NC0000272_Draft Committee Minutes 11-17-2021_20220401

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Committee Minutes
November 17, 2021
The NPDES Committee occurred in the Ground Floor Hearing Room of the Archdale Building at
512 N. Salisbury St., Raleigh, NC. Commissioners, staff, and scheduled speakers attended in -
person on Wednesday, November 17, 2021. The NPDES Committee meeting audio and
presentations were broadcast via the state web conferencing link posted on the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) website at:
https://deq.nc. gov/aboutldivisions/water-resources/water-resources-commissions/environmental-
management-commission
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. with Chair Deerhake presiding. She
provided the notice required by N.C.G.S. § 138A-15(e).
NPDES COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN TI'TENDANC D
Marion Deerhake (NPDES Chair)
John McAdams
Patricia Harris (Vice -Chair)
Maggie Monast
Charles Carter
Robin W. Smith (EMC Chair), Ex-Officio
c
EMC MEMBERS & COUNSEL IN ATTENDANCE
Dr. Suzanne Lazorick, EMC Vice -Chair
David Anderson
Mr. Phillip Reynolds, Counsel
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE
Julie Grzyb, DWR Deputy Director
Danny Smith, DWR Director
Lois Thomas
111
L Preliminary Matters
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. with Chair Deerhake presiding She took a
voice roll call of the members in attendance and confirmed a quorum existed.
Chair Deerhake read the State Government Ethics Act - G.S. 163A-159(e) "Conflicts of
Interest" notice. No Committee members responded that they had a conflict of interest with any
action or information item on the meeting agenda. There were no conflicts of interest.
2. Approval of minutes from September 9, 2020 (attached). Chair Deerhake indicated that
there were a few corrections to be made. She stated that Mr. Chernikov's title should be Dr.
1 of 3

Chernikov. One other correction was to change proposes which should be proposed on the last
page of the minutes. Commissioner Harris made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected.
Commissioner McAdams seconded the motion and the motion passed.
3. A decision was made to approve the minutes at the next NPDES committee meeting in
January 2022.
Action Item
1. Request that the Color Variance Applicable to Blue Ridge Paper Products, LLC be
Terminated
Chair Deerhake recognized EMC Counsel Phillip Reynolds to explain the purpose of the
meeting and the variance review process.
EMC Counsel reminded the Commission that this was a quasi-judicial matter. EMC
Counsel Reynolds explained that the decision coming before the NPDES Committee was
regarding the (color) variance and not the (associated) permit.
Chair Deerhake reminded the members that the day's topic focused only on the color enl} ;
the variance. She said the EMC delegated to and *'R��� here is -�� a DWR decision -making authority for
separate-effort-tmdergone-by-the-delegatien-to-the—staffte-deal-with-all other aspects of the NPDES
permit renewalaspectG of the perm;t for the facility. Please keep that in mind as you think about
any questions you may want to ask.
Ms. Kountis, DWRthe Classification, Standards, and Rules Review Branch, of DWR
reviewed the definition and authorities for an NPDES variance. She also presented the history of
the color variance forapplicable to the Blue Ridge Paper Products, LLC, Canton facility which
dischargesing treated wastewater effluent to the Pigeon River. She expressed the Division's and
provided reasoning to support f r and the impact . f terminating the facility's color variance for
the—faeility. Ms. Kountis provided information on the public hearing held and summarized
comments received pertaining to regarding theprepesed ten ination of the color variance's
proposed termination. She also presented, plus an DWR's estimated rulemaking timeline
associated with theis proposed variance terminationrulemaking Finally, Ms. Kountis conveyed
the a —Hearing Officer Charles Carter'shearing officer recommendation for the EMC NPDES
Committee to and requested action regarding the proposed terminateien-ofthe color variance was
presented by Ms. Kountis.
Chair Deerhake piled for questions from the Committee members. Hearing none at that
time, she proceeded with her own questions for staff` She asked who initiated the variance
termination. Mr. Kountis said indicated as a follow up on that, the permittee approached the
Department,
requesting removal of the variance,
Chair Deerhake asked who's idea was it to shift to a new color compliance
method that , r determination; o
permit method known as " 0 ealle the Del* Platinum -Cobalt UnitsPCU" (OPCU) approach. She
2 of 3
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
l Formatted: Font: Not Bold

asked -Ms. Kountis introduced staff memberwhere-did thatat de -antis
referred the question to _Dr. Chernikov to respond.
Dr. Sergei-Chernikov stated that in the early 19802s, the EPA interpreted the North Carolina
narrative color standard as an instream standard of 50 PCU rPl..tinu.,, Cob It units} This number is based
on the ability of the average observer to detect instream color. However, he said it is important to emphasize
that the ability to detect color does not mean that the color is objectionable to the observer, which is the
basis of the North Carolina standard
Hence, DWR concluded the EPA interpretation of objectionable is overly conservative.
Chernikov want to summarize what he said about the color reductions a ge
over the is and studies?
During the last 30 years Blue Ridge Paper has made significant improvements to the facility in order to
reduce effluent color load and improve its overall environmental performance. As a result, the annual
average effluent color loading has been reduced from 380,000 lb/day in 1988 to 36,000 lb/day today.
In order to achieve this result, the mill has spent over $526 million in expenditures on environmental
process improvement since 1990. The mill upgrade included two changes that significantly improved the
mill's environmental performance. The facility eliminated the use of elemental chlorine and implemented
significant changes to both the pine and hardwood bleaching lines.
The first major change was the use of oxygen delignification. This process is utilized to separate the
lignin from the fiber. This resulted in significant improvement in the mills environmental performance.
The second major change was the implementation of full-scale bleach filtrate recycle (BFR) on the pine
bleach line and caustic extraction stage (E.) filtrate recycle (-20%) on the hardwood bleach line. BFR
removes color from the effluent. It was installed in 1998 at a capital cost of $30 million.
According to the latest report of consultant Dr. Liebergott (issued on July 7, 2006) the mill is ranked # 1
in the world in regards to the BOD, COD, and color removal. Dr. Liebergott was originally hired in 2001
by the consortium of environmental groups to evaluate the facility for color reduction options. Dr.
Liebergott also concluded, after evaluating data from 76 similar mills around the world, that Blue Ridge
Paper Plant is ranked # 2 in the world in regards to the TSS and AOX (adsorbable organic halides)
removal.
Biological studies conducted by the University of Tennessee in 2005 and 2012 concluded that the Pigeon
River has a "balanced and indigenous fish community". These studies also found a diverse and healthy
macroinvertebrate community in the Pigeon River. Separate scientific studies indicate that stream color
concentrations below 100 color units have no effect on health of aquatic organisms (NCASI Special
Report 9407, Human Perception and Biological Impacts of Kraft Mill Effluent Color, June 1994).
According to the information the Division received from the state of Tennessee, the River Run Walleye
has returned to the Pigeon River. This is a very sensitive species that indicate high water quality. The
Pigeon River has also become a trophy smallmouth bass fishery and the number of rafters in Tennessee
has increased from -21,000 in 1995 to almost 150,000 in 2007.
The true color at the North Carolina/Tennessee line during the last 5 years (2014-2018) has averaged 21
color units, which is significantly below the value that was interpreted by EPA as the color water quality
standard agreed upon by both states.
The true color at the Fiberville Bridge (0.4 miles below discharge) during the last 5 years (2014-2018) has
averaged 41 color units, which indicates the long-term compliance with the EPA interpreted state color
standard.
3 of 3
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt, Line spacing: single
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
l Formatted: Highlight

Review of the instream monitoring data for the period 2014-2018 indicates that this condition would be
met most of the times with an exception of the significant drought conditions.
Therefore DWR DEQ recommended -proposes that the NPDES permit's color condition shall -require the
facility to meet the monthly average A50 PCU (the difference between monthly average true color upstream
of the facility and the monthly average true color downstream of the facility wastewater discharge
outfalltrue color) at the Fiberville Bridge) when the flow in the Pigeon River is equal to or greater thanabeve
mMonthly 30Q2 (2 year, 30-day low flow). By meeting this condition, DWR staff believe the facility will
not contravene the Sstate ambient color standard1111111111=1111111111111111111114 The Odelta
PCU approach to compliance determination is proposed to eliminate potential influencempaet of
upstreamfrom _turbidity and other color -contributing sources of color upstrea. of theon color that is
measured at the Fiberville Bridge monitor downstream of the facility's effluent discharge outfall.
When asked by Chair Deerhake to justify the change in compliance determination methods which are not. —
equivalent and are designed to measure different outcomes (i.e., an instream measurement downstream of
the facility that exceeds an objectionable color threshold vs. exceedance of a selected difference between
downstream and upstream colors), Dr. Cherniov explained that it is DWR's position that changing to the
APCR method is
This decision can be supported by the additional following information:
1), The Bowater Hiwassee River Study (Prestrude and Laws, 1989) identified that color increases of 50 to
60 PCU were acceptable to observers. Since the background (upstream) color concentration for Blue
Ridge Paper is 13 PCU, the downstream color concentration of 64 to 74 PCU should be acceptable to
observers.
2), The recommendation from the Bowater Study was accepted by the State of Tennessee whichand-it
established a color limit of 50 PCU above background for the Hiwassee River.
3) A sSimilar study conducted by Dr. Prestrude for the State of Maine resulted in the color limit of 40
PCU above the source river's background per river.
4), Dr. Prestrude conducted a -color perception studies in both Tennessee and North Carolina waters
(Pigeon River). Prestrude (July 1996) reported that the vast majority of peoplersons participating in the
research projects considered water quality color in the receiving stream as -aesthetically acceptable in the
100-110 PCU color range.
Chair Deerhake responded that it appeared the request for terminating the variance based on the new and
different approach to demonstrating compliance (i.e. APCU)mnay be interpreted by some as not
demonstrating a reduction of actual color downstream because the basis for the compliance determination
was different. pr. Chemikov explained tha
i ervrle Bridge (0.4 river miles downstream of the discharge) makes permit more stringent bee.
original agreement with EPA and TN required compliance with the Color Standard a •'''
(almost 39 river miles downstream of the discharge). In addition, the permit mainta
Monthly Average, and Annual Average Color limits that have been developed by the EPA technology
team, which consisted of EPA experts and independent experts. Furthermore, Fiberville bridge was
chosen as a compliance point as the first downstream sampling location, which is a standard procedure for
all Major NPDES permits and this is the first time when the permit for this facility requires instream
compliance with the water -quality based Color Standard. Previous permits only required compliance with
4 of 3
Formatted: Font color: Auto
{ Formatted: Left, Space After: 0 pt, Tab stops: Not
l at 0.44" + 2.88"
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Justified, Tab stops: 0.44", Left + 2.88",
Left
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman,
Highlight

the technology -based effluent Color Standards. .(please insert response dealing with color compliances
Fiberville and other potential contributing factors to color elevation farther downstream near TN line).1_ _
Chair Deerhake explained that she thought it was neither relevant nor appropriate to state in the Response
to Comments that color levels in other parts of NC exceeding 50 PCU are acceptable to the public and
support the acceptability of greater than 50 PCU in the Pigeon River. She explained that eastern North
Carolina waters are not comparable to the Pigeon River because those rivers are distinctly different
ecoregions with unique water chemistry. She added that the Hiwasswee Basin — while in western NC — is
also a distinctly difference ecoregion and has a greater volume and flow rate than the small Pigeon River.
She added her same reasoning could apply to waters in the State of Maine.
Chair Deerhake asked Dr. Chernikov if Blue Ridge Paper performed more than the one study of potential
new color -reducing treatment technology described in the facility's 2015 annual color report included in
the action item's records. She said the report showed only one new technology study which was rejected
as infeasible. She added the 2015 report indicated the facility primarily adopted multiple best
management practices and replaced/upgraded equipment. Dr. Chernikov said Blue Ridge has performed
additional technology studies in other years and determined those were also infeasible or ineffective.
Chair Deerhake asked if U.S EPA Region 4 submitted any written comments on the proposed termination
of the color variance. She said the Hearing Officer's report only referenced discussion with Region 4.
Dr. Chernikov said Region 4 did not submit written comments.
Chair Deerhake stated that she believed reliance on the statewide aesthetics standard _
NCAC 02B .0j for color may not be appropriate, citing the lack of a definition in the standards
for "aesthetics" and the standard's vagueness since the state contains extremely diverse river basins and
ecoregions. She recommended that the EMC examine the state -level aesthetics standard to determine if it
can be amended to increase its relevance to the state's many divers basins and ecoregions.
Chair Deerhake added that the meaning of "objectionable" for the purpose of determining water color
compliance is based on averaging monitored stream color data. In contrast, "objectionable" odor for air
quality rules is based on real-time observations. She said this difference in the meaning and application of
"objectionable" is another topic that the EMC may wish to examine.
Discussion was held regarding the proposed termination of the color variance but primarily
regarding the proposed permit and associated compliance issues. [Thus, most questions were
addressed by Dr. Sergei Chernikov with the Industrial Permitting Branch of the Water Quality
Permitting Section. Commissioner Carter stated that there was much argument that the color
variance should not be eliminated, and that there was no legal basis for the variance to be extended.
Commissioner Carter made a motion, and EMC Counsel Reynolds recommended that the
motion should include adoption of the hearing officer's report. Commissioner Carter agreed.
EMC Counsel Reynolds said that he understood Commissioner Carter's motion to be that
Commissioner Carter moved that the committee "adopt the hearing officer's report and that the
2010 Color Variance from the narrative standard for color [15A NCAC 02B .0211 (12)] issued to
Blue Ridge Paper Products, LLC (d/b/a Evergreen Packaging) on July 14, 2010 not be extended
for another permit term and therefore terminated upon issuance of the NPDES permit renewal, as
required in Paragraph (E) of the 2010 Color Variance."
Commissioner Harris seconded the motion. Chair Deerhake asked if there was any
additional discussion. .ois didn't Commissioner McAdams have uestion? , and Hearing
none, the Chair called for a vote, and the motion passed -unanimously.
5 of 3
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman,
Highlight
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman,
Highlight
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman,
Highlight
Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
(Commented [MI]:
Commented [M2R1]:

With no further business before the Commission, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at
Approved this 12th day of January 2022.
Marion Deerhake, Chair
NPDES Committee
6 of 3
Formatted: Highlight