NC0005177_STAFF COMMENTS_19880307

March 7, 1988
To: Arthur Moubeiry
From: Steve Tedder
Subject: Lithium Corporation's request to change certain requirements of NPDES permit
NPDES permit No. NCO005177
Gaston County
Myself and members of my staff have reviewed Lithium Corporation's request to the
Division to change certain provisions of their NPDES permit NC0005177 which was
issued on February 4, 1988. To the facility's five comments, Technical Services confirms
the following:
Y, 1. Grab Sampling vs Composite Sampling-
We agree that grab samples of the effluent from the 100 million gallon wastewater
treatment pond may be representative of the effluent discharge and that grab
samples may be used instead of composited samples. The permit should be
changed to reflect this allowance.
2. Final Effluent Sampling Point-
The unnamed tributary to Abernathy Creek which receives effluent discharge from
Lithco is classified as waters of the State and is not designated as an effluent
channel. The discharge sampling point specified in the facility's permit will remain
unchanged.
3. Upstream/Downstream Sampling and Effluent Monitoring for Copper, Beryllium,
-- - - -- - --Phosphorus;and-Total:Nitrogen ----
Upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for copper can be dropped.
Monthly riionitoring of the effluent for copper however must be can
-- -
- - - permit. The effluent mionitoring requirement specified for beryllium can be dropped
but-the qu'arterly effluent monitoring requirements specified for total phosphorus
. and total nitrogen must remain unchanged per._15 NCAC 2B. 0500.
4. Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement-
The conditions'`of the whole effluent toxicity testing requirement will remain
unchanged in the facility's NPDES permit. The chronic toxicity permit condition
requires monthly monitoring and testing of 83% effluent beginning on the effective
date.of the permit and lasting until February 28, 1989. Beginning on March 1,1989
:..... .." and lasting until permit expiration, the facility is_required to conduct chronic toxicity
- testing with-.a-specification of ho observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality ui.83�10 effluent'conceritratiori. It is not agreed'to defer the 83%effluent
` passJfail�liihitation-until.permii.cipiratior .'The Division commends Lithco's
initiatioii.:of toxicity reduction efforts and encourages the facility's intention to
submit.periodic progress reports. Cooperative and industrious efforts will surely
be reflected iri the facility's:compliance history.:.:

5. Clarification of Effluent Toxicity Monitoring Frequencies
The facility is correct that the initial (lasting until 2/28/89)chronic toxicity
monitoring frequency is specified as quarterly on the permit limits page and as
monthly in the corresponding toxicity test Condition G. The monthly toxicity
monitoring frequency stated in Condition G. is correct and the final limits page
regarding the initial monitoring frequency must be changed to specify monthly
monitoring.
cc: Trevor Clements

Lithium Corporation.&America;,=: ✓ r _ -
07"
LITHC
A subsidiary of FMC Corporation
13ax 735 fi+ghwa !Fi�_ pECEI `
x ;cnv tVC 2rYio,e �1 v '11
AR n ,`
February 29, 1988 1988
TECHNICAL 5BRVICE :..c
S BRANCH
Mr. Arthur. Mouberry - a_
Permits and Engineers 'Branch-
Division of Environmental Management
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611-7687 � .
Dear Mr. Mouberry:
Please refer .to our .NPDES- Wasteivater -Discharge Permit No. NC0005177, which was
modif' r 4.. 19 8: -We take exception to certain provisions of the
permit and ask that you make the following changes.
1. Grab -Sampling vs_ Composite Sampling
We' request a wavier to-allow us to take grab sainples instead of composite
O� samples for the effluent from the wastewater treatment pond. This is a -
100 million gallon pond which itself serves as a large compositing systeo.
Data oaken overmany years shows that day-to-day variations' in the
concentration -of .the dissolved materials in this pond are small . We made
this request° after'you issued- the earlier-permit on August 19, 1986 and
you granted our request... -We again make this request.
2.._- S_ampling,._Point fo.r-Strgam impact
The .sampl i rig_.po.i nt for---,stream impact has ;been the point of entry of the
IS
unnamed tributary into` Abernathy Creek in all of the earlier permits
l written. for-_thi.s. .system.:-� We_ reque' st thi s .poi nt for stream impact be
., urrtrange d- The`-trrrrrai =ti- a r i s e s s e n ti a]1 a -con v
d�tc�i�.Abernathy: reek..pro_vi,des a-.more -reasonable mixing zone-than does the
unnamed- .tributary ; Recent acute LC O data -taken upstream and downstream
on',Abernathy Creek :showed no `differ nces in the toxicity of the samples.
x Both showed LC` '`_val.ues:greater,than .90b. We ask that the .stream loading
iu :for aquatic Coxcity be;.ha`sed on Abernathy Creek, as the, receiving stream. -
z. 3 .,Anal Determiriati:oris : -h
t' The` ermit calls, .f�r__a._I" e-:number of. anal tical det p g. y enni nat-eons. Many of
these are..expensive. .We particularly object to the .large number of
(� upstream.and. downstream: sarrtp7 es. This Bain 1 i n i s es eci al 1 unwarr d
r to ar to
be afh _ ,reek ause=the=sir arheii- _. - - ---
r` water-from--our--system=o tfa 1: ' We ask -that-the-upstream-and downstream- - -
- _-- —--- - h - - -------- ---- —�— --
--= = ng regis. .emen:t-bQ:::oroped._ -_
--_ -- - - =---..�.��
i ?. 1 1 is, W .L Ar .S+ •'.'-� L y '' -t 1 .1s l ie -
_ .. .... i:::^-S ^aim_��..:-•.1.�i. :f. FS.. .., a.�. ivi."..+.a_.-i ia. =.-o.sf� '+u.i.rt..........

i_ilhium COrix)ration c>i Ari-x,f is
Our 1987 testing hi story .for beryllium and-Copper showed these elements to
be low. Our effluent copper concentrations exceeded the 15.0 g/1 stream
standard only in February and March when the effluent copper values were
20P6g/l and 30Ag/1 .. The beryllium level exceeded the stream standard of
11.k9/1 only in January' when the value was 5O.Ag/l . We believe this was
due to poor analytical work. This analytical detection limit for"
beryllium was lowered in February to 10,ii.g/l as the analytical method was
improved and all subsequent results showed the effluent to have less than
the 10wg/1 Be detection_ limit. In addition our past analytical results
also show the phosphrous .and total nitrogen levels to be low and there are
no .stream 'standard for:.these elements. We therefore request that the
monitoring requirements for copper, beryllium; phosphrous and total
nitrogen be dropped. We also ask that the permit wording be modified to
allow your department to grant additional analytical requirement waviers
if the discharge history shows this to be justified.
4. Bioassay Compliance
: We strongly object to the chronic bioassay compliance by March 1 , 1989.
very active -Prograih' underway to identify and to eliminate
components that are toxic to the Ceriodaphnia. On February 4 we sent to
your'department a progress' report that in u ed a two year program to
ideh'tify and reduce aquatic toxicity. This contained specific projects
for 'execution during this period. , We are making significant progress in
this .area and we ask- for' more time to complete tale process changes that
will be required.'to eliminate- the -'eriodaphnia toxicity.
..The volume o,f-_water in 'our 'Wastewater treatment pond is estimated to be
_ =:aPp_roximatelyA.00 mi_l.l-ion ;gallons..., Our permitted dischar.ge_r.ate..i.s. 0..5.__...._.,.
- �:1 l:ivn gall-ons per-day_.`-: - does not -travel by- plug flow through the
-pond..,and'-we. expect"•that i.t will. take perhaps 18 -months to effectively .._
";:sweep .,the water out .of..:the`iake.after the toxic substances are identified
and eliminated from :the process stream.
We. ask: that Ghat.-.the. compliance •requ,ire_ment-with the passed/fail
i;erioda 11nia test -be deferred at least until August 31,..1991-, when the
ed to expire. . .I n .return ;we wi 11 agree to submit!.
i r periodic progress�^eports,.to ,your-.department.

Lithtirn Cor1xration Jl / )nricyi''-
5. Fre uenc :.Re§ uirement for Initial Phase Bioassa s
Please refer to the' first M73 a e. that sti ul ates- moni tori n requirements
between noiv and February' 28,.1989. The stipulation on 'page M-3 _;is, :that
chronic toxicity_'bioassay-are to be conducted guarterl . The footnote
refers to Part III Item G which' ca 1 " bfoassa.y testing.
ar ca ion s needed. n ess instructe o erw se, we will assume that
the bioassays are to be done quarterly.
Your consideration 6f these requests will be appreciated. Please contact
me or. Mr. Art Gillespie our. Environmental' Manager, if you have questions.
Sincerely yours,
E. W. Wayland
Plant Manager
cc: A. S. Gillespie
M. W. Stark
— R.-. Paul Wilms-Raleigh: ,:._._...-
Rona l d''McMi l l-an4looresv.i lie
G. E. 'Foltz
f.f1•. .x '.�. a � f.- r � � it <L � ..3 _ ._..'• _ ..5... .. . .. ...