NC0007820_SPECULATIVE LIMITS_19960304

NPDES DOCUNENT PCANNIN` COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0007820
Franklinville WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
Plan of Action
Instream Assessment (67B)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
March 4, 1996
-
"-

0
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr,, Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
March 4, 1996
The I lonorable Mac Whatley
Mayer, 'i'own of F'ranklinvilie
Post Office Box 277
Frankiinville, North Carolina 27248
Subject: Speculative Limits for Town of Franklinville, NCO007820
Randolph County Receiving Stream: Deep River
Subbasin: 03-06-09
Dear Mayor Whatley:
I am writing in response to the February 5, 1996 letter from Bill Lester, .1r., P.1 ., concerning the
proposed expansion from 0.030 mgd to 0.100 mgd for the Town of Franklinville wastewater treatment.
plant. Two possible discharge locations were outlined in this letter. After a telephone conversation with
Mr. Lester, it was determined that the second site, (labeled B on the request letter) wrls included due to
possible, grant money available for upgrades at that site. But, due to its proximity to a public park, it was -
doubtful Iltat sile B would be selected as an alternative discharge location. The speculative limits outlined
in this response were determined from the Cape Fcar River Bwa inwide Water Quality Managemem Flan, and
identical limits for both sites are recommended. Therefore, no distinction is made between these Iwo
possible discharge Iocations in this letter.
As outlined in the Cape Fear River 13asinwide Water Quality Managenlellt Plan, urban areas in this
watershed discharge either directly or indirectly to (tie Deep River, and their effluents may inakc up the
majority of the flow during low flow periods. 'therefore, new and expanding discharges :ire encouraged to
investigate regionalization for wastewater treatment. If discharge to a regional W WTP is not feasible, an
alternative analysis should be performed to evaluate till practicable alternatives to surface water discharge.
Where discharge is the most feasible -option, permit limits no less stringent than BOD5 = 15 mg/1 and
NI-13-N = 4 mg/l are recommended. The following limits reflect our current recontntenda6011S:
BOD5 (mg/1):
NI-11-N (ing/1):
Dissolved Oxygen (ing/i):
'I'SS (mgll):
Decal Coliftmn 01100m1):
p1-1 (SU):
Tom] Phosphorus (rrlg/l):
Total Nitrogen (ulb/l):
"total Residual Chlorine (4"/1):
Summer Winter
15
30
4
8
5
5
30
30
200
200
b-9
6-9
incinitor
wonitor
monitor
monitor
28
28
This speculative analysis does not include limits or monitoring requirements for metals or other toxics
due to (lie presence of industrial components rn the wastenow. if an NPI)ES permit is requested, a new
Mdtlati011 Of the eollStltUentS involved in this discharge would be necessary. At. present, our Prelreatlllent
Group indicates that there are no Significant Industrial Users (SIM discharging to Ibis t'lcility,
P.O. Sox 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative ;action Emptoyer 50% recyciecil 10% post -consumer paper

Town of Franklinville Speculativcs (,units
NC0007820 Randolph County
. Under current DEM procedure, dechlorination and chlorine limits are recommended for all new or
expanding dischargers proposing the use of chlorine for disinfection. An acceptable level of residual
chlorine in the proposed discharge is 28 µg/l for protection against acute toxicity. The process of
Chlorination / dechlorination or ultra violet radiation may allow the facility to comply with the total
residual chlorine limit.
Please be advised thatresponse to a speculative request does 1121 guarantee that the Division will issue
an Nl'DES permit to discharge treated wFtstewater. In accordance with the North Caro
iina General Statutes,
the practicable waste treatment and disposal altentative with the least adverse impact on the environment is
required to be implemented. Nondischarge alternatives, such as spray irrigation or connection to a regional
treatment and disposal system, are considered to be environmentally preferable to a discharge. Therefore,
prior to submittal of an NI'DIES application, a detailed alternatives analysis must be prepared to ttssurc that
the environmentally sound alternative was selected from the reasonable cost effective options, In order to
receive final permit limits, a formal application indicating the proposed WWTP design capacity anti a
justification for the facility will have to be submitted to the Division's Permits and Engineering Unit.
The final NPDES effluent limitations will be determined after a formal permit application has been
submitted to the Division of Environmental Management. If there are any additional questions concerning
(Iris matter, please feel free to contactd,,Lson-Doll at [phone]. extension 507 or toe.
ncerely,
Donald S t, P.E.
Assistant Watbr-Quatiod
Technical Support Branch
cc: Dave GoWrich, Pcnnils and Engineering
Steve Mauney, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Bobby Blows, COUSlrrrC6011 Grants
Bill Lester, Jr., P.1,
Centmi Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
March 1, 1996
W
v
Hon. Mac Whatley
Mayor, Town of Franklinville
Post Office Box 277
Franklinville, North Carolina 27248
A ffl�5VA
DEHNF1
Subject: Speculative Limits for Town of Franklinville, NCO007820
Randolph County Receiving Stream: Deep River
Subbasin: 03-06-09
Dear Mayor Whatley: I-
I am writing in response to the February.5, 1996 letter from Bill Lester, Jr., P.E. concerning the
proposed expansion from 0.030 mgd to 0.100 mgd for the Town of Franklinville wastewater treatment
plant. Two possible discharge locations were outlined in this letter. fter a tee hone conversation with
Mr. Lester, it was determined that the second site, (labeled B on ) was included due to
possible grant money available for upgrades at that site. But, due to its proximity to a public park, it was
doubtful that site B would be selected as an alternative discharge location. The speculative limits outlined
in this response were determined from the Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan, and
identical limits for both sites are recommended. Therefore, no distinction is,Wmade between these two
possible discharge locations in this letter.
As outlined in the Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan, urban areas in this
watershed discharge either directly or indirectly to the Deep River, and their effluents may make up the
majority of the flow during low flow periods. Therefore, new and expanding discharges are encouraged to
investigate regionalization for wastewater treatment. If discharge to a regional WWTP is not feasible, an
alternative analysis should be performed to evaluate all practicable alternatives to surface water discharge.
Where discharge is the most feasible option, permit limits no less stringent than BOD5 = 15 mgll and
N1-13-N = 4 mg/I are recommended. The following limits reflect our current recommendations:
Summer Winter
BOD5 (mg/1):
15
30
NH3-N (mg/1):
4
8
Dissolved Oxygen (mgll):
5
5
TSS (mg/1):
30
30
Fecal Coliform (#/100m1):
200
200
PH (SU):
6-9
6-9
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
monitor
monitor
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
monitor
monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (p.gll):
28
28
This speculative analysis does not include limits or monitoring requirements for metals or other toxics
due to the presence of industrial components in the wasteflow. If an NPDES permit is requested, a new
evaluation of the constituents involved in this discharge would be necessary. At present, our Pretreatment
Group indicates that there are no Significant Industrial Users (SIU) discharging to this facility.
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

off Hobbs, Upchurch & associates, P.Q.
Consulting Engineers
Lcf.., 290 S.W. Broad Street • Post Office Box 1737 • Southern Pines, NC 28388
February 5, 1996 If
IfEB 6 ion
Mr. Donald Safrit
N.C. Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
Division of Environmentai Tvtai,agen-ient
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
RE: Town of Franklinville
NPDES No. NCO007820
WWTP Speculative Limits
HUA No. FV9502-G
Dear Mr. Safrit:
Per my conversation with Ms. Ruth Swanek earlier today, I am enclosing a vicinity map noting
the existing and alternative locations of the Town's wastewater treatment facility. Both sites are
situated on the Deep River, and the proposed discharge capacity being reviewed is 100,000
gallons per day.
If possible, the Town prefers to make necessary modifications at the existing facility (Site "A")
to meet the proposed limits. It would be assumed that this would involve updating the current
facility from a lagoon stabilization,process to become an activated sludge facility as originally
operated. However, if this option proves to be financially unfeasible, the Town may pursue one
of several other alternatives, one of which is investigating the feasibility of installing a package
tm.itment plant at Site "13"'
Please advise regarding the speculative limits for both alternatives at your earliest convenience.
The Town is currently, planning for additional sewer customers to be added to the system as a
result of a CDBG grant and requests from developers in the area.
If you have any questions, please do not'hesitate to contact me. Your cooperation is greatly
appreciated.
Sincerely,
HOBBS,' UPCHURC ASSOCIATES, P.A.
Bill Lester, Jr., I'.E.
Southern Pines, NC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Winston-Salem, NC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Myrtle Beach, SC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]

J,
736
x 845
' fr 703
`
resuu; x631624
Al l /®� ✓' ^ .l''.. Yorks Field,,''
22
ul o I ,' •, i �2A91i
Frankiin"Ire
. •', `l - —, �--_ _`.�• vim- '-- ---- � a(- s Fria
22
'i •i3 ;r� \ lr' , /� l :F aIl n We,,
CIO
1 d r' r.r;`.. 1 �ir s� \ •\ -� • 1 '� rc ,'! - •tl .G
Iv/
:y� ��V// gal `j�. ;�� (• ':`:u
I I • � s r- . � �, �I/ u•; I ,._ `' � .` •�\�ewar�� � l Ir'_..? .
V Jet _ ��. - � t�rl •''/ i� /—"ri(599'1 r, � a � r � 1, ' � ,�
' �•ice 1���, y '�' ` J:�,�._i � 1 [:� J ---. i� .� •` ..
TD_1nc� of �RkMIC4.l.l,l V I_Ll�
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
_. '�/��.lD,ot.•P_H�GC.u►.!"i�/_y �� - , CONSULTING ENGINEERS
"�.�QI,�GS r . _ _ S E4 ,. L l �••t 1 T SOUTHERN PINES, NORTH CAROUNA 28387

Q i -JF VLO °yf
v
9
21 , S
o �
3 �
2 ,-✓
� v N'. (��y
r � ' l ' bfi� ,� w.�,[ K_ Mid. �►� 22 [ y�� /]
4-MM-L�24
r)
lAn p
29
Its
�� +f O� � ti , 7 � ' /1 Dwrp i► „' .w.,,,s i. �. R+n t � �� � - -- � ` � � _ -
11 417a 14 Q
o�\�`° � - ���V►�° rep{ �1 P �,S . 33
03 0b cm
5 p 5 10 statute Mile9
4�!
ORIGINAL

121
1 filth
It" 230
wwTp mar .
c1„� R.ndla,,.o \
WTP 1
RAN �K�--I QFRAN
KL1M
AAmbwo WWFP ■ . •
FA �� ll.9
t
era �
ASIGH ORO
darn
■ WWTP
• City or Town
Veep River
ROBBINS
y4.
FnnrP 6.4 Man rf Tl.-s•.,

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
Franklinville WWTP
NC0007820
100 % Domestic
Existing
Proposed Expansion
Deep River
C
03-06-09
Randolph
Winston - Salem
E20NW
Request #
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (m12):
Summer 7010 (cfs):
Winter 7010 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
02.1003,6940
1987
280
9
18
280
36
1.iOfa for_ ExpArOf04
Previously Randolph Mills WWTP, (textile mill) and when it closed, the Town of Franklinville bought the facility. There was no
flow monitoring device on the effluent and 0.010 mgd was decided upon as the discharge quantity.
1987: WLA recommended 30 / 30 limits. Facility consisted of pumping station, lined facultative lagoon, clarifier (that neither returned
sludge or skimmed surface flout or solids) and a chlorinated. Therefore, they probably could not meet better than Secondary
Limits.
1990: The facility must have installed a flow measuring device and it was determined that their actual discharge was more in the
range of 0.030 mgd. Numerous models and instream data for this area verified that the assimilative capacity was over
allocated. Advanced Tertiary limits were originally recommended, but those were later changed to 10 (20) mg/1 BOD5 and
2 (4) mg/l NH3-N. Neither of these recommendations made it into the permit for 0.030 mgd and it was re -issued for 30 / 30.
There was no actual increase in influent, ii was simply that the original 0.010 mgd was under estimated.
1996: Facility has requested expansion limits for 0.100 mgd. Staff Report details that actual plant capacity at this time is 0.600 mgd,
but needs extensive upgrading. The Speculative Limits request details two potential discharge locations; one at their existing
location and another upstream in the center of Franklinville. It is unknown why the second location, (in Franklinville) was
proposed as it would not affect the limits recommended in the Cape Fear basin plan.
Basin Plan Review
Urban areas in the peep River watershed includetKernersville, High Point, Randleman, Ramseur, Asheboro, and Sanford) Municipal
wastewater treatment plants in these cities discharge either directly or indirectly to the Deep River, and their effluents may make up the
majority of the flow during low flow periods. As a result, severe water quality problems have been observed throughout the upper
portion of the Deep River9Ythe river has been intensively sampled since 1983. Water quality has improved in this time period. These
improvements have beeirelated to upgrades at several wastewater treatment plants. Using benthos data, an upstream site on the
Deep River improved from Poor to Fair after the Jamestown WWTP ceased discharge in 1984. A site further downstream near the
Guilford/Randolph County line improved from Poor in 1983 to Fair in 1984-1986. This site showed some further improvement in 1987-
1990, but achieved a Good -Fair rating only in July 1988. Copper concentrations at this site are still sometimes above NC Action Levels.
The Randleman WWTP is permitted to discharge 1.75 MGD directly to the Deep River. A Deep River site at Randleman improved from
Poor in 1985 to Fair in 1986-1988, and to Good -Fair in 1993.
Section 4.3.2 (p. 4 - 22)
Due to the predominance of wastewater in this system during low flow conditions it is recommended that all new and expanding major
facilities in the Deep River basin between High Point Reservoir and Carbonton dam be issued advanced teritary limits (BOD5 = 5 mg/l
and NH3-N = 2 mg/1).4For new and expanding discharges between High Point Lake and Carbonton dam with flows less than 1 MGD,
regionalization of wastewater treatment is encouraged. If discharge to a regional WWTP is not feasible, an alternative analysis should
be performed to evaluate all practicable alternatives to surface water discharge. Where discharge is the most feasible option, permit
limits no less stringent than BOD5 = 15 mg/I and NH3-N = 4 mg/l are recommended./Additionally, because DO violations in the Deep
River are strongly linked to algae growth, nutrient limits will be recommended in this section. This is discussed in Section 6.4
Management Strategies for Nutrients. — peQ- is,,) Dort; 5 cn#19-- 41ssolveS, 0_, - IV--016A-
Section 6.3.6 (pp. 6 - 35 and 6 - 36)
...At the Ramseur ambient station both point and nonpoint sources contribute to high nutrients, while at the Moncure station, in the
lowest reaches of the Deep River, most of the nutrient load is delivered at high flows. Field observations suggest this is caused by both
nonpoint source pollution and the resuspension and washout of stored sediments from impoundments...
Three factors, stream velocity, point source nutrient loading, and nonpoint source loadings, are predicted to play a significant role in the
control of eutrophication and DO standards violations in the Deep River. A three -tiered management strategy is recommended.
1.) Maintenance of Stream Velocity
2.) Point Source Nutrient Control
...It is also recommended that all other new and expanding major discharges (flow >= 1 MGD) receive a TP limit of 1 mg/l,
while discharges with a discharge less than 1.0 MGD and greater than or equal to 0.5 MGD receive effluent TP limits of 2 mg/l.
3.) Nonpoint Source Nutrient Control
Section 6.4.3 (pp. 6 - 44 through 6 - 46)