NC0005266_Permit Modification_19950418

NPDC!i DOCYNCN,r SCANNING COVER SNCC'1'
NPDES Permit:
NC0005266
Document ape:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Report
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
Aril 18, 1995
Thi6 document is priiitea on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerae aide

P I
' State of North Carolina V6 Vo
Department of Environment, INA
` Health and Natural Resources 5,
Division of Environmental Management/p�" 4
i
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor r
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary p FEE N i�
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 18, 1995
bi ut
Michael W. Blosser, Manager
Quality and Technical Services
ABTco
P.O. Box 98
Roaring River, North Carolina 28669
Subject: Permit No. NC0005266
ABTco WWTP
Adjudication Withdrawal
Wilkes County
Dear Mr. Blosser:
In accordance with your Petition for Contested Case Hearing filed on November 11, 1994 and
subsequent Notice of Withdrawal dated March 23, 1995, we are forwarding herewith the subject
permit. The permit has been modified as follows:
• The more stringent Total Suspended Solids (TSS) limit has been implemented in phases:
ABTco shall meet a TSS limit of 14,000 Ibs/day, monthly average; 21,000 lbs/day, daily
maximum, beginning January 1, 1996 and lasting until December 31, 1996. Beginning
on January 1, 1997 and lasting until expiration of the permit, ABTco shall meet a TSS
limit of 12,000 lbs/day, monthly average; 18,000 lbs/day, daily maximum.
• Settleable Solids and TSS monitoring has been revised to 7 days/week at the effluent.
• Part III, Special Condition F has been revised to include the specific monitoring
requirements for TSS from the dissolved air flotation unit (DAF) and secondary clarifier,
and flow monitoring from the DAF, beginning no later than January 1, 1996.
A copy of the modified permit is attached, incorporating the above requirements.
All other terms and conditions contained in the original permit remain unchanged and in full
effect. These modifications are 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 December 6, 1983.
It is our understanding that this modification will resolve all items contained in the Petition for
Contested Case Hearing. If this is not the case, you should notify us immediately, but no later than
ten (10) days following receipt of this letter. Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be
final and binding.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

` ABTco W WTP NC0005266
Final Adjudication Settlement
Page Two
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Susan Wilson at telephone
number 919-733-5083, Extension 555.
Sincerely,
Original Signed 13y
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Central Files
Winston Salem Regional Office
Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Permits and Engineering Unit
Facility Assessment Unit
Jill Hickey, Attorney General's Office

Permit No. N 005266
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
71
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
ABTco, Inc.
is, hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Roaring River Plant ;
NC State Road 2329
West of Roaring River
Wilkes County
to receiving waters designated as Yadkin River in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective May 1, 1995
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on April. 30, 1999
Signed this day April 18, 1995
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of -Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0005266
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
ABTco, Inc.
is hereby authorized to,. -
Continue to operate a combined wastewater treatment system consisting of a 0.03 MGD
cylindrical extended aeration plant with sludge holding tank for treating sanitary wastes,. a 1.0
MGD industrial waste treatment system with a bar screen, influ ant pump station, in -line grinder,
primary clarifier, dissolved air flotation unit, pumps, a sludge holding and mixing tank, a sludge
thickener, a solids dewatering system (two "S" roll filter presses), a conveyor system, two
aeration lagoons, a nutrient addition system, a secondary clarifier, and two emergency primary.
settling basins located at Roaring River Plant, NC State Road 2329, West of Roaring River,
Wilkes County (See Part III of this Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Yadkin
River,which is.classified Class C waters in'the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until January 1, 1996, the Pemuttee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Lbs/day Units (specify)
Measurement
Sample
'Sample
Mon. Avg. Daily Max Mon. Avg. Daisy
Max. Frequency
Tyne
Location
Flow 1.0 VIGD
Continuous
Recorder
I or E
BOD, 5 Day, 20 °C 11873. 22747.0
Daily
Composite
E,U,D
TSS 27296. 41388.0
7 Days/Week
Composite
E
Total Phenolics
Daily
Grab
E
CCO
3/Week
Composite
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Acute Toxicity"
Quarterly
Composite
E
Settleable Solids "'
7 Days/Week
Grab
E
Turbidity ""
3/Week
Grab
Ut,Dt
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at least 100 feet above discharge point, D - Downstream (1) 1.7 miles below
discharge at NCSR 2327, (2) 8.0 miles below discharge at NCSR 2303.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream sampling shall be conducted three times per week during June, July,
August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
**See Part III, Condition E; Acute Toxicity (Daphnid 48 hr.) LC50 at 68%; January, April, July, October.
* * * See Part III, Condition F.
**** The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural
background conditions, the discharge level cannot cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
t Instream turbidity samples shall be conducted 100 feet upstream and 300 feet downstream along the bank of the River.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
CONTINUED...

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until January 1, 1996, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. (Continued)
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Lbs da . , Other Units (specify), Measurement Sample *Sample
Mon. Avg_ Daily Max Mon. Ava. Daily Max. Frequent Type Location
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Monthly Composite E
Total Phosphorus Monthly Composite E

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning after January 1, 1996 and lasting until December 31, 1996, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s)
serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the pernuttee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Lbs/day Units (specify)
Measurement
Sample
Sam le
•3L
Mon. Avg, Daily Max Mon, Avg. Daily Max.
Frequency
Tvoe
Location
Flow 1.0 MGD
Continuous
Recorder
E
BOD, 5 Day, 20 °C 11873. 22747.0
Daily
Composite
E
TSS 14000. 21000.0
7 Days/Week
Composite
E
Total Phenolics
Daily
Grab
E
DOD
3/Week
Composite
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Acute Toxicity
Quarterly
Composite
E
Settleable Solids "'
7 Days/Week
Grab
E
Turbidity ****
3/Week
Grab
Ut,Dt
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at least 100 feet above discharge point, D - Downstream (1) 1.7 miles below
discharge at NCSR 2327, (2) 8.0 miles below discharge at NCSR 2303.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream sampling shall be conducted three times per week during June, July,
August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
** See Part III, Condition E; Acute Toxicity (Daphnid 48 hr.) LC50 at 68%; January, April, July, October.
*** See Part III, Condition F.
**** The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural
background conditions, the discharge level cannot cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
t Instream turbidity samples shall be conducted 100 feet upstream and 300 feet downstream along the bank of the River.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

W
A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning after January 1, 1996 and lasting until December 31, 1996, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s)
serial number 001. (Continued)
Effluent Characteristics bs/dav Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Other Units (specify) Measurement Sample *Sample
Mon. Ava. Daily Max Mon. Ava. Daily Max. Frequency Type Location
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Monthly Composite E
Total Phosphorus Monthly Composite E

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL
Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning on January 1, 1997 and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial
number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Lbs/day Units (specify)
Measurement
Samole
'Sample
Mon. Avg. Dail Max Mon. Avg. Daily Max.
Frequency
Type
Location
Flow 1.0 MGD
Continuous
Recorder
E
BOD, 5 Day, 20 °C 11873. 22747.0
Daily
Composite
E
TSS 12000. 18000.
7 Days/Week
Composite
E
Total Phenolics
Daily
Grab
E
ODD
3/Week
Composite
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
E,U,D
Acute Toxicity "
Quarterly
Composite
E
Settleable Solids "'
7 Days/Week
Grab
E
Turbidity ""
3/Week
Grab
Ut,Dt
* Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at least 100 feet above discharge
point, D - Downstream (1) 1.7 miles
below
discharge at NCSR 2327, (2) 8.0 miles below discharge at NCSR 2303.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream sampling shall be conducted three times per week during June, July,
August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
** See Part III, Condition E; Acute Toxicity (Daphnid 48 hr.) LC50 at 68%; January, April, July, October.
*** See Part III, Condition F.
**** The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural
background conditions, the discharge level cannot cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
t Instream turbidity samples shall be conducted 100 feet upstream and 300 feet downstream along the bank of the River.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab
samples.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL Permit No. NC0005266
During the period beginning on January 1, 1997 and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial
number 001. (Continued)
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Lb.5/day Other Units (specify) Measurement Sample *Sample
Mon. Avg, Daily Max Mon. Ava. Daily Max. Frequent Type Location
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Monthly Composite E
Total Phosphorus �` Monthly Composite E

J .
Part III Permit No. NC0005266
E. ACUTE TOXICITY PERMIT LWIT' (QRTRLY)
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a quarterly basis ^using protocols defined
as definitive in E.P.A. Document 600/4-85/013 entitled "The Acute Toxicity of Effluents to
Freshwater and Marine Organisms." The monitoring shall be performed as a Daphnia
pulex or Ceriodaphnia 48 hour static test,'using effluent collected as a 24 hour composite.
The LC50 of this effluent using the previously stated methodology may at no time in any
toxicity test be less than 68%. Effluent samples for self -monitoring purposes must be
obtained during representative effluent discharge below all waste treatment. The first test
will be performed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during the months
of January, April, July, and October.
The parameter code for this test if using Daphnia pulex is TAA3D. The parameter code for
this test if using Ceriodaphnia is TAA3B. All toxicity testing results required as part of
this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR4)
for the month in which it was performed, using the appropriate parameter code.
Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention:
Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
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 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.
Should any test data from either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management 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 retesting(within 30 days of initial
monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will constitute noncompliance
with monitoring requirements.
F. SOLIDS MINIMIZATION
ABTco shall conduct.weekly composite sampling of TSS from the secondary clarifier and
the DAF unit to further assess removal of solids from the treatment system. Flow
monitoring from the DAF unit shall also be conducted. This monitoring shall begin no later

i
� f
than January 1, 1996. Quarterly reports shall be prepared including the above monitoring
information and a summary of the effluent TSS and flow data for the same period. The
quarterly reports shall be submitted no later than 30 days following the end of each quarter
(the first report due 4/30/96).
The report shall be submitted to: Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
and,
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section, Technical Support Branch
P.O. Box .29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
ABTco shall continue to evaluate solids reduction and.submit an additional report, with the
NPDES application for renewal by October 31, 1998 (180 days prior to expiration), on the
ability to further reduce solids from the treatment system.

Page 1
Note for Dave Goodrich
From: Coleen Sullins
Date: Wed, Mar 8, 1995 11:22 AM
Subject: FW: Adjudication - ABTco.
To: Dave Goodrich; Susan Wilson
FYI
From: Bill Mills on Tue, Mar 7,1995 12:08 PM
Subject: RE: Adjudication - ABTco.
To: Coleen Sullins
This provision in the rule goes back to the original rule first adopted in 1973 or 74. Prior to
that time we had no rule that spoke to effluent limits, only WQS's. We wrote that rule,
which became 2B .0400 when all state rules had to be codified in 1976, because we had to
have rules to establish effluent limits, among other thing, for qualification to receive EPA's
NPDES delegation.
We wrote the rule in 2B .0400 sugh that EPA effluent guidelines were adopted by reference
and explain the procedure as to how WQS's and effluent guidelines worked together to
establish effluent limits. During the creation of this rule we saw what we preceived to be a
need to establish an effluent standard on facilities that were discharging inorganic solids and
wrote this provision. This was intended to get at those facilities which had settling ponds for
inorganics (typically quarries and mines, water treatment plants, and ash ponds[ ?]) and was
not used for other types of wastewater. We had as a matter of practice written effluent limits
on settable matter (solids) into mining permits for several years prior to NPDES and were
preserving this control now that we were writing an effluent limits rule. I pulled out a copy
of one of the quarry permits written in 1973 to Martin Marrietta and provision 4 reads "In the
event these facilities produce an effluent containing more than 0.1 ml/1 of 30 minute
settleable solids or otherwise fail to produce an effluent of such quality to protect the
receiving stream, Martin Marietta Aggs. shall take such immediate corrective action as may be
required by the Office of Water and Air Resources."
I believe that 0.1 ml/1 was considered to be the level of detection in the standard Imhoff Cone
measure and it was Benton's (then WQ Chief) feeling that facilities which are settling out
inorganic solids should not have any appreciable settleable solids in the 30 minutes test if
they are doing a decient job of settling. I know of no particular science behind this number
other than that. The 0.1 ml/1 to 5.0 ml/1 was created so as give us latitude in tailoring the
number to the facility however my experience in permits had been that we always used 0.1
ml/1. Benton had always held the position that settleable matter and turbidity were the most
appropriate mechanizms to be use in regulating the inorganic solids, EPA wrote guidelines
for TSS and this alone or with turbidity didn't assure that readily settleable solids would not
be discharged into the stream.
The furtherest back I have any hard copy on the rule is 1978 and this provision was in there
then.
From: Coleen Sullins on Mon, Mar 6, 1995 6:17 PM
Subject: FW: Adjudication - ABTco.
To: Bill Mills
Cc: Dave Goodrich; Susan Wilson

Page 2
Bill do you have any recollection of this rule? See messages below. Thanks Coleen
From: Boyd DeVane on Mon, Mar 6, 1995 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: Adjudication - ABTco.
To: Coleen Sullins
I don't have any recollection of it. You might ask someone like Bill Hoffman who was
involved in permitting earlier in his career. YOu might ask Alridge if he could remember it or
had a copy of the earing report although he didn't dwell much will effluent limit rules I don't
think. H looked in a 1976 version of the urle and it was in there. The orininal rule was
adopted in feb 1976 when we did the "modern" codification of all our rules. (It could have
been modified in Dec of 1976) I don't have any record of rules previous, to that date.
From: Coleen Sullins on Mon, Mar 6, 1995 12:07 PM
Subject: Adjudication - ABTco.
To: Boyd DeVane
Cc: Dave Goodrich; Susan Wilson
Boyd we are dealing with an adjudication of a permit requirement to monitor settleable solids.
ABTco. has a serious solids problem and we put monitoring in their permit and they are now
challenging the monitoring requirement. One of the discovery questions we are having to
address is on Rule 2B .0406(d) - specifically they are requesting that we state the technical
bases for the rule that establishes the 5 ml/l settleable solids limit. Do you have any
information that you can provide on the history of the rule?
FYI - I have to have responses by end of this week since it is a legal issue. Thanks Coleen

��
�J.R
�12.2195 - I�6%G.m - uvL�. Nuhn�cu(fi--SAW-- -
,/y�.� y (Jeo� Sm r� n0 che"'. 'Cam, ✓1'��
oc
R41dn (✓e�n ft)
- LW' ReS)
HtSo°
_. t.Swa'DPq ¢In
22-2A uxo
,uyc cd
I
&Ke
&OfciO for ti She
3c� Dn1
Wt+ p(eL5
6e -b uo-(.59
wa+tr (43 wo
,b Cc(MUcd)
-� i�V lificcL
b�: YJccrck �� to
maoFurc-
-- Content
(I,}Ile Eaper
ov,E ,lM.cl� mc#Onal
00 510�+
C��5oJ0.WUm-
QS"b iJaA.-ems
'75W° waieti
Chem. m,st_ <s" 5h (,tft Kj
Add palm - bLKUCIt NoA
��r- rmyn wash o�r�*K'lr�J.'c
O fcpn41,
can_hQ[ -O)___ gxd lA.
- - -- _ __ �- .Lf' LGm. _ N.� o� m�f,,�A,@�a-_ 6Yl�Wer-- o� vz-_L�-�✓rY��nS -
_-______ X uWe-is_.or-Girl can _ �o✓�iro�------_.- - --- -_ ___
Wood Wbo bonds_ Fay. Gmk _J__url-el
✓!,llA,- _ice __iY12r w/

/)/,10
CaoA is
fat ti,�lb ju"Y� - ? 6� q5
6-
�ls,t-,4,-�
_i u �sv,d
;Ypalid dw 1 s J
d�
L-L la /", 6` aNV -6(11�- t-
"i)b �`�
0 ltth,WfhT b4F
%1a,� + s5 0-v— Au�4w ��en

"ho
-o
11vPed
cb565�`
APP c75IXAlv
"qpu, i7rr�)
i 7 C/.CJ Fit,,) No
(,JM.a�4
76 �06' "6�-
D6)-e 64-�&Ap
C�4 �Gl vcfwi
LZ
7`�)
P�

Clear Water
ABTco
Wastewater
Treatment System
Dewatering Capacity
Expansion

Cleatilwief
AFE - Dewatering System Expansion
Project Description:
Project scope encompasses the first phase of increasing ABTco's
sludge dewatering capacity to lower operating costs of the
wastewater system while improving compliance to NPDES permit
conditions.
Reasons For Expenditure:
Environmental regulations implemented with ABTco Roaring
River's new NPDES permit require a "solids minimization" plan
and future compliance to stringent settleable solids limits.
These limits cannot be met without significantly reducing
solids wasting to the river. In addition, economic benefits
will be derived by lowering polymer demand in the system.

Supporting Statement:
Effective early 1995 Roaring River will begin operating under a
new NPDES permit which requires testing for settleable solids
on.the wastewater treatment system's discharge to the Yadkin
River. The state DEHNR has established a regulation which
limits settleable solids to 5 ml/L of effluent to state waters.
The treatment system's current settleable solids discharge is
over the regulatory limit. The permit specifically requires a
"solids minimization plan" submitted by May 1ST, 1995. This
plan will be an ongoing endeavor to lower solids discharge to
meet the state's settleable solids limit.
The project also has strong economic justifications. 1994's
projected year-end polymer usage will exceed budget by 3180, a
total of $544,000 or $413,000 over budget. Allowed to continue
unchecked into 1995, current usage would run up a $960,000
expense in 1995. Over usage has been caused by adding polymer
to the secondary clarifier to reduce solids discharge and
maintain permit compliance. The high discharge was a result of
high lagoon solids concentration. These solids cannot be
controlled by an undersized dewatering system. Specifically,
the wastewater system generates approximately 40,000 pounds of
suspended solids per day. The total dewatering capacity should
be designed around a minimum of 45,000 pounds per day with
surge capacity up to 65,000 pounds per day. This design will
eliminate the need for secondary clarifier polymer reducing the
cost of that chemical to $367,000 and eliminate the need for
contract dewatering, a total annual savings of $273,000 versus
budget and $775,500 versus 1994 to 1995 projections.
The project is planned for two phases. The first to begin in
early January, 1995 with the second phase following in mid
first quarter. The phase I and II of this project's planned
improvements include retrofitting or replacing the current DAF
with a new design. The new units are more compact, have greater
efficiency in terms of gpm capacity and improve solids
consistency over old designs (5-8o solids discharge versus 3-40-.
on the old design). In addition, an Andritz sludge press will
be added designed for 2,000 lb/hour of high biological content
sludge. The current press will continue to be used but has
capacity of only 700-800 lb/hr. In addition to major equipment
modifications, the dewatering building layout must be changed
to accommodate new equipment, expand sludge storage, and
increase throughput of the dewatering building discharge line
to the effluent box. Miscellaneous changes will include

upgrades for the primary sludge pumps, polymer pumps, plant
lift station, Rotary Thickener as well as piping
rearrangements.
Phase I of this project, the subject of this AFE, involves
improving sludge pressing capacity by adding a second 2000
lb/hr Andritz belt press, improvements to the polymer pumps and
the existing rotary thickener will be modified to improve
polymer flocculation and performance. Facility changes will
include expansion of the sludge storage pad, piping changes,
pressurization of effluent line and miscellaneous costs for
demolition.
Phase II cost stems from expansion of the Dissolved Air
Flotation unit's capacity. The DAF must dewater solids from the
lagoon which are then fed to the belt press. Engineering design
has been completed on modular DAFs which would be purchased for
$270,000 and replace the current DAF. These units will perform
as needed to meet regulatory requirements but at added
operating costs. The alternative plan is to retrofit the
current DAF inexpensively. Currently, temporary modifications
are being made to test the retrofit's ability to meet capacity
demands. This alternative also allows upgrades to the primary
sludge handling systems which will lower overall operating
costs. If the retrofit scenario succeeds, both phases of this
project can be completed for $600,000. If the modular units
must be installed, the project will cost $780,000.
Subsequent to the expenses incurred to complete the entire
Clear Water phases I & II project, a possibility exists of
spending an additional $75,000 to $205,000 for additional land
application acreage and/or a new over -the -road sludge spreading
truck. These expenses may occur due to doubling sludge
production. Efforts are being made to permit new arceage owned
by local farmers within a reasonable radius of the plant.
Failing to permit sufficient acreage will demand the additional
investment.
Economics and regulatory mandates demand the dewatering system
capacity be expanded early in 1995.

Economic Benefits:
Phase I:
........................
Immediate order of the sludge press will ensure delivery by
3/7/94. Failure to achieve project approval in a timely manner
will delay press delivery until late June costing the plant an
additional three months of high polymer usage and contract
hauling of sludge from #1 Lagoon.
Benefits: Avoidance of the following costs,
Added Polymer $195,000 (1995)
Contract Dewatering $ 50,000 (1995)
Total $245,000
Phase I & Phase II:
........................................................
Both phases of this project will cost 780,000 with modular DAFs
or $600,000 with DAF Retrofit.
Polymer cost will be reduced $635,000 per year from 1995
projection.
Contract hauling will be avoided $50,000 in 1995.
Land Application cost (Labor, fuel and maintenance to spread
additional sludge) will increase 42,000 per year with the
possibility of additional capital needed for farmland acreage
(75,000 max) and/or another over -the -road sludge vehicle
(130, 000) .

Detail Estimate: Phase I
1. One Andritz 2.0 meter SMX S14 Belt Filter Press $238,000
2. Rotary Thickener Upgrade $ 10,000
3. Pressurize main eff line (Pump/Controls,Pipe,Inst)$ 85,000
4.
Labor
$
28,000
S.
Sludge
Pad Expansion
$
18,000
6.
Upgrade
Polymer Pumps
$
10,000
7.
Misc(Sludge
Conveyor,diking,drains,RT to
press
chutes, electrical, concrete)
$
43,000
8.
Taxes &
Delivery
$
10,000
------------------------------------------------------------
Total
$437,000
Phase II - Retrofit
------------------------------------------------------------
1.
DAF Retrofit
$
40,000
2.
Primary Sludge Pump Replacement
$
43,000
3.
Plant Lift Station Muffin Monster
$
63,000
4.
Misc Labor
$
15,000
5.
Taxes & Delivery Charges
$
8,000
------------------------------------------------------------
Total
$163,000
Phase II - Modular DAF Purchase
------------------------------------------------------------
1. DAF Replacement
2. Controls & Piping changes
3. DAF supports
4. Misc Labor
5. Taxes & Delivery Charges
---------------------------------------------
Total
Totals Phase I & II
------------------------
Phase I $412,000
Phase I & II $780,000
Phase I & II $600,000
if DAF replaced
if DAF retrofitted
$290,000
$ 10,000
$ 20,000
$ 20,000
$ 8,000
$343,000

ABTco
Solids Minimization Plan
1. Implement Clear Water Dewatering Capacity Expansion.
2. Lower Lagoon MLSS from 10,000+ ppm to 5,000 ppm for ongoing operations. Improve biomass overall
health and settling rate. Lower solids loading on secondary clarifier and eliminate bulking conditions.
Discharge 80% or more of effluent through improved DAF unit with balance through secondary clarifier.
3. Complete by 5/1/95.

—' s}d:✓.fig
o D M
2U.THNER, INC.
January 11, 1995
ABT Co. Inc.
ABT Building Products Corporation .
Siding Division
P.O. Box 98
Hwy 268
Roaring River, NC 28669
Attention: Mr. Mike Blosser
Reference: 2.Om SMX®-S14 Belt Filter Press
Subject: Your Purchase Order RR 55881
Dear Mike:
Please find enclosed the acknowledgment of your order for the 2.Om SMX®-S14.
691-646
I want to take this opportunity to express our sincere thanks that you have selected our
equipment for your dewatering needs. We are extremely confident that you have purchased a
press that will not only provide you with the maximum performance available for your
secondary sludge, but will do so for many years of service.
Again, thank you and please don't hesitate in calling me if you ever need assistance.
Sincerely,
*egiionalilManager
on
7
JW:jrs
1010 Commercial Blvd. S., Arlington, TX 76017 [phone] FAX [phone]

AL3 I UU, INC. V
:.:": AND ABT Building Products CorporationAB"'I
/ PURCHASE ORDER
F,P TO, SIDING DIVISIONU. 5 p
P.O. Box 98 Highway 268 O
Roaring River, North Carolina 28669 This Number must appear on all Invoices,
FShipping Papers, Packages & Correspondence.
ANDRITZ RUTI NEP, INC � DATE OF ORDER 01/03/95
TO 1010 COMMERCIAL BLVtD SOUTH DATE REQUIRED
SUE](D03/07/95
liers CIIOiGe
ARLINGTON TX 76017
F.Q.B. Our Plant
TERMS: See Below
SALES TAX ❑ APPLICABLE ❑ FXFMPT SAI_FR TAX
ITEM NO.
QUANTITY
SPCCIFICATlOtdS .
CQDE,
PRICE:
1.
1 each
2.GH S(IX—S14 Belt Filter
:32335000.00
(Press as specified in your quo Le of 10/28/94
from 3ef f !di lkinson to Hike B.Iosser )
2.
1 each
i;otors & variah.le frequency drive controllers
497B8.00
as sper,ified on your 12/14/94 quote from Kyle
;Delon to Mlike 0losser
;•rs
I
ACKr
��, rr ��1� ; I
00Y'�%�Ic'�CI�II ,;II���� � cc��t�1 ��� � ��n �r= e I;�r.I I������r���! �
PLEASE FILL IN
oell"mcz IC Tine
WE AGREE TO SELL AND DELIVER THE SUPPLIES OR SERVICES SPECIFIED HEREIN
SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF.
SHIP O /� FROM OU AT�
S
PERION WH ONFIU T7S ORDER VENDOR'S ORDER NO. VENDOR'S GNATURE
°L O A)
DATE RETURNED
t��
COLUMN
NOT COMPLETED,
1010 Commercial Blvd. S., Arlington, TX 76017 [phone] FAX [phone]

To: Mike Blosser January 5, 1995
From: Erich Burke
Re: _ DAF Throughput
Mike -
With the modifications we made to the DAF, we are now able to feed the unit about 550
GPM and still keep a clean back end. We are doing this with a recycle rate of 250 GPM.
The blended sludge pump is maxed out and we build chest level. In addition, the polymer
feed pump to the DAF is wide open. Also, Jack stated that -the sludge lift pumps which
feed the DAF are also at maximum capacity at this flow rate. Jack had to close the bypass
valve in order to achieve this feed rate. This needs to be examined because we need to be
able to feed the DAF higher volumes up to the total flow of our discharge. Obviously we
cannot keep the material on the belt press at this time.
However, 550 GPM at 1% solids is 66,053 pounds in a 24 hour shift. If we could get this
material to the land application sites we would be in good shape on solids wasting.
We may need to reexamine the Calloway,trials scheduled for next week. If we are close to
- maximum on these various pumps, we will not be able to see much with the other
polymers. Lets discuss.
I have examined the liquid sludge application possibilities. I am having Eric contact Gurney
Mathis and I looked at the blended sludge chest. It would be possible to plumb the old
liquid sludge transfer pump to the dump valve on the bottom of the BS chest and use it to .
fill a liquid spreader parked behind the building. If we could do this, we would be at the
sludge wasting capacity we need.
I am meeting with Bo Carlton at 1 pm today to go over:
• Polymer Pumps
• Primary Pumps
• Blended Sludge Pumps
• Sludge Lift Pumps
• Booster Pumps
• Look at clarifier pumps
If there are other items I need to discuss with SPATCO, please let me know.
I am still pursuing the new recycle pumps!* system in order to eliminate the use of .
defoamer. This should have a dramatic impact on polymer usage in the building.

To: Mike Blosser
From: Erich Burke
Re: Polymer Pumps
Mike -
January 9, 1995
In order to upgrade our SDM pump to supply both presses, we will require a significantly
larger pump. This will require an increase in line sizes to feed this equipment as well as
new flow meters to. measure the polymer flow.. The existing one inch flow meters will not
work with the increased flows as the head losses become too great through a one inch tube
at the proposed flow rates.
We will need to consider budgeting for new polymer flow meters as part of this project.
tE

,i DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL, MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
December 21, 1994
MEMORANDUM
To: Jill Hickey
Assistant Attorney General
From: Coleen H. Sullins
Permits and Engineering Unit
Subject: NPDES Permit No. NC0005266
ABTco, Inc.
Petition No. 94 EHR 1599
In accordance with the Petition for Contested Case filed on the subject permit, attached
please find the following information:
• Copy of Permit issued 10/20/94.
• List of witnesses. .
• Issues of contention.
• Winston-Salem Regional Office comments.
The following items have been outlined by the petitioner as matters of concern:
Settleable Solids Monitoring. Settleable solids monitoring is being required pursuant to
15A NCAC 2B .0406(d). DEM staff have collected samples from the discharge and
have determined settleable solids values in excess of 500. Monitoring is
recommended to determine if the projected average solids concentration exceeds 5 mUl.
Solids Minimization Plan. Based on the data taken to date and biological monitoring
conducted at the site, settleable solids have the potential to cause a detrimental effect to
the receiving stream. The biological assessment conducted at the discharge site in June
1993 indicated an impact to the immediate downstream area of the discharge. The
Division has requested that ABTco submit a solids minimization plan to determine the
potential to adequately reduce the effluent solids level and thereby reduce the impact to
the receiving water. [Ref. 15A NCAC 2B .0203]
Turbidity Monitoring. The Division may implement a turbidity limit and monitoring
requirement pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0211(b)(1)(K). Results of the biological
assessment conducted in June 1993 indicated a visual turbidity difference between the
immediate upstream site of the discharge and the immediate downstream site.
Witnesses may include:
Steve Mauney, Water Quality Supervisor, Winston-Salem Regional Office
David Russell, Environmental Specialist, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Coleen Sullins, Supervisor, Permits and Engineering Unit
David Goodrich, Supervisor, NPDES Group
Susan Wilson, Environmental Engineer, NPDES Group

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 12, 1994
Lewfa
.fill's .
M E M O R
A N D U M
TO:
Coleen Sullins
Permits and Engineering
{=
THROUGH:
Steve Mauney
?r
Water Quality Supervisor, WSRO
z
D/-f-
n
FROM:
David Russell
1'
Environmental Specialist, WSRO
w 1 C
SUBJECT:
Draft Permit ABTco, Inc.
NPDES No. NC0005266
Wilkes County
As explained in the June 29, 1994, memo to Don Safrit from
Lee Spencer, WSRO, our office does not support the increase in
the allowable poundage limits for BOD and TSS in the draft
permit.
This offices does support the "Solids Minimization"
conditions in the draft permit. We fully expect the permit to be
reopened if a settleable solids value of 5 ml/l cannot be
consistently met in the future.
W-Cf a