliance with pretreatment requirements,
b Pretreatment Program Summary(PPS)
A pretreatment program summary(PPS)on forms or in a format provided by the Division,
c Significant Non-Compliance Report(SNCR)
A list of Industrial Users(IUs)in significant noncompliance(SNC)with pretreatment requirements,and the
nature of the violations on forms or in a format provided by the Division,
d Industrial Data Summary Forms(IDSF)
Monitoring data from samples collected by both the POTW and the Significant Industrial Users(SIUs) These
analytical results must be reported on Industrial Data Summary Forms(IDSF)or on other forms or m a format
provided by the Division,
e Other Information
Copies of the POTW's allocation table,new or modified enforcement compliance schedules,public notice of
lUs in SNC,a summary of data or other information related to significant noncompliance determinations for
His that are not considered SIUs,and any other information, upon request,which in the opinion of the Director
is needed to determine compliance with the pretreatment implementation requirements of this permit,
11 Public Notice
The Permittee shall publish annually a list of Industrial Users(lUs)that were in significant noncompliance(SNC)
as defined in the Perrmttee's Division-approved Sewer Use Ordinance with applicable pretreatment requirements
and standards during the previous twelve month period This list shall be published within four months of the
applicable twelve-month period [15A NCAC 0214 0903(b)(34), 0908(b)(5)and 0905 and 40 CFR
403 8(f)(2)(vui)]
12. Record Keeping
The Permittee shall retain for a minimum of three years records of monitonng activities and results,along with
support information including general records,water quality records,and records of industrial impact on the
POTW and shall retain all other Pretreatment Program records as required by 15A NCAC 02H 0908(f). [15A
NCAC 02H.0908(f),40 CFR 403 12(o)]
13 Pretreatment Program Resources
The Permittee shall maintain adequate funding and qualified personnel to accomplish the objectives of its approved
pretreatment program and retain a written description of those current levels of inspection [15A NCAC 02H
0906(b)(9)and(10)and 0905,40 CFR 403.8(f)(3),403.9(b)(3)]
14 Modification to Pretreatment Programs
Modifications to the approved pretreatment program including but not limited to local limits modifications,POTW
monitoring of their Significant Industrial Users(SIUs),and Monitoring Plan modifications,shall be considered a
permit modification and shall be governed by 40 CFR 403 18, 15 NCAC 02H 0114 and 15A NCAC 02H.0907.
•
•
Version 11/09/2011 1

RECEIVED/DENRIDWR
AUG 022018
Water Resources
Permitting Section
ATTACHMENT 5
Complaint, NCDEQ v.
Duke Energy Carolinas
(Aug. 16, 2013)

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
MECKLENBURG COUNTY 13 CVS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ex rel. )
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF )
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL )
RESOURCES, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) COMPLAINT
) AND MOTION FOR
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, ) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
) RULE 65 N.C.R.C.P
Defendant. )
)
The Plaintiff State of North Carolina in accordance with Article 21 of Chapter 143 of the
North Carolina General Statutes, and N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 65, complaining of the
Defendant alleges and says:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff is the sovereign State of North Carolina. This action is being brought
upon the relation of the North Carolina Depaitment of Environment and Natural Resources
("DENR") and its Division of Water Resources ("DWR" or division"): an agency of the State
established pursuant to the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143B-279.1 et seq., and vested with
the statutory authority regarding protection of the environment and enforcement of
environmental laws pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-211 et seq.
2. Defendant, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of North Carolina. Defendant's principal place of business is located
DENR's Division of Water Quality and Division of Water Resources have been
combined and are currently operating under the name of the Division of Water Resources. All
actions taken by the DWQ are considered to have been taken by the DWR.

at 526 South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-1904. Defendant's Registered
Agent is CT Corporation System, 150 Fayetteville Street, Box 1011, Raleigh, North Carolina
27601.
3. Defendant owns the following six Facilities ("6 Facilities"):
(1) Cliffside Steam Station in Rutherford County;
(2) Buck Steam Station in Rowan County;
(3) Allen Steam Station in Gaston County;
(4) Belews Creek Steam Station in Stokes County;
(5) Dan River Combined Cycle Station in Rockingham County; and
(6) Marshall Steam Station in Catawba County.
4. Defendant was doing business in all of the counties set forth in paragraph 3
above, at each of the 6 Facilities, at the time the violations or threatened violations were
committed that gave rise to this action.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. The Superior Court has jurisdiction of this action for injunctive relief for existing
or threatened violations of various laws and rules and regulations governing the protection of the
State's water resources pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 7A-245 and I43-215.6C, and for such
other relief as the Court shall deem proper.
6. Mecklenburg County is a proper venue for this action because Defendant's
principal place of business is located in Mecklenburg County.
2

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
Applicable Laws and Regulations
7. Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.3(a)(1), the Environmental Management
Commission ("EMC" or the "Commission") has the power "[t]o make rules implementing
Articles 21, 21A, 21B or 38 of. . . Chapter" 143 of the North Carolina General Statutes. These
statutes, and the rules adopted under them, are designed to further the public policy of the State,
as declared in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-211, "to provide for the conservation of its water and air
resources . . . [and], within the context of Article [21] and Articles 21A and 21B of this Chapter
[143], to achieve and to maintain for the citizens of the State a total environment of superior
quality."
8. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-211 further provides that "[s]tandards of water and air
purity shall be designed to protect human health, to prevent injury to plant and animal life, to
prevent damage to public and private property, to insure the continued enjoyment of the natural
attractions of the State, to encourage the expansion of employment opportunities, to provide a
permanent foundation for healthy industrial development and to secure for the people of North
Carolina, now and in the future, the beneficial uses of these great natural resources."
9. The Commission has the power to issue permits with conditions attached which
the Commission believes are necessary to achieve the purposes of Article 21 of Chapter 143 of
the General Statutes. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(b)(4).
10. Pursuant to its autihority in N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.3(a)(4) to delegate such of
its powers as it deems necessary, the Commission has delegated the authority to issue permits,
and particularly discharge permits, to the Director of the Division of Water Resources
("Director"). See Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code ("NCAC"), rule
3

2H.01122. A copy of this rule is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 1, and is incorporated
herein by reference.
11. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1 requires a permit before any person can "make any
outlets into the waters of the State" or "cause or permit any waste, directly or indirectly, to be
discharged to or in any manner intermixed with the waters of the State in violation of the water
quality standards applicable to the assigned classifications ... unless allowed as a condition of
any permit, special order or other appropriate instrument issued or entered into by the
Commission under the provisions of this Article [Article 21 of Chapter 143 of the General
Statutes]." N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 143-215.1(a) (1) and (6).
12. The Commission's rules in 15A NCAC Subchapter 2L (hereinafter "2L Rules")
"establish a series of classifications and water quality standards applicable to the groundwaters
of the State." 15A NCAC 2L.0101(a). A copy of the 2L Rules is attached hereto as Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 2 and is incorporated herein by reference.
13. "Groundwaters" are defined in the 2L Rules as "those waters occurring in the
subsurface under saturated conditions." 15A NCAC 2L.0102(11).
14. The 2L Rules "are applicable to all activities or actions, intentional or accidental,
which contribute to the degradation of groundwater quality, regardless of any permit issued by a
governmental agency authorizing such action or activity except an innocent landowner who is a
bona fide purchaser of property which contains a source of groundwater contamination,"who
purchased such property without knowledge or a reasonable basis for knowing that groundwater
contamination had occurred, or a person whose interest or ownership in the property is based or
2 1 SA NCAC 2H.0112. This Rule actually delegates the authority to issue discharge
permits to the Director of the former DWQ. However, this authority has now been delegated to
the Director of the DWR.
4

derived from a security interest in the property, shall not be considered a responsible party."
15A NCAC 2L.0101(b).
15. The policy section of the 2L Rules provides that the 2L Rules "are intended to
maintain and preserve the quality of the groundwaters, prevent and abate pollution and
contamination of the waters of the state, protect public health, and permit management of the
groundwaters for their best usage by the citizens of North Carolina." 15A NCAC 2L.0103(a).
16. "Contaminant" is defined in the 2L Rules as "any substance occurring in
groundwater in concentrations which exceed the groundwater quality standards specified in Rule
.0202 of the Subchapter." 15A NCAC 2L.0102(4).
17. "Natural Conditions" are defined in the 2L Rules as "the physical, biological,
chemical and radiological conditions which occur naturally." 15A NCAC 2L.0102(16).
18. The policy section of the 2L Rules provides further that, "[i]t is the policy of the
Commission that the best usage of the groundwaters of the state is as a source of drinking water.
These groundwaters generally are a potable source of drinking water without the necessity of
significant treatment. It is the intent of these Rules to protect the overall high quality of North
Carolina's groundwaters to the level established by the standards and to enhance and restore the
quality of degraded groundwaters where feasible and necessary to protect human health and the
environment, or to ensure their suitability as a future source of drinking water." 15A NCAC
2L.0103(a).
19. The policy section of the 2L Rules provides further that, "[n]o person shall conduct
or cause to be conducted, any activity which causes the concentration of any substance to exceed
that specified in Rule .0202 of this Subchapter, except as authorized by the rules of this
Subchapter." 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
5

20. The groundwater "Standards" are specified in 15A NCAC 2L.0202. See 15A
NCAC 2L.0102(23). Some groundwater standards and their concentrations are specifically
listed in 15A NCAC 2L.0202(g) and (h). If a substance is not specifically listed and if it is
naturally occurring, the standard is the naturally occurring concentration as determined by the
Director. 15A NCAC 2L.0202(c). If a substance is listed, if it is naturally occurring and the
substance exceeds the established standard, the standard shall be the naturally occurring
concentration as determined by the Director. 15A NCAC 2L .0202(b)(3). If a substance is not
specifically listed and it is not naturally occurring, the substance cannot be permitted in
concentrations at or above the practical quantitation limit in Class GA or Class GSA waters,
except that the Director may establish interim maximum allowable concentrations ("IMAC")
pursuant to 15A NCAC 2L.0202(c). These are listed in Appendix #1 of 15A NCAC 2L. The
IMACs are the established standard until adopted by rule. See the last page of Plaintiff's Exhibit
No. 2.
21. The DWQ Director established the IMAC for Antimony on August 1, 2010 and .
for Thallium on October 1, 2010, substances for which standards had not been established under
the 2L Rules. A copy of the Public Notice establishing the IMACs and a copy of the Approved
IMACs are attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit Nos. 3 and 4, respectively, and both exhibits are
incorporated herein by reference. The interim maximum allowable concentration for Thallium is
0.2 micrograms per liter ("µg/L") established pursuant to 15A NCAC 2L.0202(c). The interim
maximum allowable concentration for Antimony is 1 µg/L established pursuant to 15A NCAC
2L.0202(c). See the last page of Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2.
•
6

22. "It is the intention of the Commission to protect all groundwaters to a level of
quality at least as high as that required under the standards established in Rule .0202 of this
Subchapter." 15A NCAC 2L.0103(b).
23. A "Compliance Boundary" is defined in the 2L Rules as "a boundary around a
disposal system at and beyond which groundwater quality standards may not be exceeded and
only applies to facilities which have received an individual permit issued under the authority of
[N.C. Gen. Stat. §] 143-215.1 or [N.C. Gen. Stat. §1130A." 15A NCAC 2L.0102(3).
24. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2L.0107(a), "[f)or disposal systems individually
permitted prior to December 30, 1983, the compliance boundary is established at a horizontal
distance of 500 feet from the waste boundary or at the property boundary, whichever is closer to
the source."
25. The "Waste Boundary" is defined in the 2L Rules as "the perimeter of the
permitted waste disposal area." 15A NCAC 2L.0102(26).
26. A "Corrective Action Plan" is defined in the 2L Rules as "a plan for eliminating
sources of groundwater contamination or for achieving groundwater quality restoration or both."
15A NCAC 2L.0102(5). A site assessment pursuant to a corrective action plan should include
the source and cause of contamination, any imminent hazards to public health and safety, all
receptors and significant exposure pathways, the horizontal and vertical extent of the
contamination, as well as all geological and hydrogeological features influencing the movement
of the contamination. I5A NC C 2L.0106(g).
27. Pursuant to N. . Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6C, "[w)henever the Department has
reasonable cause to believe t any person has violated or is threatening to violate any of the
provisions of this Part [Part 1, Article 21, of the General Statutes], any of the terms of any permit
7

issued pursuant to this Part, or a rule implementing this Part, . . ." the Department is authorized
to "request the Attorney General to institute a civil action in the name of the State upon the
relation of the Department for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation."
28. The statute further provides that "[u]pon a determination by the court that the
alleged violation of the provisions of this Part or the regulations of the Commission has occurred
or is threatened, the court shall grant the relief necessary to prevent or abate the violation or
threatened violation." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6C.
29. Additionally, the section provides that "[n]either the institution of the action nor
any of the proceedings thereon shall relieve any party to such proceedings from any penalty
prescribed for the violation of this Part." N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6C.
30. Defendant is a person consistent with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-212(4) and pursuant
to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6C.
Factual and Legal Allegations
All 6 Facilities
31. Defendant implemented a voluntary groundwater monitoring program at most of
the 6 Facilities in 2006.
32. In 2009, the DWQ required Defendant to place monitoring wells at the
compliance boundaries of all of the Coal Ash Ponds at all 6 Facilities.
33. The DWQ approved Defendant's proposed locations of compliance boundary
wells and monitoring wells at each of the 6 Facilities on the following dates:
(1) Offside Steam Station—October 20, 2010;
(2) Buck Steam Station —September 2, 2010;
(3) Allen Steam Station — September 2, 2010;
8

(4) Belews Creek Steam Station — October 19, 2010;
(5) Dan River Combined Cycle Station —October 19, 2010; and
(6) Marshall Steam Station— September 2, 2010.
34. Defendant completed construction of the compliance monitoring wells at the
compliance boundaries of the Coal Ash Ponds at each of the 6 Facilities on the following dates:
(1) Cliffside Steam Station —April 2011;
(2) Buck Steam Station—December 2010;
(3) Allen Steam Station—December 2010;
(4) Belews Creek Steam Station —December 2010;
•
(5) Dan River Combined Cycle Station—December 2010; and
(6) Marshall Steam Station—August 2010.
35. Each of the 6 Facilities have a specific set of parameters being monitored:
(1) Cliffside Steam Station — Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Boron,
Cadmium, Chromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, Nickel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate, Thallium, Total
Dissolved Solids, Water Level, and Zinc;
(2) Buck Steam Station — Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Boron,
Cadmium, Chromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, Nickel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate, Thallium, Total
Dissolved Solids, Water Level, and Zinc;
(3) Allen Steam Station — Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Boron,
Cadmium, chromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, N ckel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate, Thallium, Total
Dissolved S lids, Water Level, and Zinc;
(4) Belews Cre k Steam Station—Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Boron,
Cadmium, hromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, N'ckel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate, Thallium, Total
Dissolved Solids, Water Level, and Zinc;
(5) Dan River Combined Cycle Station —Antimony, Arsenic, Barium,
Boron, Cadmium, Chromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead,
9

Manganese, Mercury, Nickel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate,
Thallium, Total Dissolved Solids, Water Level, and Zinc; and
(6) Marshall Steam Station — Antimony, Arsenic, Barium, Boron,
Cadmium, Chromium, Chloride, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, Nickel, Nitrate, pH, Selenium, Sulfate, Thallium, Total
Dissolved Solids, Water Level, and Zinc.
36. In 2010 and 2011, Defendant began submitting groundwater monitoring data to
the DWQ from the 6 Facilities.
37. On June 17, 2011, the DWQ adopted a Policy for Compliance Evaluation of
Long-Term Permitted Facilities with No Prior Groundwater Monitoring Requirements
(hereinafter the "Policyfor Compliance Evaluation"). A copyof the Policy for Compliance
Evaluation is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 5 and is incorporated herein by reference.
38. The Policy for Compliance Evaluation establishes an approach to evaluate
groundwater compliance at long-term permitted facilities. Specifically, the Policy for
Compliance Evaluation requires staff and responsible parties to consider multiple factors before
determining if groundwater concentrations in samples taken at the permitted facility are a
violation of the groundwater standards, or if the concentration is naturally occurring., Such
factors considered are well design, sample integrity, analytical methods, statistical testing, etc.
39. All 6 Facilities are subject to the Policy for Compliance Evaluation and Plaintiff
has been working with the Defendant to move through the evaluative process as described in the
policy.
40. Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the 6 Facilities. The 6 Facilities began submitting data in
2010, and Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff prepared 6 charts of the Ash Pond Exceedances
from 2010 to July 16, 2013. The 6 charts are labeled by National Pollutant Discharge
10

•
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit number and facility name. Each chart is attached hereto
and labeled individually as Plaintiff's Exhibit: No. 6 (Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond
Exceedances Chart); No. 7 (Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart); No. 8 (Allen
Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart); No. 9 (Belews Creek Steam Station Ash Pond
Exceedances Chart); No. 10 (Dan River Combined Cycle Station Steam Station Ash Pond
Exceedances Chart); and No. 11 (Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart);
respectively, and are incorporated herein by reference.
41. Each of the 6 charts contains the following information: the well number, the
parameter sampled, the date of the sample, the 2L Groundwater Standard, the sampling result
and the unit of measurement.
Cliffside Steam Station
42. On March 3, 1976, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful statutes
and regulations issued by the Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended ("Clean Water Act" or "CWA"), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seg., the DWQ issued NPDES
Permit No. NC0005088, to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Cliffside Steam Station
("Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit"), located on NCSR 1002, south of Cliffside; in
Rutherford County, North Carolina.
43. The Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit has been renewed subsequently. The
current NPDES Permit was re-issued on February 20, 2012, with an effective date of March 1,
2011, and with an expiration date of July 31, 2015. A copy of the current Cliffside Steam
Station NPDES Permit No. NC0005088 is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 12, and is
incorporated herein by reference.
11

44. The Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued discharge of
treated wastewater to receiving waters designated as Broad River (Class C waters), in the Broad
River Basin, in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other
conditions set forth in the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit.
45. The Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued discharge of
treated wastewater through Outfall 002 from the Ash Settling Basin. The Ash Settling Basin
contains low volume wastes, coal pile runoff, metal cleaning wastes, treated domestic
wastewater, chemical metal cleaning wastes, water treatment system wastewaters, ash transport
water, landfill leachate (landfill contains fly and bottom ash, and gypsum from the Flue Gas
Desulfurization ("FGD") system), cooling towers blow down, and runoff from the limestone
stacking area and the gypsum stacking area.
46. In addition, the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued
discharge of emergency yard drainage basin overflow through Outfall 002A.
47. Further, the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the facility to
discharge metal cleaning waste, coal pile runoff, ash transport water, domestic wastewater,
landfill leachate, cooling tower blowdown, limestone and gypsum stacking area runoff, and low
volume wastes from Internal Outfall 004 -- FGD Wastewater Treatment System into the Ash
Settling Basin.
48. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Cliffside Steam
Station NPDES Permit require sampling for the following parameters from the ash settling pond
discharge from Outfall 002: Flow, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids, Total Copper, Total
Iron, Total Arsenic, Total Selenium, Chronic Toxicity, Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, pH,
12
L

Total Cadmium, Total Chromium, Total Mercury, Total Nickel, Total Silver, Total Zinc, and
Temperature.
49. The Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit prohibits the discharge of floating
solids or visible foam other than in trace amounts.
50. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Cliffside Steam
Station NPDES Permit require sampling for the following parameters from emergency yard
drainage overflow from Outfall 002A: Flow, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids, pH, Total
Copper and Total Iron.
51. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Cliffside Steam
Station NPDES Permit require sampling for the following parameters from the internal discharge
from Outfall 004 -- FGD Wastewater Treatment System into the Ash Settling Basin: Total
Suspended Solids, Total Arsenic, Total Cadmium, Total Chromium, Chloride, Total Mercury,
Total Nickel, Total Selenium,Total Silver and Total Zinc.
Unpermitted Seeps at the Cliffside Steam Station
52. As mentioned above, the Defendant's Cliffside Steam Station has three permitted
outfalls (two external outfalls (002) and (002A) which discharge directly into the Broad River
and one internal outfall (004)) which are included in the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit.
53. Defendant's Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit does not authorize the
Defendant to make any outlet or discharge any wastewater or stormwater other than those
included in the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit.
54. Seeps identified at Defendant's Cliffside Steam Station, include engineered
discharges from the toe-drains of Ash Settling Basin, which are different locations from the
outfalls described in the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit.
13

55. A seep or discharge from the Ash Settling Basin or any other part of the Cliffside
Steam Station that is not included in the Cliffside Steam Station NPDES Permit is an
unpermitted discharge in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6).
Exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards at the Cliffside Steam Station
56. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Cliffside Steam Station from April 2011 through July 16,
2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the Cliffside Steam
Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 6.
57. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 µg/L) in MW-20D, MW-20DR, MW-22DR,
MW-23D, MW-23DR, MW-24D, MW-24DR and MW-25DR during seven sampling events
from April 2011 through April 2013, with concentrations ranging from 330 µg/L to 9,890 µg/L.
58. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L) in MW-20D, MW-20DR, MW- .
21D, MW-22DR, MW 23-D, MW-23DR, MW-24D, MW-24DR and MW-25DR during seven
sampling events from April 2011 through April 2013, with concentrations ranging from 51 µg/L
to 750 µg/L.
59. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows an
exceedance from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Chromium (10 µg/L) in MW-23D and MW-
25DR during one sampling event on April 2011, with concentrations of 14 µg/L and 45 µg/L,
respectively.
60. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for pH (6.5-8.5) in MW-25DR during three
14

sampling events from April 2011 through December 2011, with concentrations ranging from 8.7
to 9.5.
61. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for pH (6.5-8.5) in MW-21D, MW-22DR and
MW-24D during seven sampling events from April 2011 through April 2013, with
concentrations ranging from 4.7 to 6.4.
62. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Total Dissolved Solids (500 milligrams per
liter ("mg/L")) in MW-23D during seven sampling events from April 2011 through April 2013,
with concentrations ranging from 590 mg/L to 820 mg/L.
63. The Cliffside Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Total Sulfate (250 mg/L) in MW-23D
during six sampling events from April 2011 through December 2012, with concentrations
ranging from 280 mg/L to 420 mg/L.
64. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
Buck Steam Station
65. On March 31, 1976, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful statutes
and regulations issued by the Corpmission, and the Clean Water Act, the DWQ issued NPDES
Permit No. NC0004774 to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Buck Steam Station
("Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit"), located in Rowan County, North Carolina.
66. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit has been renewed subsequently. The
current NPDES Permit was re-issued on December 2, 2011, with an effective date of January 1,
15

2012, and with an expiration date of August 31, 2016. A copy of the current Buck Steam Station
NPDES Permit No. NC0004774 is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 13, and is
incorporated herein by reference.
67. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued discharge of
treated wastewater to receiving waters designated as the Yadkin River (Class WS-IV & B
waters) in subbasin 03-07-06 of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin in accordance with the effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth therein.
68. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued discharge of
once-through non-contact cooling water through Outfall 001.
• 69. In addition, the Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued
discharge of treated wastewater from the Ash Basin through Outfall 002.
70. Further, the Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued
discharge of yard sump overflows through Outfall 002A.
71. Outfalls 002 and 002A consist of coal pile runoff, ash transport water, metal
cleaning wastes, treated domestic wastewater, remediated groundwater, low volume wastes,
blowdown from wet cooling towers for combined cycle unit, and boiler blowdown.
72. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Buck Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 001 requires sampling for the following
parameters: Flow and Temperature from June to September and October to May.
73. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit prohibits chlorination of the once-
through cooling water.
74. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit includes special low-flow condition
when the High Rock Lake drawdown is ten feet or greater. In that instance, the Buck Steam
16

Station can use no more than two-thirds of the stream flow for condenser cooling and Buck
Steam Station must ensure that minimum unheated daily average stream flow does not fall below
the one-third of the 7-day 10-year low flow (7Q10).
75. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Buck Steam Station
NPDES Permit for Outfall 002 require sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Oil and
Grease, Total Suspended Solids, Total Copper, Total Iron, Total Arsenic, Total Selenium,
Chronic Toxicity, Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, pH, and Total Mercury. The metal cleaning
waste, coal pile runoff, remediated groundwater, tlows from floor drains, laboratory flows, ash
transport water, domestic wastewater and low volume wastes must be discharged to the Ash
Settling Pond.
76. The.effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Buck Steam Station
NPDES Permit for Outfall 002A require sampling for the following parameters: Flow, pH, Total
Suspended Solids, Fecal Coliform and Iron.
77. The Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit prohibits the discharge of floating solids
or visible foam other than in trace amounts from any of its outfalls.
Unpermitted Seeps at the Buck Steam Station
78. As mentioned above, the Defendant's Buck Steam Station has three permitted
outfalls (001, 002 and 002A) discharging directly into the Yadkin River which are included in
the Buck Steam Station NPDES PCrmit.
79. Defendant's Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit does not authorize the Defendant
to make any outlet or discharge ny wastewater or stormwater other than those included in the
Buck Steam Station NPDES Pe it.
17

80. Seeps identified at Defendant's Buck Steam Station, include engineered
discharges from the toe-drains of its Ash Basin and Ash SettlingPonds, which are different
g
. locations from the outfalls described in the Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit. •
81. A seep or discharge from the Ash Basin, the Ash Settling Ponds or any other part
of the Buck Steam Station that is not included in the Buck Steam Station NPDES Permit is an
unpermitted discharge in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6).
Exceedances in Violation of the 2L Groundwater Standards at the Buck Steam Station
82. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Buck Steam Station from March 2011 through July 16,
2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the Buck Steam
Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 7.
83. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Boron (700 .Lg/L) in MW-11D during seven sampling events
from March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 1,130 µg/L to. 1,290
lig/L. Although Boron is a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific
occurrence at this site indicate impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment
and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
84. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 .tg/L) in MW-10D, MW-11D and MW-
11S
W-11S during seven sampling events from March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging
from 56 .tg/L to 1,130 .tg/L. Although Manganese is a naturally occurring element, its presence
in groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicate impacts to groundwater resulting
from the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
18

85. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Total Dissolved Solids (500 mg/L) in MW-10D during
six sampling events from March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 561
mg/L to 630 mg/L. The presence of Total Dissolved Solids in groundwater and the specific
occurrence at this site indicate impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment
and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
86. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Sulfate (250 mg/L) in MW-10D during seven sampling
events from March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 320 mg/L to 350
mg/L. Although Sulfate is a naturally occurring compound, its presence in groundwater and
specific occurrence at this site indicate impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater
treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
87. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart also shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 µg/L) in MW-11D during seven sampling
events from March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 318 µg/L to 3,230
µg/L. Although Iron is a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific
occurrence at this site indicate impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment
and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
88. Defendant's exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards for Boron,
Manganese, Total Dissolved Solids, Sulfate and Iron, at or beyond the compliance boundary of
the Ash Basin and the Ash S tling Ponds at Buck Steam Station, are violations of the
groundwater standards as prohibit d by 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
19

Other Exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards at Buck Steam Station
89. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Chromium (10 µg/L) in MW-12S during three sampling events
from March through November 2011, with concentrations ranging from 11 µg/L to 28 µg/L.
90. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L) in MW-12S, MW-6S, MW-7D, MW-7S,
MW-8S, and MW-9S during seven sampling events from March 2011 to March 2013, with
concentrations ranging from 52 µg/L to 444 µg/L.
91. The Buck Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 .tg/L) in MW-10D, MW-11S, MW-12D, MW-12S,
MW-6S, MW-7D, MW-8D, MW-8S; MW-9D and MW-9S during four sampling events from
March 2011 to March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 323 µg/L to 2,000 .tg/L.
92. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
Allen Steam Station
93. On February '8, 1977, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful
statutes and regulations issued by the Commission, and the Clean Water Act, the DWQ issued
NPDES Permit No. NC0004979, to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Allen Steam
Station ("Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit"), located in Belmont, Gaston County, (NCSR
2525), North Carolina.
94. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit has been renewed subsequently. The
current NPDES Permit was re-issued on January 18, 2011, with an effective date of March 1,
2011, and with an expiration date of February 28, 2015. A copy of the current Allen Steam
20

Station NPDES Permit No. NC0004979 is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 14, and is
incorporated herein by reference.
95. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the discharge of treated
wastewater to receiving waters designated as the Catawba River and the South Fork Catawba
River in the Catawba River Basin in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth in the Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit.
96. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes a Condenser Cooling Water
("CCW") once through discharge directly into the South Fork Catawba River from Outfall 001.
97. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the operation of a septic tank
and ash pond with pH adjustment and the discharge of domestic wastewater, stormwater runoff,
ash sluice, water treatment system wastewaters, FGD system blowdown, landfill leachate and
miscellaneous cleaning and maintenance wash waters discharge from Outfall 002.
98. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes a coal yard sump overflow
discharge from Outfall 002A.
99. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes a power house sump overflow
discharge from Outfall 002B.
100. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes miscellaneous equipment
non-contact cooling and sealing water discharges from Outfall 003.
101. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes miscellaneous non-contact
cooling water, vehicle washwater, and intake screen backwash discharges from Outfall 004.
102. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes an FGD wet scrubber
wastewater treatment system consisting of a flow equalization tanks, a maintenance tank, feed
systems for lime, sulfide, ferric chloride, polymer hydrochloric acid, and molasses-based
21

nutrient, two clarifiers, dual heat exchangers, a selenium reduction bioreactor and a sludge
treatment system including three filter presses and it discharges through Internal Outfall 005 to
the ash settling basin.
103. The Allen Steam Station discharges into the Catawba River (Class WS-IV B
waters) from Outfalls 002, 0002A, 002B and 004, and discharges into the South Fork Catawba
River (Class WS-V waters), from Outfalls 001 and 003. Both discharges are in the Catawba
River Basin.
104. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 001 for the once through condenser cooling water
("CCW") requires sampling for the following parameters: Flow and Temperature from June to
September and October to May. Chlorination of the CCW is not allowed under this permit.
105. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002 (the Ash Pond effluent), require sampling for
the following parameters: Flow, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids, pH, Total Mercury,
Total Iron, Total Arsenic, Total Beryllium, Total Cadmium, Total Chromium, Total Copper,
Total Nickel, Total.Silver, Total Zinc, Total Nitrogen, and Chronic Toxicity.
106. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002A (the Coal Yard Sump Overflows), require
sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Oil and Grease, pH, Total Iron, Total Suspended
Solids and Fecal Coliform. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit also prohibits a discharge of
floating solids or foam from Outfall 002A.
107. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002B (the Power House Sump Overflows),
22

require sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Oil and Grease, pH, Total Iron, Total
Suspended Solids and Total Copper. The Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit also prohibits a
discharge of floating solids or foam from Outfall 002B.
108. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from the once through cooling water from Outfall 003,
miscellaneous equipment non-contact water and sealing water, require sampling for the Flow
parameter. No chlorination is allowed under this permit.
109. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Steam Station
NPDES Permit for the discharge from the once through cooling water from Outfall 004
(miscellaneous non-contact water, vehicle waste water and intake screen backwash), require
sampling for the following parameters: Oil and Grease and Flow.
110. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Allen Plant NPDES
permit for the discharge from Internal Outfall 005 (treated FGD wet scrubber wastewater to the
Ash Pond) require sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Total Suspended Solids, Total
Mercury, Total Iron, Total Arsenic, Total Beryllium, Total Cadmium, Total Chromium,
Chloride, Total Nickel, Carbonaceous Oxygen Demand("COD"),Total Silver, and Total Zinc.
Unnermitted Seeps at the Allen Steam Station
111. As mentioned above, the Defendant's Allen Steam Station has six permitted
outfalls discharging directly into the Catawba River and the South Fork Catawba River which are
included in the Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit.
112. Defendant's Alle Steam Station NPDES Permit does not authorize the Defendant
to make any outlet or discharge any wastewater or stormwater other than those included in the
Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit.
23

113. Seeps identified at Defendant's Allen Steam Station, include engineered
discharges from the toe-drains of its Ash Pond, which are different locations from the outfalls
described in the Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit.
114. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff believes there are other non-engineered
seeps at Defendant's Allen Steam Station, which are different locations from the outfalls
described in the Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit.
115. A seep or discharge from the Ash Pond or any other part of the Allen Steam
Station that is not included in the Allen Steam Station NPDES Permit is an unpermitted
discharge in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6).
Exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards at the Allen Steam Station
116. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Allen Steam Station from March 2011 through July 16,
2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the Allen Steam
Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 8.
117. The Allen Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 j.tg/L) in wells AB-1R, AB-11D, AB-
12D, AB-13D, and AB-14D during seven sampling events from March 2011 through March
2013, with concentrations of ranging from 301 µg/L to 8,350 .tg/L.
118. The Allen Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L) in AB-12S, AB-13D, AB-13S, AB-14D
and AB-4S during seven sampling events from March 2011 through March 2013, with
concentrations of ranging from 53 tg/L to 945 tg/L.
24

119. The Allen Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Nickel (100 µg/L) in AB-14D during seven sampling events
from March 2011 through March 2013, with concentrations ranging from 121 µg/L to 544 µg/L.
120. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
Belews Creek Steam Station
121, On June 30, 1977, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful statutes
and regulations issued by the Commission, and the Clean Water Act, DWQ issued NPDES
Permit No. NC0024406 to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Belews Creek Steam
Station ("Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit"), located in Stokes County, North
Carolina.
122. The Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit has been renewed subsequently.
The current Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit was re-issued on October 12, 2012,
with an effective date of November 1, 2012, and with an expiration date of February 28, 2017. A
copy of the current Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit No. NC0024406, is attached
hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 15, and is incorporated herein by reference.
123. Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the discharge of treated
wastewater to receiving waters designated as the West Belews Creek/Belews Lake, and the Dan
River in the Roanoke River Basin in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth in the NPDES permit.
124. The Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes an Ash Basin
I
discharge at Outfall 003 that discharges into West Belews Creek/Belews Lake. The ash pond
receives wastestreams from the power house and yard holding sumps, ash sluice lines, chemical
25

holding pond, coal yard sumps, stormwater and remediated groundwater, and treated FGD
wastewater from Internal Outfall 002.
125. The Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes once through cooling
water that discharges a wastestream into West Belews Creek/Belews Lake at Outfall 001.
126. The Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes an FGD wet scrubber
wastewater treatment system which discharges to the Ash Pond via Internal Outfall 002.
127. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Belews Creek Steam
Station NPDES Permit for Outfall 003 (the Ash Pond Treatment System) require sampling for
the following parameters: Flow, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids, Total Arsenic,
Chlorides, Total Iron, Total Copper, Total Selenium, Total Silver, Fluoride, Total Phosphorus,
Total Nitrogen, Sulfates, pH, Bromides, Total Mercury and Chronic Toxicity.
128. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Belews Creek Steam
Station NPDES Permit for Outfall 001 (the once through non-contact cooling water system)
require sampling for the following parameters: Flow and Temperature.
129. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Belews Creek Steam
Station NPDES Permit for Internal Outfall 002 (FGD wet scrubber wastewater treatment system)
include Flow, Total Suspended Solids, Total Arsenic, Chlorides, Total Mercury, and Total
Selenium.
Unpermitted Seeps at the Belews Creek Steam Station
130. As mentioned above, the Defendant's Belews Creek Steam Station has three
permitted outfalls discharging directly into West Belews Creek/Belews Lake and the Dan River
which are included in the Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit.
26

131. Defendant's Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit does not authorize the
Defendant to make any outlet or discharge any wastewater or stormwater other than those
included in the Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit.
132. Seeps identified at Defendant's Belews Creek Steam Station, include engineered
discharges from the toe-drains of its Ash Pond, which are different locations from the outfalls
described in the Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit.
133. A seep or discharge from the Ash Pond or any other part of the Belews Creek
Steam Station that is not included in the Belews Creek Steam Station NPDES Permit is an
unpermitted discharge in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6).
Exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards at the Belews Creek Steam Station
134. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Belews Creek Steam Station from January 2011 through
July 16, 2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the Belews
Creek Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 10.
135. The Belews Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows an exceedance
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Chromium (10 µg/L) in MW-202D during one sampling
event in January 2011, with a concentration of 15 µg/L.
136. The Belews Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 µg/L) in MW-200D, MW-200S, MW-201D, MW-
202D, MW-204D and MW-204S during eight sampling events from January 2011 to May 2013,
with concentrations ranging from 310 µg/L to 14,100 µg/L. However, over half of these wells
showed three samples that were under the 2L Groundwater Standard and thus the compliance
status for these wells is unclear pending further information.
27

• 137, The Belews Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances from
the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L) in MW-200D, MW-200S, MW-201D,
MW-202D, MW-204D, and MW-204S, during eight sampling events, from January 2011 to May
2013, with concentrations ranging from 53 µg/L to 3,600 µg/L.
138. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
Dan River Combined Cycle Station
139. On August 30, 1976, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful
statutes and regulations issued by the Commission, and the Clean Water Act, DWQ issued
NPDES Permit No. NC0003468 to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Dan River •
Combined Cycle Station ("Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit"), located in
Rockingham County,North Carolina.
140. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit has been renewed
subsequently. The current Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit was re-issued on.
January 31, 2013, with an effective date of March 1, 2013, and with an expiration date of April
30, 2017. A copy of the current Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit No.
NC0003468 is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 16, and is incorporated herein by
reference
141. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES permit authorizes the discharge
of treated wastewater to receiving waters designated as the Dan River in the Roanoke River
Basin in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions
set forth in the Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES permit.
28

142. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit authorizes an Ash Basin
Discharge at Outfall 002 that discharges directly into the Dan River. The ash pond receives low
volume wastes, boiler cleaning wastewater, ash disposal, stormwater, boiler blowdown, and
metal washing wastewater.
143. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit authorizes a once through
cooling water and cooling tower blowdown from the combined cycle unit, intake screen
backwash, plant collection sumps (low volume wastes), and treated domestic wastewater that
discharges a wastestream directly into the Dan River through Outfall 001.
144. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit authorizes wastes from
the filtered water plant including miscellaneous washdown water and laboratory wastes (low
volume waste sources) from Internal Outfall 001A.
145. The Dan River Station NPDES Permit authorizes a yard sump overflow
consisting of stormwater runoff, miscellaneous sumps and coal yard runoff via Outfall 002A.
146. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Dan River Combined
Cycle Station NPDES Permit for Outfall 002 (the Ash Pond Treatment System) require sampling
for the following parameters: Flow, pH, Total Iron, Total Suspended Solids, Sulfate, Acute
Toxicity, Oil and Grease, Nitrate/Nitrate Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Total Nitrogen, and
Total Phosphorus.
147. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Dan River Combined
Cycle Station NPDES Permit or the once through non-contact cooling water system require
sampling for the following par meters: Flow (MGD), Temperature, Total Iron, Total Suspended
Solids, pH, and Total Residual hlorine.
29

148. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Dan River Combined
Cycle Station NPDES Permit for Outfall 001 (the once through cooling water and cooling tower
blowdown and domestic wastewater) require sampling for the following parameters: Flow,
Temperature, Total Iron, Total Suspended Solids, pH and Total Residual Chlorine.
149. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Dan River Combined
Cycle Station NPDES Permit for Outfall OO1A (the wastes from the filtered water plant) require
sampling for the following parameters: Total Suspended Solids and Oil and Grease.
150. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Dan River Combined
Cycle Station NPDES Permit for Outfall 002A (the yard sump overflows system) require
sampling for the following parameters: Flow, pH, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids and
Total Iron.
Unpermitted Seeps at the Dan River Combined Cycle Station
151. As mentioned above, the Defendant's Dan River Combined Cycle Station has four
permitted outfalls discharging directly into the Dan River which are included in the Dan River
Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit.
152. Defendant's Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit does not
authorize the Defendant to make any outlet or discharge any wastewater or stormwater other than
those included in the Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit.
153. Seeps identified at Defendant's Dan River Combined Cycle Station, include
engineered discharges from the toe-drains of its Ash Pond, which are different locations from the .
outfalls described in the Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES Permit.
30

154. A seep or discharge from the Ash Pond or any other part of the Dan River
Combined Cycle Station that is not included in the Dan River Combined Cycle Station NPDES
Permit is an unpermitted discharge in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6).
Exceedances in Violation of the 2L Groundwater Standards
at the Dan River Combined Cycle Station
155. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Dan River Combined Cycle Station from January 2011
through July 16, 2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the
Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No.
10.
156. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Antimony (1 µg/L) in MW-21S during two
sampling events on September 2011 and May 2012, with concentrations of 1.19 µg/L and 1.3
i.tg/L, respectively; and in MW-22D during four samplingevents from January2012 to May
2013, with concentrations ranging from1.1 µg/L to 1.6 µg/L. Although Antimony is a naturally
occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicates
impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with
coal burning activities.
157. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Arsenic (10 µg/L) in MW-21S during eight
sampling events from January. 2011 to May 2013, with concentrations ranging from 21 µg/L to
45µg/L. Although Arsenic is a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and
31

specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater
treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
158. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Boron (700 µg/L) in MW-22D during three
sampling events from January 2012 to January 2013, with concentrations ranging from 711 µg/L
to 793 µg/L and in MW-22S during one sampling event in May 2013 with a concentration of 903
µg/L. Although Boron is a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific
occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment
and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
159. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 µg/L) in MW-20S and MW-22S
during eight sampling events from January 2011 to May 2013, with concentrations ranging from
829 µg/L to 19,400 µg/L. Although Iron is a naturally occurring element, its presence in
groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from
the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
160. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L ) in monitoring wells
MW-20D, MW-20S, MW-21S, MW-21D, MW-22D, and MW-22S during eight sampling events
from January 2011 to May 2013, with concentrations ranging from 306 µg/L to 1,050 µg/L.
Although Manganese is a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific
occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment
and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
32

161. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Total Dissolved Solids (500 mg/L) in MW-
21D
W-21D during eight sampling events from January 2011 to May 2013, with concentrations ranging
from 643 mg/L to 770 mg/L. The presence of Total Dissolved Solids in groundwater and the
specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater
treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
162. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows
exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Sulfate (250 mg/L) in well MW-21D during
eight sampling events from January 2011 to May 2013, with concentrations ranging from 310
mg/L to 350 mg/L. Although Sulfate is .a naturally occurring compound, its presence in
groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from
the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
163. Defendant's exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards for Antimony,
Arsenic, Boron, Iron, Manganese, Total Dissolved Solids and Sulfate, at or beyond the
compliance boundary of the Ash Pond at the Dan River Combined Cycle Station, are violations
of the groundwater standards as prohibited by 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
Other Exceedances of 2L Groundwater Standards at Dan River Combined Cycle Station
164. The Dan River Combined Cycle Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart
consistently shows exceedances from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron in wells MW-22D
and MW-23D, and Manganes in well MW-23D during eight sampling events from January
2011 to May 2013.
165. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
33

Marshall Steam Station
166. On March 3, 1976, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.1, other lawful statutes
and regulations issued by the Commission, and the Clean Water Act, the DWQ issued NPDES
Permit No. NC0004987 to Defendant or Defendant's predecessor for the Marshall Steam Station
("Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit"), located in Terrell, Catawba County, (NCSR 1841),
North Carolina.
167. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit has been renewed subsequently. The
current Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit was re-issued on January 18, 2011, with an
effective date of March 1, 2011, and with an expiration date of April 30, 2015. A copy of the
current Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit No, NC0004987 is attached hereto as Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 17, and is incorporated herein by reference.
168. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit was modified on January 18, 2009 to
reflect a name change to "Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC".
169. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes the continued discharge of
treated wastewater to receiving waters designated as the Catawba River (Lake Norman) (Class
B-CA waters) in the Catawba River Basin in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring
requirements and other conditions set forth therein.
170. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes a once through cooling
water discharge at Outfall 001 at the intersection of Highway 150 and NCSR 1841.
171. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes treated wastewater, i.e.,
metal cleaning waters, coal pile runoff, ash transport water, domestic wastewater, low volume
wastes and an FGD wet scrubber waste water, from the Ash Settling Pond through Outfall 002.
34

•.
172. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes a discharge of treated FGD
wet scrubber wastewater through Internal Outfall 004, upstream of the Ash Pond.
173. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes discharges of sump
overflows through Outfalls 002A and 00213.
174. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit authorizes discharges of non-contract
cooling water through Outfall 003 from the induced draft fan control house.
175. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 001 (once through cooling water) require
sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Temperature and Free Available Chlorine.
176. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002 (Ash Pond effluent) require sampling
for the following parameters: Flow, Oil and Grease, Total Suspended Solids, Total Arsenic,
Chloride, Total Copper, Total Iron, Total Mercury, Total Nickel, Total Selenium, Total Selenium
limits effective July 1, 2012 ,Total Zinc, Total Nitrogen, Total Phosphorus, Chronic Toxicity and
pH.
177. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam •
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002A (yard sump #1 overflows) require
sampling for the following parameters: Flow, pH, Total Iron, and Total Suspended Solids.
178. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 002B (yard sump #2 overflows) require
sampling for the following parameters: Flow, pH, Total Iron and Total Suspended Solids.
179. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from Outfall 003 (non-contact cooling water from the
35

induced draft fan control house) require sampling for the following parameters: Flow,
Temperature, Total Residual Chlorine, Free Available Chlorine and pH.
180. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements in the Marshall Steam
Station NPDES Permit for the discharge from the Internal Outfall 004 (treated FGD wet scrubber
wastewater to the Ash Pond and effluent from the constructed wetland prior to dischargeto the
ash settling basin) require sampling for the following parameters: Flow, Total Selenium and
Total Zinc.
181. The Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit prohibits the discharge of floating
solids or visible foam other than in trace amounts from any of its outfalls.
Exceedances in Violation of 2L Groundwater Standards at the Marshall Steam Station
182. The Plaintiff's Aquifer Protection staff compiled tables of the analytical results of
groundwater samples collected at the Marshall Steam Station from February 2011 through July
16, 2013, and prepared a chart of the Ash Pond Exceedances which are listed in the Marshall
Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart. See Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 11.
183. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Boron (700 µg/L) in wells MW-14D and MW-14S,
during seven sampling events from February 2011 to February 2013, with concentrations ranging
from 2,960 µg/L to 4,530 µg/L. Although Boron is a naturally occurring element, its presence
in groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting
from the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
184. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 lag/L) in well MW-14D during five
sampling events and in well MW-14S during seven sampling events from February 2011 to
36

February 2013, with concentrations ranging from 51 pg/L to 192 pg/L. Although Manganese is
a naturally occurring element, its presence in groundwater and specific occurrence at this site
indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment and disposal
associated with coal burning activities.
185. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Total Dissolved Solids (500 mg/L) in well MW-14D
during four sampling events and in well MW-14S during seven sampling events from February
2011 to February 2013, with concentrations ranging from 510 mg/L to 650 mg/L. The presence
of Total Dissolved Solids in groundwater and the specific occurrence at this site indicates
impacts to groundwater resulting from the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with
coal burning activities.
186. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Sulfate (250 pg/L) in wells MW-14D and MW-14S in
seven sampling events from February 2011 to February 2013, with concentrations ranging from
270 mg/L to 400 mg/L. Although Sulfate is a naturally occurring compound, its presence in
groundwater and specific occurrence at this site indicates impacts to groundwater resulting from
the wastewater treatment and disposal associated with coal burning activities.
187. Defendant's exceedances of the 2L Groundwater Standards for Boron,
Manganese, Total Dissolved Solids and Sulfate, at or beyond the compliance boundary of the •
Ash Pond at the Marshall Steam Station, are violations of the groundwater standards as
prohibited by 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
37
I
1

Other Exceedances ofthe2L Groundwater Standards at Marshall Steam Station
188. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Iron (300 µg/L) in wells MW-4D, MW-10S, MW-11D,
MW-11S, MW-12D, MW-13S, and MW-14S during seven sampling events from February 2011
to February 2013, with concentrations ranging from 305 µg/L to 1,060 µg/L.
189. The Marshall Steam Station Ash Pond Exceedances Chart shows exceedances
from the 2L Groundwater Standard for Manganese (50 µg/L) in wells MW-10D, MW-10S, M W-
12S and MW-13S during five sampling events from February 2011 to February 2013, with
concentrations ranging from 54 µg/L to 127 µg/L.
190. The DWR staff is working with the Defendant to determine if these exceedances
are naturally occurring or if corrective action will be required.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
191. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 190 are incorporated into these
claims for relief as if fully set forth herein.
192. With the exception of the Marshall Steam Station, which has no unpermitted
seeps, Defendant's unpermitted seeps from the 5 of the 6 Facilities (Cliffside, Buck, Allen,
Belews Creek and Dan River) are violations of N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 143-215.1(a)(1) and(a)(6).
193. Defendant's exceedances of the groundwater standards for Boron, Manganese,
Total Dissolved Solids, Sulfate and Iron, at or beyond the compliance boundary of the Ash Basin
and the Ash Settling Ponds at Buck Steam Station, are violations of the 2L Groundwater
Standards as prohibited by 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
194. Defendant's exceedances of the groundwater standards for Antimony, Arsenic,
Boron, Iron, Manganese, Total Dissolved Solids and Sulfate, at or beyond the compliance
38

e
boundary of the Ash Pond at the Dan River Combined Cycle Station, are violations of the 2L
Groundwater Standards as prohibited by 15A NCAC 2L.0103(d).
195. Defendant's exceedances of the groundwater standards for Boron, Manganese,
Total Dissolved Solids and Sulfate, at or beyond the compliance boundary of the Ash Pond at the
Marshall Steam Station, are violations of the 2L Groundwater Standards as prohibited by 15A
NCAC 2L.0103(d).
196. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief, as set forth more specifically in the prayer
for relief, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-215.6C.
197. Defendant's violations of N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 143-215.1(a)(1) and (a)(6) for the
unpermitted seeps and Defendant's violations and potential violations of the 2L Groundwater
Standards, without assessing the problem and taking corrective action, pose a serious danger to
the health, safety and welfare of the people of the State of North Carolina and serious harm to the
water resources of the State.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHERFORE, the Plaintiff, State of North Carolina, prays that the Court grant to it the
following relief:
1. That the Court accepts this verified complaint as an affidavit upon which to base
all orders of the Court;
2. That the Court preliminarily, and upon final judgment permanently enter a
mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant to abate the violations of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-
215.1, NPDES Permits and groundwater standards at the 6 Facilities;
3. That the Court preliminarily, and upon final judgment permanently enter a
mandatory injunction requiring the Defendant take the steps required in the attached "Ash Ponds
39

Assessment Needs," which is attached hereto as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 18, and is incorporated
herein by reference;
4. That the Defendant be taxed with the costs of this action;
5. Any other and further relieftat the Court deems to be just and proper.
Respectfully submitted, this the / day of August, 2013.
ROY COOPER
Attorney enera
By .0'" %//
Kathr n J 1 • Cooper
Special Deputy Attorney General
NC State Bar No. 12176
kcoo.er@ncdoj.:.ov
B 11,3 . —
Y
Donald W. aton
Assistant Attorney General
NC State Bar No. 13303
d o nc'oj._1
By P.��'�
----fr
Anita LeVeaux
Assistant Attorney General
NC State Bar No. 13667
[e-mail]
By '- a,L `✓u�
Jane L. Oliver
Assistant Attorney General
NC State Bar No. 16771
[e-mail]
N.C. Department of Justice
Environmental Division
Post Office Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone] phone
[phone] facsimile
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
State of North Carolina ex rel.
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
40

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
VERIFICATION
COUNTY OF WAKE
Jeffrey Poupart, first being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the Point
Source Branch Supervisor of the Surface Water Protection Section of the Division of
Water Resources in the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources; that he has read the foregoing verified Complaint and Motion For Injunctive
Relief, and that he is acquainted with the facts and circumstances alleged therein; and
believes them to be true.
Jeffrey Poupart
wa,ke County,North Carolina
I certify that the following person appeared before me this day, acknowledging to
me that he signed the foregoing document: Jeffrey Poupart.
11day of August, 2013. �� U /
Official Signature of Notary
V, ern i /
V. S� Notary's printed or typed name
Q� 0TA RI �y
$ My Commission Expires: /0/_c2//4
(Official Seal) "e'`w'OUB�.�G.�r U
cs. 'I'•I'NIIN'~ ,
Cps
L