NC0024112_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2016

Mickey, Mike
From: Basinger, Corey
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 2:07 PM
To: Beck, Allen
Cc: Knight, Sherri; Hudson, Gary, Mickey, Mike
Subject: RE: Thomasville November 2015 Compliance Issue
Allen,
Thank you for the update.
I will forward your email to Gary Hudson of the Winston-Salem staff. He will schedule a Technical Assistance visit at his
first opportunity.
I am also copying Sherri Knight on this email chain. Sherri will be the new Regional Supervisor effective Dec 11t as I am
departing to manage the Mooresville Regional Office at the end of this month.
Your efforts to minimize adverse impacts is most appreciated.
Thanks,
Corey
Gary,
Please contact Allen Beck to schedule a TA visit.
Thanks,
CB
Mike,
This email will be useful as you evaluate the DMR for November.
Thanks,
CB
W. Corey Basinger
Regional Supervisor
Division of Water Resources
Department of Environmental Quality
336-776-9688 office
[e-mail]
Winston-Salem Regional Office
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
KC.
�- 'Nothing Compares.,—,
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Beck, Allen [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 2:01 PM
To: Basinger, Corey <[e-mail]>
Cc: Craver, Kelly < Kelly. Crave [e-mail]>; Huffman, Morgan <Morgan.Huffman @thomasville-nc.gov>
Subject: Thomasville November 2015 Compliance Issue
Cory,
On Nov. 2nd and 3,d and then again on Nov. 9th and loth prolonged moderate to heavy rain in excess of
1.75" on saturated ground caused abnormally high flows that exceeded the design treatment capabilities
of this plant for an extended period of time. Due to the high flows recorded (see attachments) for these
events total daily effluent suspended solids were 795 and 580 while the BOD was 87.5 and 144
respectively. These reported values will make us non -compliant for both the first two weeks as well as the
month of November.
In an effort to contain solids within the plant, mixers in the second stage anoxic zone were turned off when
secondary sludge blankets reached six feet with a six MGD flow in order to settle and hold solids there
prior to discharge to the secondary clarifiers and the alum feed system was modified to feed a floc polymer
to clarifier influent to help MLSS settleability there but these efforts and the polymers affect were marginal
at best under the conditions we were experiencing. I would also like to request a visit from you or someone
within the Technical Assistance area to assess our efforts as I welcome any and all suggestions that might
help us better manage the situations we have been experiencing.
Thanks,
Allen
Peek
Zt't�F�t�y �ea.�rd Stet
74wau&1? 27360
Pow [phone]

4
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
September 4, 2015
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Donald R, van der Vaart
Secretary
A Compliance Evaluation Inspection was performed at the City of Thomasville's Hamby Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on August 18, 2015 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional Office.
Allen Beck and Misty Conder were present for the inspection. The inspection consisted of an on -site
inspection of the treatment facility and a review of related files.
There were several BOD and TSS NPDES limits violations in March 2015, which were addressed through
the Division's regular monthly enforcement program.
Overall, the WWTP appears to be very well operated and maintained. Please refer to the enclosed
inspection report for more detail. If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
if r W. Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NC DENR
attachment
cc: Mr. Allen Beck (same address)
DWR Central Files
WSRO SWP Files
450 W Hanes Mill Rd., Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer— Made in part by recycled paper

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN I 2 15 1 3 I NCO024112 111 12 15/08/18 17 18 L C J 19 L G j 201
2111111111111111111IIIIIII1IIIIII IIIIIIIIIII r6
Inspection
Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA -------------------- Reserved ------- ------ ---
67
70 71 I„ JI 72 L ti j 73 1 I I 174 75I I I I I I I I80
LJ LJ I I
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:OOAM 15/08l18
14/10/01
Hamby Creek WWTP
110 Optimist Park Rd
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Thomasville NC 27360
11:30AM 15/08/18
19/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Allen R Beck/ORC/336-475-4246/
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Kelly Craver,PO Box 368 Thomasville NC 273610368/Assistant City
Manager/336-475-4220/3364754283 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenanc6 Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program N Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Jenif arter 7 WSRO WQ//336-776-9691/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
31 N00024112 I11 121 15/08/18 117 18 I c I
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page#

I
Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WVVTP
Inspection Date: 08/18/2015 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit
Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new
M
❑
❑
❑
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
❑
0
❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: There are only 2 clarifiers. There are not three fine bubble aeration basis, rather two
re -aeration tanks that are considered the 5th stage of the Bardenphro process. There are 4
sludge holding tanks, and a belt press.
Record Keeping
Yes No NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
❑
❑
❑
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported CM
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
M
❑
❑
❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
❑
❑
❑
0
(If the facility is = or> 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator
0
❑
❑
❑
on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
Page# 3

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/18/2015 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Influent Sampling
Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
0
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
0
❑
❑
❑
representative)?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
M
❑
❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
❑
❑
N
❑
Comment:
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? N ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
Page# 4

11
Permit: NCO024112
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/18/2015
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens
Yes No NA NE
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Grit Removal
Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches
Yes No NA NE
Are the aerators operational?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
M
❑
❑
❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are setteeometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
❑
❑
0
❑
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Nutrient Removal
Yes No NA NE
# Is total nitrogen removal required?
❑ N
❑
❑
# Is total phosphorous removal required?
M ❑
❑
❑
Type
Biological
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
❑ 0
❑
❑
Page# 5

r
Permit: NC0024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/18/2015 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Nutrient Removal Yes No NA NE
Is nutrient removal process operating properly? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are pumps operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier
Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are weirs level?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of weir blockage?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is scum removal adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the drive unit operational?
❑
❑
❑
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
❑
❑
❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/4 of the sidewall depth)
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Yes No NA NE
Type of operation:
Cross flow
Is the filter media present?
M ❑
❑
❑
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
M ❑
❑
❑
Is the filter free of growth?
N ❑
❑
❑
Is the air scour operational?
❑ ❑
0
❑
Is the scouring acceptable?
❑ ❑
N
❑
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
0 ❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Page# 6

I
Permit: NC0024112
Inspection Date: 08/18/2015
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWrP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Disinfection - UV
Yes No NA NE
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are UV bulbs clean?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is UV intensity adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is there a backup system on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Solids Handling Equipment
Yes No NA NE
Is the equipment operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
❑
❑
0
❑
Is storage adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
M
❑
❑
❑
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Pipe
Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
❑ 0
❑
❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
❑ ❑
❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
❑ ❑
0
❑
Comment: There is an easement in place for access to the effluent discharge pipe, but it has not been
maintained. The City says it is cost prohibitive at this point to regain/maintain access. There
is alternative access that can be and has been obtained via other adjacent
properties
without easements.
Page# 7

CITY OF THOMASVILLE
North Carolina
PUBLIC SERVICES
Mr. W. Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
DWR, NCDENR
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
25 June 2015
RE: Permit No. NCO024112
Notice of Violation
NOV-2015-LM-0034
Notice of Recommendation for c-nforcement Lettr r Resporrst
INCORPORATED T
Dear Mr. Basinger,
In resoonse to the letter of Recommendation for Enforcement of 10 June 2015 the City of
Thomasville asks that the foliowing be taken into consideration:
Regandi^g the rc,iJorted DMR results and violations i:hat to•:: I: place in March 2015, on Thursday
March 5, 2015 steady moderate and focally heavv rains in e\'.cess o' cne inch for the day along with snow
melt on saturated g ouod created inflow cootributions to influent ir.i,:h e;cceeded the designed
treatment capacity of the 6 N,1GD wastewater plant. Sceady flow in ;;xcess of 6 MC:D for an extended
period of time with a pe3K flow of 14.03 MGD (see attached flow p� int out) caused secondary clarifier
blankets to rise quickly and overflow the weirs. Efforts to mitigate solids washout were attempted by
the operator on duty; however, due to plant design the most e;ffecflve method of containing the MLSS
was to cut off the second srage anoxic mixers, but due to the abno, really high influent flow this was only
marginally successful. ?eni (ar Carter of NCDENR W-S Regional G it e was notified of the situation and
staff's response thereto both by phone and email on tnt day of the event and the morning following. It
is noteworthy that the reported results for that single flay event �jvere the sole contributor to both the
weekly and inonthiy per -Flit non -compliant_.
'i ne WWTP Staff wou :' ,ve;some a visit to assess the
appropriateness of the action taken in response to this event ano r,.; .?e if they have any additional
suggestions to Sad to our r4:spouse should such a high flow siWat*r` OCCUr again. Thii is the first
violation of permit limits that has occurred hi sever ai years and t'r e City and :staff greatly wish to
mitigate any surch violation from occurring again. We request fliat the action taken by staff to mitigate
the event, the fact that a single day event was the catisative factor for both the weekly and monthly
permit violations ana the request fora Technical Assistance, vise, AE,ined herein be taken into account
with any Recommendation for Enforcernemr actin o, conSi&_ red.
Sincerely,
CC: Kelly Craver
li,tu:u, 1 aiiilat<< i
RECEIVED
*:er V e�* 3.).0 c.t ,)r N.C. Dept of ENR
JUN 2 9 2015
33 a--F ;5-4220
WINSTON-SALEM
REGIONAL OFFICE
City Hall • 10 Salem Street • P.O. Box 368 • Thomasville, N.C. 27361-0368
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]

3SO10

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Govemor
June 19, 2015
CERTIFIED MAIL #7011 1570 0001 8546 0602
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361-0368
Subject: Notice of Violation and Recommendation for Enforcement
NOV-2015-LM-0034
Permit No. NCO024112
Hamby Creek WWTP
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
A review of Hamby Creek WWTP's monitoring report for March 2015 showed the following violations:
Parameter
Date
Limit Value
Reported Value
Limit Type
BOD, 5-Day
3/7/2015
9.000 mg/I
117.680 mg/I
Weekly Average Exceeded
Solids, Total Suspended
3/7/2015
45.000 mg/I
717.830 mg/I
Weekly Average Exceeded
BOD, 5-Day
3/31/2015
6.000 mg/I
31.250 mg/I
Monthly Average Exceeded
Solids, Total Suspended
3/31/2015
30.000 mg/I
180.310 mg/I
Monthly Average Exceeded
Parameter
Date
Measuring Frequency
Violation
Phosphorus, Total (as P)
3/21/2015
1 Weekly
1
A Notice of Violation/Notice of Recommendation for Enforcement (NOV/NRE) is being issued for the noted
violation of North Carolina General Statute (G.S.) 143-215.1 and NPDES Permit No. NC0024112. Pursuant to
G.S. 143-215.6A, a civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) may be assessed
against any person who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms, conditions, or requirements of any
permit issued pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1. If you wish to provide additional information regarding the noted
violation, request technical assistance, or discuss overall compliance please respond in writing within ten (10)
business days after receipt of this Notice. A review of your response will be considered along with any
information provided on the March 2015 Discharge Monitoring Report. You will then be notified of any civil
penalties that may be assessed regarding the violations. If no response is received in this Office within the
10-day period, a civil penalty assessment may be prepared.
Remedial actions, if not already implemented, should be taken to correct any problems. The Division of Water
Resources may pursue enforcement actions for this and any additional violations. If the violations are of a
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300; Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov SV(
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

continuing nature, not related to operation and/or maintenance problems, and you anticipate remedial
construction activities, then you may wish to consider applying for a Special Order by Consent.
If you have questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Jenifer Carter or me at (336)
776-9800.
Sincerely,
T W. Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, DENR
CC' Compliance & Expedited Permitting Unit
DWR — Central Files
WSRO Files

/� �erers 9�Gl11CW I��ii�f(� /V!/(� —�v�v �•�� — civ�+ i
Facility /Stlle gr�k1 �% Permit No.: L66(x -0 d— Pipe No.. d Month
lYear
Monthly Average Violations
Parameter Permit Limit DMR Value % Over Limit Action
Weekly/Daily Violations
Dat Parameter Permit Limit Limit Type DMR Value % Over Limit Action
(t F6 S
Monitoring Frequency Violations
Date Parameter
Permit Frequency
Values Reported
# of Violations Action
►they Violations/Staff Remarks:
fC�eM��
Supervisor Remarks: N LIT, , -
,�r /UoVs
Completed by: J �Q V-- Date: Allls—
Assistant Regional
Supervisor Sign Off: Date:
Regional Supervisor Sign � �'_
Off: Date: i ��

NPDES Pennit No. NC0024112 DISCHARGE NO. 001
MONTH March
YEAR
2015 a EFFLUENT
FACILITY NAME: City of Thomasville, Hamby Creek W WTP CLASS
IV COUNTY
Davidson
�,
N,
CERTIFIED LABORATORY (1) Thomasville, Hamb Creek W WTP Laborsto
CERTIFICATION NO.
92
a/page 2 ,Meek
(list additional laboratories on the backs'tbnn)
YY 2�15
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Allen R. Beck
GRADE IV
CERTIFICATION NO.
Q539 NO FLOW / DISCHARGE FROM SITE
PERSON(S) COLLECTING SAMPLES Laboratory and Operations Staff
ORC PHONE [phone]
/�
"gHECK,OX IF ORC HAS CHANGED
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY I ATTN: CENTRAL FILES, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27699-1617
Signature of ORC �f�� ✓��.� Date y 2?, / j
By this signature, I certify that'this report is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.
50050
00010
00400
50060
00310
00610
00530
31616
00300
00095
00600
00665
THP3B
01027
01034
01042
00720
01051
01067
71900
01147
01077
01092
1105
01097
01002
01002
❑
¢g
°U
p
y
e�
°o
o
u
a
O
FLOW
��
"1�
� .�.1
w w
h U
a
OUV
o
c
N
❑
O
m
¢ z
z�
o
�
¢ z
❑
Z
w
ti
Nw
Q7o
l-' v�
O c 7i
F 0L
0 i
o
-'
V
w
w
❑
�z
o0
yj }
X
❑ O
5
o
z
O
U
CwC77
O
F
z
F
O
F
a
x
.aa
F O
O 'S
[- C,
❑
v
�
�¢
zy
O 0
U m
i
O
c<
[�-
O
F.
O
x
a
(¢+
O
n
w
0
°U
F
O
p
z
¢
c',
a
F
O
❑
[�+
O
w
v
z
[�-
O
U
�
a
F
O
5
z
a
(
O
1
R
F
O
`
z
N
F
z
¢
a
F
O
zO
F
a
O
u
z
w
F
O
z
c
a�
F 0
O O
EFF ❑
disinfecti
INF ❑O
a w
¢z
ca
aO
ti
U
rµ{a1�
"1 (-
¢
❑
HRS
HRS
Y/B
MGD
°C
UNITS
UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
/100
MG/L
os/c
MG/L
MG/L
Pass/Fail
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
1
7:00
24
N
3.84
2
7:00
24
Y
4.01
11.8
6.5
26.1
<0.1
92.0
>1200
9.7
370
1.24
3
7:00
24
Y
3.42
11.5
6.5
55.0
0,411
190
2
10.5
371
4
7:00
24
Y
3.50
13.1
6.5
<2
0.833
<5
1
10.0
396
5
7:00
24
Y
5.93
12.1
6.5
<2
0.806
<5
10
8.9
399
6
7:00
24
Y
4.74
11.2
6.6
616
2.85
4000
4
10.1
309
13.1
5.08
1
1080
7
7:00
24
N
3.57
9.01
25.0
8
7:00
24
N
3.10
5.19
9.50
9
7:00
24
Y
3.21
12.4
6.6
2.25
0.163
<5
<1
10.2
366
10
7:00
24
Y
3.00
12.8
6.5
2.24
0.214
<5
1
10.1
407
11
7:00
24
Y
2.88
13.6
6.4
2.27
3.89
<5
2
9.5
464
1.03
12
7:00
24
Y
2.82
12.8
6.4
2.73
1.46
5.56
<1
9.7
518
13
7:00
24
Y
2.71
13.6
6.8
<2
1.92
<5
1
9.3
507
14
7:00
24
N
3.35
1.2
15
7:00
24
N
3.02
1.94
16
7:00
24
Y
2.90
14.2
6.6
3.23
3.93
<5
<1
9.3
445
17
7:00
24
Y
2.81
14.6
6.6
2.79
1.78
5.40
3
9.6
484
18
7:00
24
Y
2.74
15.0
6.8
2.34
1.9
<5
<I
9.5
484
19
7:00
24
Y
3.49
14.0
6.7
2.56
3.45
<5
<I
9.8
494
20
7:00
24
Y
4.28
14.1
6.5
2.10
1.67
<5
2
9.0
433
21
7:00
24
N
3.33
22
7:00
24
N
3.13
23
7:00
24
Y
3.08
15.1
6.6
2.98
1.02
<5
1
9.1
409
24
7:00
24
Y
2.89
15.2
6.6
2.76
2.63
<5
<I
9.6
443
5.19
0.128
Pass
<0.15
3
8
<5
<0.5
5.5
<0.2
<2
<0.5
22
<0.5
Q
25
7:00
24
Y
2.83
15.2
6.7
4.11
1.73
<5
<1
9.5
447
26
7:00
24
Y
2.98
15.8
6.6
2.11
1.65
<5
<I
1 9.5
461
27
7:00
24
Y
3.23
15.8
6.4
<2
2.77
<5
<I
8.9
467
28
7:00
24
N
2.81
29
7:00
24
N
2.66
30
7:00
24
Y
2.81
14.6
6.7
2.06
1.73
<5
<1
9.3
489
31
7:00
24
Y
2.74
15.5
6.6
2.18
2.39
<5
<I
9.3
473
ass
<
<.
<. r
<
<,
<,
<
MAXIMUM
5.93
15.8
6.8
616
3.93
4000
10
1 10.5
518
33.1
5.08
<0.15
3
]080
<5
<0.5
5.5
<0.2
<2
<0.5
22
<0.5
<L
MINIMUM
2.66
11.2
6.4
Q
<0.1
<5
<1
8.9
309
5.19
0.128
<0.15
3
8
<5
<0.5
5.5
<0.2
<2
<0.5
22 1
1
<0.5
I <2
Comp. (C) /Grab (G)
G
G
C
C
C
G
G
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
C
C
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Monthly Limit
6.0 - 9.0
1 4s 6w
is 3w
30mgA
200
1 >6.0
pas 90% 52.3
mo /wk
26 wk
92.1 wk
13 mo
.2mo/wk
Weekly Limit
I I
I 6s 9w
3s 9w
45 m
400
>6.0
1
1
1022 day
34 day
261 day
13 day 156
day
QA
WAY - b 2015
w
DWQ Form MR-1 (11104)

Facility Status: (Please check one of the following)
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies meet permit requirements
(including weekly averages, if applicable)
Compliant
All monitoring data and sampling frequencies do NOT meet permit requirements ❑X
Noncompliant
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
permittee becomes aware of the circumstances.
If the facility is noncompliant, please attach a list of corrective actions being taken and a time -table for
improvements to be made as required by Part II.E.6 of the NPDES permit.
"1 certity, under penalty of law, that tins 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 managed 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. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fines
and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Allen R. Beck
Permittee (Please print or type)
Signature of Permittee*** Date
(Required unless submitted electronically)
PO Box 368, Thomasville, NC 27361 336-475-4222 4/30/2014
Permittee Address Phone Number e-mail address Permit Expiration Date
ADDITIONAL CERTIFIED LABORATORIES
Certified Laboratory (2) Meritech, Inc. Certification No. 165
Certified Laboratory (3) Certification No.
Certified Laboratory (4)
Certification No.
Certified Laboratory (5) Certification No.
PARAMETER CODES
Parameter Code assistance may be obtained by calling the NPDES Unit at [phone] or by visiting the Surface
Water Protection Section's web site at h2o.enr.state.nc.us/was and linking to the unit's information pages.
Use only units of measurement designated in the reporting facility's NPDES permit for reporting data.
* No Flow/Discharge From Site: Check this box if no discharge occurs and, as a result, there are no data to be
entered for all of the parameters on the DMR for the entire monitoring period.
** ORC On Site?: ORC must visit facility and document visitation of facility as required per 15A NCAC 8G .0204.
*** Signature of Permittee: If signed by other than the permittee, then the delegation of the signatory authority must be on
file with the state per 15A NCAC 2B .0506(b)(2)(D).
Paget

NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
FACILITY NAME: City of Thomasville, Hamby Creek WWTP
Non Compliance Issues:
MONTH March
COUNTY Davidson
YEAR 2015
Impact: Corrective Action or Comments:
1
BOD - Avg and first weekly limits were exceeded.
Significant
Violations were attributed to MLSS wash out from the secondary clarifiers
TSS - avg and first weekly limit are exceeded.
caused by snow melt and moderate to heavy rains on saturated ground
BOD - avg = 31.6 mg/L, week 1 = 118 mg/L
which caused abnormally high flows that exceeded the plants designed
TSS - avg = 182 mg/L, week 1 = 1077 mg/L
treatment capacity for an extended period of time. Efforts to mitigate solids
wash out by cutting off anoxic mixers and allowing solids to settle in the
oxidation ditch we only partly successful due to turbulence caused by the
high flows. The WS regional office was notified while the event was in
progress and downstream sampling showed little to no environmental impact.
2
Phosphorus was not collected and analyzed for the third week
Significant
The technician responsible for these missed analyses has been disciplined
of the month. An LTM phosphorus was also not analyzed for
and testing checks and balances are being reviewed to determine if
the Oxidation Mixed Liquor LTM sampling.
improvements can be made. The missed samples were reported to
WSRO when discovered and additional samples are being pulled as
makeup samples.
uata utuauricatwns:
Impact ratings: None - No affect on compliance or data quality
coae: impact: corrective Action or comments:
Slight - No affect on compliance, QC controls exceed acceptance limits but don't affect validity of results
(QC control should be noted as blank, duplicate RPD, or SSCV recovery.)
High - Reported value doesn't affect compliance, however QC controls exceed acceptance limits or other factor may affect validity.
Test cannot be repeated to verify validity of reported value.
(QC control should be noted as blank, seeded blank acceptance failure, SCF failure, or other. Other may include known operator error.)
Significant - Affects compliance, specify known problem.
Page 2A

Influent
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112 DISCHARGE NO.
FACILITY NAME: City of Thomasville, Hamby Creek W WTP
001 MONTH March
COUNTY Davidson
YEAR 2015
00010
00400
00310
00610
00530
00665
00600
01027
01034
01042
00720
01051
01067
71900
01147
01077
01092
1105
01097
01002
01002
p
o
N
F-
F
r
0
U
a
F
a
0
w LW
F U
oN
O
[C
d z
F
Q z
O
w
, W
Q p
O
F
O
Q n
O S
F a
w
z
Q
O
F
pU
Q
O
F
O
O
U
Q
O
FI
a
OU
Q
O
F
w
z
U
Q
O
F
p
.W
Q
O
F
z
Q
O
F
a
U
i
Q
O
F
O
z
W
Q
O
F
w
n
Q
O
F
N
Q
O
i
Q
Q
O
z
z
i
Q
Q
O
U
LZ
Q
Q
O
IF
p
Q
O O
HRS
HRS
°C
UNITS
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
1
7:00
24
2
7:00
24
6.6
124
33.0
192
3
7:00
24
6.6
133
17.1
263
4
7:00
24
6.5
137
21
165
5
7:00
24
6.8
118
17.5
125
6
7:00
24
6.8
157
50.1
323
7
7:00
24
97.0
170
8
7:00
24
110
68.3
9
7:00
24
6.7
98.7
13
110
10
7:00
24
6.8
136
13.4
283
11
7:00
24
6.7
153
48.7
305
12
7:00
24
7.0
117
28.6
273
13
7:00
24
7.0
134
37.8
255
14
7:00
24
39.1
15
7:00
24
34.3
16
7:00
24
6.7
157
46.3
150
17
7:00
24
6.6
177
27.5
257
18
7:00
24
6.8
134
26.4
145
19
7:00
24
6.7
116
23.6
63.3
20
7:00
24
6.6
202
38.5
190
21
7:00
24
22
7:00
24
23
7:00
24
6.8
101
24.6
120
3.82
31.1
<0.15
19
97
<5
4.3
18
<0.2
<2
2.8
95
0.5
<2
24
7:00
24
6.7
169
28.2
147
25
7:00
24
6.7
132
24.4
190
26
7:00
24
6.6
188
63.2
165
27
7:00
24
6.4
138
54.5
103
28
7:00
24
29
7:00
24
301
7700
1 24
6.8
144
51.5
155
31
7:00
1 24
6.6
141
51.8
148
AVERAGE
138
33.9
182
3.82
31.1
<0.15
19
97
<5
4.3
18
<0.2
<2
2.8
95
0.5
<2
MAXIMUM
7.0
202
63.2
323
3.82
31.1
<0.15
19
97
<5
4.3
18
<0.2
<2
2.8
95
0.5
<2
MINIMUM
6.4
97.0
13.0
63.3
3.82
31.1
<0.15
19
97
<5
4.3
18
<0.2
<2
2.8
95
0.5
<2
Comp.(C) /Grab(G)
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
C
C
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
DWQ Form MR-2 (Revised 7/2000) Page 3

EFFLUENT
NUTRIENTS WORKSHEET
NPDES PERMIT NO. NCO024112 DISCHARGE NO. 001
FACILITY NAME: Thomasville, Hamby Creek WWTP CLASS: IV
By this signature, 1 certify that this report is accurate and
complete to the best of my knowledge. X
Signature Operator in Responsible Charge
MEMBER OF COMPLIANCE
ASSOCIATION? Yes x No ❑
If "Yes," provide name of association:
Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin
Association
(1) (2) (3) (4)
YEAR 2015
COUNTY Davidson
27-i1`
Date
INSTRUCTIONS
*Submit two (2) copies of this Effluent Nutrients Worksheet, each with an original
signature, with the facility's regular Discharge Monitoring Report form(s). This Worksheet is
a reporting form for nutrients. It supplements but does not replace the regular DMR forms.
*Each Worksheet must include all nutrient data for the current year. Either (1) fill in a new
Worksheet for each report, each time entering all nutrient data for the year-to-date, and submit with the
regular DMR; or (2) maintain the original Worksheet at the facility, entering nutrient data as they are
generated, and submit photocopies with the DMR. In either case, each Worksheet must carry an
original signature (photocopied signatures are not acceptable).
See reverse side for additional instructions on completing the Worksheet.
(5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
Date
Total
HOW
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Monitoring: q llft q 1/Mo. q 1/Qtr. q
Reporting: q 1/Mo. q 1/Qtr. q
Monitoring: El1Mk. 1IMo. 1/Qtr. q
Reporting: I] 1/Mo. 1/Qtr. q
Average
Conc.
Mass Loading
Current Period
Mass Loading
Year -to -Date
Sample I
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Sample 5
Average
Conc.
..........
r : ............
..........
TN::::
..................................
. ...TN1644:::::::CumuU
................
TN Load :
.......................I.....
....................................................
:::::TP:::::::::::TP::::::::::
..I ......... .
TP:::::
...........
TP::::::
.............
...........
..
............
............
.... TP
............
(WIG:):::
...................
..........
:: (mg)tl::
..........
: ' (Iti)::::::::
................
....................I.............
: :: : : : (1b):::::::
.............................
:::(m9/L) :::::::
....................................................
fm37fis ::::::
.............
fm9:)L3:::::::::::(m97:L)::::
...........
.............
:::fm911) ::
............
...........
::: fn?97:C):: :
...........
Jan
0.046
0.057
0.067
0.075
0.061
Feb
0.070
0.081
0.086
0.126
0.091
Mar
3.16
1.03
0.128
1.44
ec.::...:..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::.:.;:.:.;:.:.:.:.:
Qtr.:.
..
. .
......
...........
............
Apr
May
Jun
..................
..........
..................................
.. ..
....................................................
...
...........
............
Jul
Aug
Sep
3rq Qi
Oct
Nov
Dec
Note: Samples listed are an average for all phosphorus samples run for that week.
DWQ Form MR -NW I (9/00) Page 4

EFFLUENT
PHOSPHORUS WORKSHEET SUPPLEMENT
NPDES PERMIT NO. NCO024112 DISCHARGE NO. 001
FACILITY NAME: Thomasville, Hamby Creek WWTP CLASS: IV
By this signature, I certify that this report is accurate and
complete to the best of my knowledge. X
Si natu of Operator in Responsible Charge
Compliant with seasonal loading limits? Yes
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
YEAR 2015
COUNTY Davidson
Z1/S
Date
No
(9) (10) (11)
Total Phosphorus Loading
Total Phosphorus
Date
Monitoring:
❑O 1/Wk. 1/Mo.
- 110tr. q
Total
Flow
Reporting:
❑x 1/Mo.
t/atr. q
Average
Mass Loading
Mass Loading
Average
Conc.
Current Period
Season -to -Date
Sample 1
Sample 2
Sample 3
Sample 4
Sample 5
Conc.
.........
............................
: TP
TIP Load:::::
................
: Cumul_ TP:Load:
............
::: .P::::
........................
.............
TP :::::
...........
:: TP.: '::
......................................
.........I .........
::::: TP
....................
g......
.........
: f4(;3::
.........
:::{mglk)::::::::::
..........
............................
fJb):::::::
..................................
:::::::(Ib? ::::::
................
::: (ir+sl:U:::
.........................
............
tm9lk)::::
.............
:: (cnglk)::::::::{m9/L
......................................
...........
:::
.............
:::(mgfl) :::::::(m41L1:
.........................
:
............
.........
........
...I ........................
..........
.......................
.................
.......
.........
......................
............
............
.....................
.............
.............
.....
.............
...........
......................................
...........
......................................
...........
......................................
.............
.............
.............
.........................
.........................
.........................
............
............
............
.........
.........
.........
Previous
........
............................
............................
............................
............................
............
............
...........
.............
.............
.............
...........
..............................
...........
..............................
......
...........
.............
.............
.............
....... .....
.........................
.........................
..............I..........
.... ....................
...........
............
Seasonal
Total
93
Jan
78.7
0.061
40
133
0.046
0.057
0.067
0.075
0.061
Feb
73.4
0.091
56
189
0.070
0.081
0.086
0.126
0.091
Mar
102
1.44
1222
1411
3.16
1.03
0.128
1.44
Seasonal
...............
....
....................................
............
Loading 9
1411
4.. r:
....................................
....
.........................
............
Apr
May
Jun
.....................
�a................
............................
..
................
............
. .
.............
...........
.............
..............
I ........ ..
Jul
Aug
Sep
.....................
�d....::
3..Qtr:.:.
:::::::::
.:..........::.....::
............................
...
................
. ..
.. . .....
............
.. . ...
.............
....
...........
.............
............
............
Oct
Seasonal
Loading
Nov
Dec
the :
4..Qir.
.....................
.................
Year:tb::
.
Date Lead
1318
TP Load = Q x TP x 8.34
Avg. TP in monitoring period = (Sum of all TP values) / (# Samples)
(4) (2) (3)
(11)
(b) thru (10)
Note: Samples listed are an average for all phosphorus samples run for that week. Page 5

Addendum
NPDES Permit No. NC0024112 DISCHARGE NO. 001 MONTH March YEAR 2015
FACILITY NAME: City of Thomasville, Hamby Creek W WTP COUNTY Davidson
Effluent lInfluent
-'-_-
•
QQQQQ__QQQQQQ_1-_Q
DWQ Form MR-2 (Revised 7/2000) Page6

LTM - Mixed Liquor Splitter Box
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112 DISCHARGE NO. 001 MONTH March YEAR 2015
FACILITY NAME: City of Thomasville, Hamby Creek WWTP COUNTY Davidson
•
•
DWQ Form MR-2 (Revised 7/2000) Page 7

���►
♦ Allf,
mo, .M-. �� � i ►
� ..
If "M
_lffl�=
I / % �✓ ]L�j ,

Baity Plumbing Inc.
4538 Lower Lake Rd.
Thomasville, N.C. 27360
Shuler Meats
RE: drain lines
' 6/22/15
Our company came out and inspected drain lines and ran dye in lines
to see if they drained into ditch on 6/18/15. The results found that no
dye was found leaking into ditch so therefore drain lines are not piped
to ditch. If any questions please call our office and speak with Brian
Deweese, who done the inspection of lines 336-475-0921.
Thank You,
Tracy Deweese
Owner of Baity Plumbing

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Bass, Sarah
Sent:
Tuesday, June 09, 2015 1:25 PM
To:
Michele Dawes
Cc:
Carter, Jenifer
Subject:
RE: Modified MOM Brands IUP 6.8.15
Michele,
PERCS has received the submittal of the streamlined permit review form (approval number 0110) and the following IUP
modification. This submittal was received on June 8, 2015.
MOM Brands (IUP # 2043)
Our database and files have been updated accordingly.
Thanks for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program,
Sarah Morrison Bass
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Di -vision of Water Resources
Pretreatment, Emergency Response and Collection Systems Unit (PERCS)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone]; fax [phone]
http: i/portal. ncdenr. orklia-eb/wq/sia-pihvI ret
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Before printing this etnail, please consider your budget and the environment.
j If you must print, please print only what you need and sage ink with the free Eco-Font.
From: Michele Dawes[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 3:28 PM
To: Bass, Sarah
Subject: Modified MOM Brands IUP 6.8.15
Sarah,
Hi! The legal staff at Post Holdings decided that MOM Brands is still the entity operating
the plant in Asheboro, so the
permittee on the IUP #2043 should be MOM Brands. Therefore I am submitting the name change
back to MOM Brands from
Post Consumer Brands. I also changed the Water Resources references.
Have a great afternoon!
Michele H. Dawes
1

Technical Services Manager
Water Resources Division
336-672-0892 x 217
www.asheboronc.gov
Calm cF
N Oft IN CAR* L INA

J
i k PIMA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
April 28, 2015
Ms. Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Resource's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed the
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2014. This PAR was received on
March 30, 2015. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the requirements of 15A NCAC
2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or comments,
please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at [phone]
(Monti. Hassan@ncdenr. gov).
cc
Sincerely,
Z�'14
Jenifer Carter, Environmental Specialist
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources
PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
DWR — Central Files
450 W Hanes Mill Rd., Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— Made in part by recycled paper

Regional Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Review
Is the PAR on time? Does it have two copies?
Did they send any other submissions with it?
Included?
ADEQUATE?
POTW noted Corrections?
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
PPS Form
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
IDSF
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Allocation Table
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Waste Reduction Info
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
❑ YES ® NO
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
❑ YES ❑ NO ® NA
Regional Office: WSRO
POTW: Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Report Period: 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2014
® Full ❑ Modified
For modified programs evaluate shaded
items only. A Narrative is required for a
modified program only if there are SIUs
in SNC.
If No, check recommendation below.,
1. Have at least 90% of SIU permits been issued within 180
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
days of expiration? See Allocation Table).
Assessment
2. Were at least 80% of SIUs inspected? (See PPS Form)
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
3. Has effective enforcement been taken against industries in
® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
SNC, including those causing pass -through or interference? (See
Assessment
Narrative and SNCR Form
4. Does public notice cover all SIUs in SNC?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
Note: Exceotions should be exolained in the comment section below:
Fill in Values from
•
data)
SSNC
0
FENF
10
JUDI
12
SVPU
1
IUPN
2
SOCS
0
Reviewed By: Jenifer Carter Date: 4/28/2015
Regional Pretreatment Annual Report Review
Thomasville PAR 2013 Review.docxl2

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Conder, Misty <[e-mail]>
Sent:
Tuesday, April 21, 2015 8:24 AM
To:
Carter, Jenifer
Cc:
Beck, Allen
Subject:
Missed sampling
Jenifer,
I'm reporting to you that Thomasville missed a sampling for phosphorus the week of March 16 — 20. That was the week
I was out with the flu and complications from the flu. We had been supposed to do tox testing that week and had it
rescheduled for later on. Vince was covering the lab in my absence and missed that sample. We do have lists posted of
required sampling but, somehow that one got missed. I discovered the missing sample as I was working on the DMR
yesterday. Do you want us to do an extra phosphorus this week? The missing sample will be noted on the DMR along
with the TSS and BOD non-compliance that Allen had already reported to you.
Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor — Pretreatment
Hamby Creek WWTP
110 Optimist Park Rd.
Thomasville, NC 27360
PH 336-475-4246
Fax [phone]

Carter, Jenifer
From: Huffman, Morgan <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:40 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: RE: Odd Situation
Thanks Jenifer,
I would not categorize it as having excessive sediment loss downstream. I appreciate you looking into it. I'll pass it on to
our Minimum Housing Inspector who also handles nuisance type complaints.
Thanks again,
Morgan
From: Carter, Jenifer [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:25 PM
To: Huffman, Morgan
Subject: RE: Odd Situation
Sorry that I did not respond more quickly... been dealing with a family crisis.
I spoke to our wetland specialist, who said, 'USACE doesn't regulate digging swimming holes (or watering holes) within a
creek or a wetland. We can enforce best usage if something is bad enough'.
By 'bad enough', she means excessive sediment loss and accumulation downstream ofthe 'pool'. Excessive usually
meaning more than a few inches of sediment deposited along the channel downstream. Anything less than that, then
you run the risk of doing more damage cleaning out the sediment than help.
So, the question is, in your opinion, has there been excessive sediment loss downstream downstream of the pool? If you
think so or don't know for sure, I will visit the site. If not, I feel sorry for the neighbors.
Jenifer
Phone: [phone].
WSRO Address:
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Huffman, Morgan [mailto:Morgan. HuffmanOthomasville-nc.gov]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2015 12:01 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: RE: Odd Situation

Jenifer,
Do you have any updated information on this situation?
Thanks,
Morgan
From: Carter, Jenifer [mailto:jenifer.carter(a)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 8:45 PM
To: Huffman, Morgan
Subject: RE: Odd Situation
Morgan,
Wow. Strange one, alright. I am out of town until next week but will confer with our 401/404 permitting folks to see if
there is anything we can do about this. I will get back to you next week.
Jenifer
Phone: [phone].
WSRO Address:
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Huffman, Morgan [maiIto: Morgan. Huffman(&thomasville-nc.ciov]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 3:36 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: Odd Situation
Jenifer,
I doubt this would be NCDENR's, but it's unlike any situation I've run into yet so I thought I would run it by you guys
before I passed it on to our Minimum Housing as a nuisance complaint.
Apparently the resident at 121 Lowery Drive in Thomasville decided at some point that he would like a swimming pool,
well perhaps more accurately a swimming hole. The neighborhood is basically built with most of the houses, including
121 Lowery Drive backing up to what was at one time a man-made pond via a dam. As constructed, the previous pond
area has a drainage ditch running through it that pretty much runs all the time. The resident at 121 Lowery dug out a
swimming hole in the path of the drainage, bermed up the dirt from the hole around it, and lined it with plastic
sheeting. I am told he actually runs an electrical cord down to it and has Christmas lights hung up in the trees (which I
observed) at night while enjoying the pool. The neighbors aren't exactly thrilled with the resultant pool of more -or -less
standing green water and newly marsh -like condition of the surrounding area. Attached are some pictures as this might
be a little hard to visualize, if not to believe entirely. It is not a blue line creek, so it may not be NCDENR's, but I wanted
to run it by you to get your take.

Thanks,
Morgan Huffman
Public Services Director

Carter, Jenifer
From: Carter, Jenifer
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 11:39 AM
To: 'Beck, Allen'
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby Creek Solids Wash Out
You can make that call based on the results you've gotten so far, in addition to other observations.
Phone: [phone].
WSRO Address:
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 11:18 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby Creek Solids Wash Out
Jenifer,
Since our wash out is over do you see the need to continue up/down stream sampling through the weekend? Misty made it
back safely and reported no visual signs of solids or dead fish at the downstream sampling point.
Thanks,
Allen
From: Carter, Jenifer[mailto:jenifer.carter(ci)ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 7:57 AM
To: Beck, Allen
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby Creek Solids Wash Out
Thanks for the update Allen. Tell Misty to be careful and to stay dry. Safety first, right?
I will place this and any other updates in our files.
Feel free to contact me over the weekend if you need to. My office phone will ring through to my work cell. Or
email me.
Try to have a good weekend. :-)
Jenifer

New phone number: 336-776-9691
New WSRO Address:
NC DENR Division of Water Resources
450 W Hanes Mill Rd. Ste. 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Voice: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and
may be disclosed to third parties.
-------- Original message --------
From: "Beck, Allen"
Date:03/06/2015 7:38 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "Carter, Jenifer"
Cc: "Basinger, Corey" , "Huffman, Morgan" , "Craver, Kelly"
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby Creek Solids Wash Out
Jenifer,
Just wanted to give you a quick update. This morning about 3 AM all solids wash out had stopped. Although we turned off
all the mixers on the oxidation ditch to help settle and retain solids at no point did we stop aeration of the process. This
morning Misty will be taking one of the spill response kits that was part of the consent order and we will be doing up and
down stream sampling for fecal. NH3,PO4,TKN, NO2+NO3,copper, TSS and ph. Today, providing we get some relief from
this unusual flow, we will be working to bring the secondary blankets down and when we get them manageable we'll begin
restarting mixers to get the solids moving again. I've also stopped all wasting and press operations so we should have
sufficient seed sludge in our holding tanks to boost the MLSS mass should that be necessary. As always, should you have
questions or advice please let me know.
Thanks,
Allen
From: Carter, Jenifer[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:55 PM
To: Beck, Allen
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby CreekSolids Wash Out
Allen,
A good way to determine the best of course of action is to think what you would want the media to report. I would
suggest pulling addition US/DS samples (at least Fecal Coliform, TSS, Amm, DO) daily while the potential to exceed limits
exists. Note the presence or absence of dead fish and any other observations as to the condition of surface waters.
Those observations could be done more than once per day. It may be a pain in the short term, but the long-term
consequences of not doing it could be worse. And, of course, keep a written record of everything the staff does to try to
lessen the impact and bring the plant back under control, like turning off the mixers.
Keep me posted.
Thank you, and good luck!
Jenifer

Phone: [phone].
WSRO Address:
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:44 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Basinger, Corey
Subject: 3-5-15 Hamby CreekSolids Wash Out
Jenifer,
Due to heavy rains on saturated ground, and other I & I issues, we have been experiencing sustained
flows through our 6 MGD plant in excess of 9 MGD with a peak flow of about 14 MGD. Due to this
extremely unusual condition we are currently experiencing some solids wash out in the secondary
clarifiers which will probably to permit non-compliance.
When solids over wash commenced we immediately turned off the mixers in the second stage anoxic
zone of the oxidation ditch to try and settle and contain solids there as best as possible but this plant will
simply not handle this volume of water effectively. As always should you have questions or suggestions
please let me know.
Thanks,
Allen
6r# 4 7laxa*a& ne 27360
;vow [phone]

Carter, Jenifer
From: Carter, Jenifer
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:55 PM
To: 'Beck, Allen'
Subject: RE: 3-5-15 Hamby CreekSolids Wash Out
Allen,
A good way to determine the best of course of action is to think what you would want the media to report. I would
suggest pulling addition US/DS samples (at least Fecal Coliform, TSS, Amm, DO) daily while the potential to exceed limits
exists. Note the presence or absence of dead fish and any other observations as to the condition of surface waters.
Those observations could be done more than once per day. It may be a pain in the short term, but the long-term
consequences of not doing it could be worse. And, of course, keep a written record of everything the staff does to try to
lessen the impact and bring the plant back under control, like turning off the mixers.
Keep me posted.
Thank you, and good luck!
Jenifer
Phone: [phone].
WSRO Address:
NC DENR - Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300
Winston-Salem, NC 27105
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:Allen.Beck(a)thomasville-nc.gov]
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 1:44 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Basinger, Corey
Subject: 3-5-15 Hamby CreekSolids Wash Out
Jenifer,
Due to heavy rains on saturated ground, and other I & I issues, we have been experiencing sustained
flows through our 6 MGD plant in excess of 9 MGD with a peak flow of about 14 MGD. Due to this
extremely unusual condition we are currently experiencing some solids wash out in the secondary
clarifiers which will probably to permit non-compliance.
When solids over wash commenced we immediately turned off the mixers in the second stage anoxic
zone of the oxidation ditch to try and settle and contain solids there as best as possible but this plant will

simply not handle this volume of water effectively. As always should you have questions or suggestions
please let me know.
Thanks,
Allen
ettty °d 7lc "&,d& Ite 27360
;D4~ [phone]

A'
*ka
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
February 11, 2015
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI)
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed by Jenifer Carter, of this office, on February 5,
2015. Pretreatment Coordinator, Misty Conder, was present for the inspection. The purpose of this
inspection was to determine the effectiveness of the City's pretreatment program and included a review of
pretreatment program elements, POTW plant performance, Industry monitoring data, and adherence to the
enforcement response plan (ERP). An inspection was conducted at Ennis -Flint (fka Flint Trading) due to a
complaint passed on by the EPA. Initial observations do not indicated the need for a pretreatment permit
as the complainant suggested, but Misty requested that the facility complete a long -form. A final
determination will be made by Ms. Conder after she has reviewed the application.
The City currently has five (5) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), four (4) of which are categorical. Two
SIUs were in significant non-compliance (SNC) for permit limits and/or reporting violations, though the
violations did not appear to cause any problems at the plant. The plant has not had any limits violations
since the last PCI.
Overall, the inspection showed the pretreatment program to be well implemented. Please refer to the
attached inspection report for further comments. If you have any questions please contact Jenifer Carter at
[phone].
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NC DENR
cc: WSRO Files
DWR Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit
450 W Hanes Mill Rd., Suite 300, Winston-Salem, NC 27105
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

1I--- -as t.t-11\ l I A ill ♦ 1/J1V1\ Vl' ♦1 L>11'Jl\ WALLA .
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)]
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/Lab Supervisor/Back-up ORC
4. Last Inspection Date: 01 /23 /14 Inspection Type: ❑ PCI ® Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
ON N I C 10 10 12 14 1 1 2 02 05 15 ® SO
Fac. Type
a]
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI)(INS
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users SIUs ?
5
P)
SIUS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users CIUs ?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? See comments
1
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
1
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No ]UP, or With an Expired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi -Annual Periods Total Number of SIUs in SNC 11
2
PSNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
2
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-annual Periods
1
POTW INTERVIEW
17. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations?
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
18. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been: in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 Ni, TSS
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? SNC for
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC) Not Pub
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order,
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division?
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which
Ones? ,
El Yes ® No
[I Yes ® No
Limits: Custom Drum (BOD, Se, Cd,
Reporting: Custom Drum & AMC
.ished: Not yet.
N/A
[I Yes ® No
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes ❑ No El N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes El No Is the Table Adequate? ® Yes El No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? ❑ Yes ® No May be able to remove
some pollutants due to their removal from the NPDES permit upon renewal.
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added:
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07
Page 1

x xvc 11.v1Gw 1 V 1 vv ulcer, vciuy rvl vv uaa GVYy Ul rl Vb'l gill hlGlllGlll lI1
their files, complete with supporting documents and cony of PERCS Annmval T.etter. anrd Aatea ennsiatent with Prnamrn Tnfn-
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis A
06/06/2011
® Yes ❑ No
10/01/2015
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
09/20/2010
® Yes ❑ 140
04/30/2015
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
03/25/2013
® Yes ❑ No
(Adopted 10/15/2012
Enforcement Response Plan RP
01/13/2009
® Yes ❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
07/22/2009
® Yes ❑ No
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW(3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW Arm I TIT TrTSPF( TT0N)
29. User Name l . Custom Drum 2.
3.
30. IUP Number
0029
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
® Yes ❑ No
11 ❑ Yes ❑ Noll
❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date
F 01/31/16
33. Categorical Standard Applied .E. 40 CFR, Etc. Or N/A
n/a
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
N Y_e_s_❑_ o_
Yes No
❑ Yes No
to Permit Issue Date?
_N_ _
_❑_ _ _❑
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. ®Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. If No, is One Needed? See Inspection Form from POT
b. []Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes []No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan TOW)?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. ®Yes ❑No
a. []Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.❑Yes❑mcaN/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required b IUP, includingflow?
11
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A­]
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SILT Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
❑Yes®No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
0Yes0No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by lUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non-Com fiance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Reporting -Non -Compliance from SILT Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.❑Yes®No❑NSA
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.❑Yes®No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
c.❑Yes❑No®N/A
of SILT limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU? 1
11
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the S1U in SNC?
❑ Yes ® No
ElElYes
No
❑Yes ❑ No
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP OVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?
❑Yes❑No®N/A
a. ❑Yes ®No
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a. ❑Yes ❑No
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a. []Yes []No
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
b. Is SILT in Compliance with Order?
b. []Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes []No
b. ❑Yes []No
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes El No
El Yes ❑ No
Requested Information For You?
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

36. Spill Plan needs updating
47. Results submitted late on 02/03/2015. NOV drafted, to be sent. ERP to be followed. In SNC for late reporting.
Overall, files were well organized and current..
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments: An inspection was conducted at Ennis -Flint (fka Flint Trading) due to a complaint passed on by the EPA. Initial
observations do not indicated the need for a pretreatment permit as the complainant suggested, but Misty requested that the facility
complete a long -form application. A final determination will be made by Ms. Conder after she has reviewed the application.
Requirements: HWA due 10 012015, and IWS due 04/30/2015.
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory
Marginal ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter
Unsatisfactory ❑
DATE: February 11, 2015
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

N.C.Dept. or crvR
�4 SEP 21 2015
2���WAr
inston-Salem
NCDENR Re ionalOffice
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Donald R. van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
September 11, 2015
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial Waste Survey
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Resources has reviewed the Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) for the City of Thomasville. The IWS
was received by the Division on July 3, 2015.
The review indicates that the IWS is adequate and meets the minimum requirements of 40 CFR 403.8
(f) (2). Proper completion of an Industrial Waste Survey is required by Part III (B) of your NPDES
permit.
Please remember it is the responsibility of the POTW to continue efforts to ensure that any Significant
Industrial Users (SIUs), as defined by NCAC 15A 2H .0903(b)(9) (A) through (D), are identified and
subsequently added to the City's pretreatment program. This includes evaluation of new IUs before
they commence discharge and evaluation of existing IUs determined to be not SIUs that make changes
to their process.
1) Next IWS Due Date: The IWS was conducted in 2015. Your next updated IWS is due on April 30,
2020, unless conditions at the POTW change significantly and thus warrant an earlier submittal.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti.Hassan6a ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
Wnerely,
Monti Hassan
Division of Water Resources
mh/Thomasville.IWS.2015
cc: Jennifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal opportunity
\AfirmativeAc6onEmployer %hl a"/

f 011+5vi'l-e F X- WA .
ASIRR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
December 18, 2014
Subject: End of 2014 Pretreatment Mailing
Dear Pretreatment Professionals:
John E. Skvada, III
Secretary
As we draw to the close of another great pretreatment year, I wanted to provide you an update on some
issues, inform you on this year's upcoming workshops and distribute the Pretreatment Program Info
Database sheets.
1) NC Pretreatment Professionals Honor Roll: In case you missed the Annual Pretreatment Conference
held September 21-23`d in Wrightsville Beach, this year's addition to the Honor Roll is Martie Groome
with the City of Greensboro.
2) Metal Standards Triennial Review: The EMC approved the proposed revisions to state surface water
quality standards for the 2010 Triennial Review at its November meeting
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/swtrirev).
3) Dental Amalgam Rule: As you know, EPA has proposed dental effluent guidelines
(http:Hwater.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/dentaU). PERCS will be preparing comments expressing
our concerns in time to meet the February 21, 2015 deadline.
4) Rules Review: G.S. 150B-21.3A was amended to require periodic review of all State rules. The first
step was to determine if the rule is (i) necessary with substantive public interest, (ii) necessary without
substantive public interest, or (iii) unnecessary. All of the Division's rules were placed in the first
category. Our next step was to propose new draft rules. The EMC will be provided an update in January
and the 6-month stakeholder process will begin in February. At that time we will ask for your
suggestions for updating the Pretreatment Rules. PERCS was not able to reach out for your suggestions
in advance due to the short time frame; we would have been unable to give your comments the
thoughtful consideration that they deserve.
At this time the proposed revisions consist of updating Water Quality to Water Resources, correcting
some addresses and a couple of grammatical errors. We considered if we needed to add a definition of
Dental Industrial User, but think that the current definition in 02H .0903 34 (C) "Is subject to Categorical
Pretreatment Standards under 40 CFR Part 403.6 and 40 CFR chapter 1, Subchapter N, Parts 405-471" is
sufficient.
Please be thinking about any other revisions that might be needed.
5) Division Review of IUPs: The Division continues implementation of the streamlined permit review
process. After attending the IUP workshop and a thorough Division review of three program IUPs, a
permit writer may be approved to participate in this process. Permits submitted under this process are
not subject to a full Division review. Benefits to the POTW include less paperwork to submit and
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh; North Carolina 27699-1617
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.nmaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— Made in part by recycled paper

End of 2014 Pretreatment Mailing
Page 2 of 2
December 18, 2014
immediate approval of your permits. More information is posted on the Permit Writing Guidance page
of our website.
6) Staff Assignments: Staff assignments remain the same. We continue to meet our goals for project
review of 30 days for IUPs and SIU drops and 90 days for ERP, HWA, IWS, LTMP and SUO.
Monti Hassan, 919-807-6314 [[e-mail]]: Chowan, Hiwassee, Little Tennessee,
Lumber, Neuse, New, Roanoke, Yadkin
Sarah Bass, 919-807-6310 [[e-mail]]: Broad, Cape Fear, Catawba, French Broad, Tar -
Pamlico.
7) Workshops: The following workshops are planned for 2015. The registration form, invitation and
directions for these workshops are posted on the Training page:
http://portal.ncdenr.or web/wq/swp/ps/pret/training. Please register early, as space is limited at each
site.
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) — January 21 st (Hickory WTP) and January 27th (Raleigh Neuse
River WWTP).
Headworks Analysis (HWA) — January 22nd (Hickory WTP) and February 17th (Raleigh Neuse River
WWTP).
Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) Writing — March 19th (Huntersville) and May 21 st
(Goldsboro)
8) Pretreatment Program Info Database Sheets: Please review your attached program info sheet and
historical SNC sheets, if applicable, and make necessary updates to any of the information presented.
Send the corrected sheets back with your PAR, due March 1, 2015. If all the information was correct,
please indicate that in your PAR. Especially note the due dates as this may be the only reminder you get.
Please note:
a. All pretreatment programs (full and modified) must submit a PPS form with their PAR per an
EPA requirement of the State.
b. Historical SNC sheets only list currently Active SIUs that had SNCs from 2007-2013.
9) Email Addresses: PERCS often uses email to send out mass mailings. To make this an effective and
cost saving tool, we ask that you keep PERCS updated on your current email address as well as which
staff member is the "primary" contact for your POTW - see "prim" field next to staff names on Program
Info sheet, and email field below names. For programs with more staff than the printed sheet is able to
show, a separate contacts page has been included. Please make any staff changes on that sheet and return
to PERCS as well with the PAR.
As always, please contact your pretreatment staff member (as listed above) or me at 919-807-6383 [email:
[e-mail]] with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Dg/dec2014_mass—mailing
Enclosures: Program Info sheet(s)
Historical SNC sheet(s), if applicable
Cc: PERCS Pretreatment Staff (via email)
All RO Pretreatment Contacts (via email)
Pretreatment Consultants (via email)

Aja
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Secretary
October 27, 2014
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Long Term Monitoring Plan
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP (NPDES Permit: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
RECEIVED --_7
N.C.De.. .. lr.
OCT 2 9 20%
Winston-baien
Re ioAalOffice
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of Water
Resources has reviewed the updated Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) submitted by the City of
Thomasville for the Hamby Creek WWTP. The LTMP was received by the Division on September 19,
2014, via email.
The review indicates that the LTMP is adequate and meets the requirements needed to establish a
site -specific Headworks Analysis (HWA). Proper implementation of an LTMP is also required by Part IV
(C) of your NPDES permit.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. [e-mail]] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Debora [e-mail]].
-ncerel ,
Thomas A. Reeder
Director, Division of Water Resources
mh/thomasvi IIe.Itmp.2014
cc: Jennifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: pportunity\A Affirmative
a atmy+a//y
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer �/ Y f� 1 LL

MR
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
August 18, 2014
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
A Compliance Evaluation Inspection was performed at the City of Thomasville's Hamby Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on August 13, 2014 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional Office.
Allen Beck and Misty Conder were present for the inspection. The inspection consisted of an on -site
inspection of the treatment facility and a review of related files.
There have been no NPDES limits violations since the last plant inspection in September 2013. Records were
complete and accurate, with no discrepancies noted when comparing lab data to the submitted Discharge
Monitoring Reports.
There is an easement in place for access to the effluent discharge pipe, though it has not been maintained.
Access has been obtained in the past via other adjacent properties without easements, though such access is
not without its drawbacks (e.g. cow pastures, thick brush, & the need to obtain prior approval from land
owners). It is recommended that some form of access be maintained to the discharge pipe to enable prompt
access when/if needed.
Overall, the WWTP appears to be very well operated and maintained. Please refer to the enclosed inspection
report for more detailed information. If you have any questions, please call Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
W 4Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources, NC DENR
attachment
cc: Mr. Allen Beck (same address)
Ms. Misty Conder (same address)
DWR Central Files
WSRO SWP Files
585 Waughtown St., Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
Inspector Fac Type
1 u 2 u 3 I NCO024112 111 12 14/08/13 17 18 ICI
19 I S I 201
211111 1 1 1 1 1 111 I I 1 I I i l l l l l I I I I I I I I I I I
I II I I 1 1 12
Inspection
Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA — — ----Reserved-
--
67
70 71 J�� � 72 (,, j 73 I I 1 I I74 75III
LJ LJ
80
Section B: FacilityData
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES Kermit Number)
09:50AM 14/08/13
09/08/01
Hamby Creek VWVfP
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
P
110 Optimist Park Rd
Thomasville NC 27360
12:OOPM 14/08/13
14/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)Ttles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Allen R Beck//336-475-4246 /
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Kelly Craver,PO Box 368 Thomasville NC 273610368/Assistant City
Manager/336-475-4220/3364754283 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Date
Jenifer arter WSRO WQ//336-771-5000/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Date
(4—
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type 1
31 NC0024112 I11 12 14/08/13 17 18 I C J
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Excellent inspection overall.
One item of note:
There is an easement in place for access to the effluent discharge pipe, but it has not been maintained.
Less than ideal access can be and has been obtained as needed via other adjacent properties without
easements. It is recommended that some sort of access be maintained to the discharge point to
enable prompt observation/ emergency access.
Page# 2

Permit: NCO024112 Owner -Facility: Hamby Creek VWVrP
' Inspection Date: 08/13/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit
Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new
0
❑
❑
Cl
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
❑
M
❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
❑
0
❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: There are only 2 clarifiers. There is a fine oraanics drum filter that receives RAS Drior to the
oxidation ditches (or cannibal system). There is no re -aeration lagoon, rather two re -aeration
tanks that are considered the 5th stage of the Bardenphro process. There are 4 sludge
holding tanks (formerly digesters) and a belt press, as well as 3 tertiary disk filters prior to
UV disinfection.
Record Keeping
Yes No NA NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
M.
❑
❑
❑
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
0
❑
❑
❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
M
❑
❑
❑
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator
M
❑
❑
❑
on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
M
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Page# 3

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/13/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Influent Sampling
Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
0❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
0❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
0
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
0❑
❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees
0
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
M
❑
❑
❑
representative)?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
N❑
❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
0❑
❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
M
❑
❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
❑
❑
0
❑
Comment: Effluent flow meter, also calibrated annually, is used as back-uD
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable M ❑ ❑ ❑
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
Page# 4

Permit: NCO024112
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWrP
' Inspection Date: 08113/2014
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens
Yes No NA NE
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: manual bar screen can be used as back-up.
Grit Removal
Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
❑
❑
❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches
Yes No NA NE
Are the aerators operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
0
❑
❑
❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
0
❑
❑
❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?
N
❑
❑
❑
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
❑
❑
0
❑
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
❑
❑
❑
Comment: Accordina to Mr. Beck. the SCADA system has been maintainina the DO at —0.7 - 1.0 at the
effluent end of the oxidation ditches.
Nutrient Removal Yes No NA NE
# Is total nitrogen removal required? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
# Is total phosphorous removal required? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Type Biological
Page# 5

Permit: NC0024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 08/13/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Nutrient Removal Yes No NA NE
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
Is nutrient removal process operating properly? ❑ ❑ 11
Comment: achieved using 5-stage/ modified bardenDhro process
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place?
M
El
El
El
Are pumps operational?
N❑
❑
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
0
0
❑
11
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier
Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
❑
11
❑
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
❑
Are weirs level?
0❑
El
0
Is the site free of weir blockage?
N
El
0
❑
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
0
❑
Is scum removal adequate?
0
El
❑
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
❑
El
Is the drive unit operational?
0
0
❑
El
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
❑
❑
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
❑
1:1
El
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately 'Y4 of the sidewall depth)
Comment:
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Yes No NA NE
Type of operation:
Cross flow
Is the filter media present?
0
El
11
❑
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
0
0❑
El
Is the filter free of growth?
0
❑
❑
Is the air scour operational?
❑
0
0
❑
Is the scouring acceptable?
11❑
0
❑
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
0
El
❑
11
Comment: back -flow is flow -dependent.
Page# 6

Permit: NCO024112 Owner -Facility: Hamby Creek VWVrP
Inspection Date: 08/13/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Disinfection - UV
Yes No NA NE
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are UV bulbs clean?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is UV intensity adequate?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is there a backup system on site?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
0
❑
❑
❑
Comment: One of three channels used at any given time, with a 2nd channel used when flows exceed
—5 MGD.
Solids Handling Equipment
Yes No NA NE
Is the equipment operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
❑
❑
0
❑
Is storage adequate?
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
❑
❑
❑
0
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
N
❑
❑
❑
Comment: There _is_a belt Dress, a cannibal solids reduction process, and 4 sludge holding tanks
(formerly digesters).
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? ❑ ❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Comment: There is an easement in place for access to the effluent discharge pipe, but it has not been
maintained. Less than ideal access can be and has been obtained as needed via other
adjacent properties without easements. It is recommended that some sort of access be
maintained to the discharge point to enable prompt observation/ emergency access.
Page# 7

PRELIMINARY TREATMENT FACILITY cuss a sLuoGE .
TO 1/1N0 APPUCATION SLUDGE SLUDGE
! DEGRITTING N0LMMN0 HOw
I/ I'
1 - - - - FACILITY TANK W. S TANK NO.I '
' 1 I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r
CONTROL I
BLDG.
SLUDGE SLUDGE
S.S. MANHO E _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ HowING NOLOING
I NAN NHLUEM TANK W. TANK N0.2
METENNG INFLUENT
DEWATEAED SO1.
FILTER /SCREEN To L13
AxOFlLLGESTER ;
AND WASHER BUILDING $ g
TO LANDFILL 'A w
SUPERNAIENT
SCREENINM 3 I
!1
NFR11Mi SOLIDS COMPACTED SOLIDS TO LANDFILL
KwAlal2 SEPERATION wASTE sLUDGE
BUILDING
INTERCHANGE 1
BIORFACTOR No. i T'
1 MANHO INTERCHANGE NOREA—IT DECANT T' '
1 NO
.1H
INTERCHANGE I i
BIOREACTOfl ND.2
CHEMICAL
STORAGE 1
—E 1-1 CANNIBAL AND
PROCESS J FEED BLDG.
SECONDARY PURGE SOLIDS
SLUDGE FLOCCULATION
PUMP CLARIFIER
ANAEROBIC ANAFRONC STATION
SELECTOR B Fi)
CLANFIER EFllUENT0 c-
y1�
1 1 N ' '
s 1
N0.1 NO. 2 '
FERIC „ ---_—_____ilti___________�c__�________________________G� ________1 I
r__ ___�________________ _ I�
a ; RFAERAnON
RFAERATK)N EFFLUENT
I TANK ; w
No.2 U
FINAL CLARIFIER FILTER BACKWASH
NEW I NO.1 PUMPING STATION
OXIDATION REAERAnoN J 4' Mmv.m J J
DITCHES TANK - - RAS C I _ _ _ _ u ,
11
CCCF
EFFLUENT
1 1 RLms rL
,- MANHOLE op
EFFLUENT REUSE 5
secOND sEcoNDAR NO. 103 3 vumvs
Yy uv DL51uFEcnoN
ANOxIC ANOx¢ FF UNITS
Z
RENRN ACTUATED SLUDGE IRASI R'A'S' I O
MANHOLE L� -
NO.104
EFFLUENT
WASTE DRAM MAR_ PROCV
FILTER EFF. BUILDING
Eg_ oyglgfq E� STATIC AERATOR OTHER FLOI
7
FINAL CLARIFIER
_ - _ _ N0.2 O WASTE DRAIN CHEMIC
PUMPING q
STATION K
C
RAS
• WASTE DRAIN
FILTER BACKWASH

t k,'
fL L�
10;
cimti

Notes on Preparation of 2008 NPDES Permit Renewal Application
A.6. Annual flow data is based on a yearly period from September 1, 2007 — August 31, 2008.
A.12. Where averaged values are reported for multiple samples and some samples are shown as <value,
the averaged value is based on %2 the detection limit for that method. This minimizes skewing the data by
not counting <values as zero or as if the value didn't have a < sign in place. Fecal averaging of < values
use 1 instead of the %2 detection limit rule since fecal data is reported in whole numbers and 0.5 would
round to 1. This is also consistent with DMR reporting. Copies of DMR effluent data from the past year
and for the two months in previous years where PPA was performed are included.
B.2.a & d. A topographic map of the surrounding area is included, which shows water bodies and any
wells.
B.2.b & e. A printout from the SCADA system has an overview of the major piping drawn on it and the
digesters labeled as the sludge storage/treatment area. Note that the drawing is not to scale, but does give
majority of the layout correctly.
B.2.c & f. These are not applicable to the Hamby Creek WWTP.
B.3. Please see the attached process flow diagram and a labeled SCADA overview printout that detail
flows and layout. In general, the process proceeds as follows:
Two primary flows into the plant converge at MH100 orthside — gravity line, Southside — force
main). The combined flows then enter the headwork (B) here sampling and flow monitoring occur.
There are chemical feeds for pH adjustment (acetic aci or sodium hydroxide) just prior to entrance to the
headworks if needed. After flow measurement, waste proceeds to a Parkson mechanical scree l (C to
remove large debris, plastics and other untreatable materials. Collected solids are washed with reuse
water to remove organics and then compressed with a screw press to remove liquids. Compressed solids
are discharged to a dumpster for disposal at the landfill. Liquids, including those from the washing
process continue on to the grit removal system. In the event of high flow or maintenance to the
mechanical screen a rack screen is in parallel to the mechanical screen to handle any screen bypass flow.
The grit removal syste (D consists of three units — the headcell settling cone and pump, the slurry cup
grit washer, and the grit snail conveyor. The headcell uses centrifical flow around the settling cone
allowing the grit to settle to the bottom of the cone and be pumped out. The headcell also receives flow
from the digester supernatant, the belt press filtrate, and the solids building sump pump. De -gritted
wastewater continues over the weir at the top of the headcell to the head of the oxidation ditch. The grit
which has been removed from the bottom of the settling cone is pumped to the slurry cup for washing to
remove fine organic materials. The washed grit is then transported by the grit snail conveyor to a
dumpster for disposal at the landfill. In the event any portion of the grit system is not operating correctly,
flow from the mechanical screen can be bypassed around the grit system and on to the oxidation ditch for
treatment.

Wastewater moves from the grit system to (MH101) E) he entrance to a 5 stage Bardenpho process
oxidation ditch©for nutrient removal, BOD and TSS breakdown. MH101 also receives return activated
sludge from the clarifiers and the cannibal interchange tanks (MH103). Wastewater leaves the fourth
stage of the Bardenpho process and goes to the re -aeration tanks G) This is the fifth stage of the process
although it is not built immediately next to the xidation ditch. T s aeration stage removes additional
Nitrogen. Wastewater then flows to MH10 (H) for splitting to the 2 — 100 ft clarifers. MH103 is divided
into three ctions — oxidation ditch mixed liquor, RASIWAS, and clarifier effluent. Sludge settles in the
clarifier((I and is drawn off the bottom to go back to MH103. Clarifier effluent is returned to MH103 to
be pumpe up to MH104 and then into the J) ilter/UV building for final treatment. The effluent is
filtered by a tertiary di c filter and then disi ected by an in -line UV system. The disinfected effluent is
then discharged to a (0 static aerator for final aeration and discharge to outfall 001. Reuse water is also
pumped from the final effluent back to a pressurized storage tank in the filter/UV building for
dispersement to any systems requiring water for washing (mechanical screen, grit snail, drum screen,
reuse hydrants). &✓ JG s5 V41 110106 f -G'�
Sludge from the clarifiers is remoGtcan
ve el o MH103 where it cbe pumped to the oxidation ditch as RAS
through MH101, to the digesters via a secondary WAS pump statiolo as WAS, or to the cannibal
system. The RAS pumped up to MH101 can be pumped over to the solids buildingo for screening of
fine inorganics with the drum screen. The screened RAS can then be returned either to the oxidation
ditch or to the Cannibal process interchange tanks. The Cannibal solids reduction process uses
computer controlled ORP monitoring to regulate solids additions, withdrawals, and aeration cycles. The
effluent from the process is sent to the flocculation clarifier efor phosphorus precipitation. The
effluent returns to MH103 to renter the main process and t solids arA wasted through the WAS pump
station. Sh A -/ZY,cy
Chemical feeds are available in various areas of the plant. The chemical buildinA&includes metering
pumps, valving to route chemicals where needed and the storage tanks for Alum, Sodium Hydroxide,
Acetic acid and Ferric Chloride. The sodium hydroxide and acetic acid are used for pH adjustment as
needed and can be fed to the headworks and to the effluent discharge at the static aerator. The alum is
used as a filtration aid in the disc filters and the ferric chloride is used to precipitate out phosphorus in the
floc clarifier and aid in settling in the clarifiers.
Backup power is provided by two 600KW Genrac diesel generator Final sludge removal is
b [.
accomplished at the belt press buildin S Waste sludge from thefigeaers (M) is pumped to the belt
press building for either press operation for landfill of solids or loading of the liquid in the event of a land
application.
No bypass lines are present which would allow water/waste to be discharged to the creek. Corrective
action is in process to protect several storm drains from potential run-off around waste dumpsters.
A water balance on the plant is based on an average flow of 2.4 MGD. Minimal detention occurs at the
headworks and grit systems. The oxidation ditch process is broken down to each zone of the ditch as
follows: Anaerobic 5.3 hrs per train, First Anoxic 7.6 hrs per train, Oxidation 35.2 hrs per train, Second
Anoxic 2.6 hrs per train, and Re -aeration 1.3 hrs per train. The Final Clarifiers have a detention time of
19.4 hrs per tank. Detention in the disc filters and UV systems are minimal. An exact water balance is
not possible due to the reuse water streams used in the plant for washing purposes. The reuse water flow

is not measured and may vary from day to day depending on the amount of washing done. In addition
supernatant from the digesters and filtrate from the belt press are returned to the headworks. These flows
are also not readily measured. Therefore accurately determining that 2.4 MGD came into the plant and
2.4 MGD exited the plant is not possible.
B.6 BOD, Chlorine, Fecal and TSS data are reported in two ways. The first value (maximum, average,
and total samples) includes data for one full year. The second set of numbers (following the slash) is
reporting data only from May 1, 2008 after the new plant has come on line and stabilized.
Part D. Some metals are noted to have maximums or averages below the listed detection limit. The
detection limits listed are based on those of our current contract laboratory supplier. The listed
maximums and averages include data from a previous supplier who had different detection limits. If the
limits are different, and results are listed at below detection limits, then the maximum and average is
based on the use of % the detection limit since < signs can't be averaged and using 0 or the detection limit
can bias the data. This practice is commonly used for pretreatment calculations. If both suppliers have
the same detection limit and all values are listed as below detection limit, then the maximum and average
are listed as below detection limit.
Part E. Toxicity testing is listed for all tests from November 2004 forward. A test done by the State
DWQ on June 13, 2005 indicated mortality, however a June 22, 2005 test by the City meet acceptance
criteria. The State's test was not from a full 24 hour composite sample however. Test #6, August 10,
2005 failed but no apparent cause was determined for this failure and subsequent testing showed no
further toxicity. Tests #17, August 8, 2007 and #18, September 12, 2007 both failed. The City planned to
do TIE testing on effluent in response to the proposed copper and zinc action level, however, no further
toxicity has occurred in which to perform a TIE test. The copper and zinc levels where not out of
compliance limits for the failed tests, however, ammonia limits were. We believe the loss of our
nitrification processes resulted in ammonia levels high enough to be toxic. This problem has been
corrected.

-7--_14tc
From: Carter, Jenifer
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 10:57 AM
To: 'Beck, Allen'
Subject: RE: April 2014 Compliance Issue
Check compliant, if it lets you. If it doesn't, just add a footnote about the split season. I have left myself a note address
this when/if the database spits out a red flag. I will be able to leave my own footnote in our database to explain that the
higher limit is used in when a week starts and ends in two different seasons.
Jenifer
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 10:00 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Basinger, Corey
Subject: April 2014 Compliance Issue
Jenifer,
If you recall, we had a conversation a couple weeks ago about our plant being hit with a toxic load and
about NH3 values and what would constitute weekly compliance on the DMR when there are several days
in the week that fell under winter limits and the rest of the week reverted back to summer limits. After
running the numbers for the week in question it looks like we are going to be reporting 3.34 for the first
week with 2 days of the month being under the higher limit of 9/weekly and the remaining 5 days under
the lower limit of 3/weekly. When we file our April DMR will we file as compliant, non -compliant or file as
neither with a note attached and let you (DENR) make the determination?
Thanks,
Allen

Aw" 9 uE
'ktu P69-4 Soeri cteade rt
e # 4 7"x"oil& We 97360
Pow [phone]

.. 1
Carter, Jenifer
From: Knight, Sherri
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 11:08 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer; Boone, Ron
Subject: FW: Yadkin Riverkeeper a City of Thomasville nnounce Settlement in Clean Water
Act Citizen Suit
I didn't know if you had seen this.
Sherri Knight, PE
Assistant Supervisor
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
NC Division of Water Resources
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Yadkin Riverkeeper [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:57 PM
To: Knight, Sherri
Subject: Yadkin Riverkeeper and City of Thomasville Announce Settlement in Clean Water Act Citizen Suit
Yadkin Riverkeeper News and Upcoming Event - Environmental Movie Night May 1 Yadkin
Riverkeeper<httP:Hyadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/default/files/yrk_banner.jpg>
Yadkin Riverkeeper and City of Thomasville Announce Settlement in Clean Water Act Citizen Suit
The City of Thomasville and the Yadkin Riverkeeper announced that they reached a settlement resolving the
Riverkeeper's Clean Water Act citizen suit against the city after numerous, sizeable discharges of wastewater from its
collection system into tributaries of the Yadkin River and High Rock Lake. The parties submitted a proposed settlement
agreement to the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. The proposed settlement will be
reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and, if approved by the
Court, will be entered as a binding Consent Decree.
The proposed settlement requires the City of Thomasville to take actions that will improve its wastewater system and
address the causes of its wastewater spills. The settlement incorporates Thomasville's Ten Year Capital Improvement
Plan, which Thomasville put into place following completion of a Wastewater Collection System Study in December
2009, and which represents a long-term strategy to upgrade and improve the Thomasville Wastewater Collection
System. The settlement commits the city to completing upgrades to areas of the system that were the source of past
discharges. Thomasville is already making progress in upgrading its system: Project 1 of the Capital Improvement Plan
(replacement of the Baptist Children's Home collector line) has already been completed and important renovations to

the East Davidson Pump Station, Northside Pump Station, and North Hamby Outfall line are currently under construction!
or in final planning.
The parties are confident that by completing the projects which are targeted in the ten year plan, and which will now be
required by the Consent Decree, Thomasville will reduce future discharges from its wastewater collection system.
Yadkin Riverkeeper Dean Naujoks approved of the settlement, stating, "The problem of wastewater spills is not going to
be fixed overnight, but this agreement is an important step towards reducing these spills into High Rock Lake and
tributaries of the Yadkin River in the long-term. People in Thomasville and downstream of Thomasville have a right to
clean and safe water."
Thomasville Mayor Joe Bennett observed, "I am glad that we satisfactorily resolved the case and can avoid the
unnecessary expense of litigation, and use those resources instead to continue our progress in correcting and upgrading
our facilities. 1 appreciate the continuing good work of our staff which has been implementing these positive changes in
cooperation with the City Council over the past few years."
In addition to completing the ten year plan to which the City had previously committed, Thomasville has agreed to
assess the performance of its system beginning in November 2014. If the city does not experience reductions in the
volume and number of significant wastewater spills, the city will reassess its capital improvement plan. In addition, the
city agreed to:
* take water quality samples from any large wastewater spills;
* clean 15 percent of its sewer lines each year;
* actively enforce its grease reduction ordinance;
* distribute an annual report to its residents on any spills and its actions to reduce spills; and
* support a Hamby Creek restoration plan.
The city also stated that it supports a comprehensive strategy to address nutrient pollution in High Rock Lake. If
Thomasville fails to meet any deadlines required by the agreement, it will make payments to the Land Trust for Central
North Carolina that will be used to support development of the Daniel Boone Paddle Trail and other river recreation
opportunities to stimulate ecotourism in Davidson County.
Julie Youngman, senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, which represented the Riverkeeper,
added, "This agreement ensures that Thomasville will take the necessary steps to improve its wastewater collection
infrastructure to protect the waters of the Yadkin River. This agreement is a win for the citizens of Thomasville and for
everyone who uses the Yadkin River and High Rock Lake."
Kelly Craver, Thomasville's City Manager, stated, "City Staff has worked diligently with NCDENR over the last four years
to address sewer collection system improvement needs. We have three current projects underway and will continue to
work with NCDENR to get our planned additional sewer system improvement projects approved, funded and
construction completed. We are all in this together and have the same desired end result, better water quality in High
Rock Lake and the Yadkin River."
News Article from Lexington Dispatch
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15115&qid=313190> Upcoming Event
Temple Emanuel Environmental Movie Night: May 1, 7-9 PM, 201 Oakwood Dr., Winston-Salem, NC 27103
2

'TOPIC. WATER AND THE DAN RIVER COAL ASH SPILL
FILM: WATERSHED! (Segments will be shown)
SPEAKERS:
• DEAN NAUJOKS: Our Yadkin Riverkeeper (YRK); and • FRANK HOLLEMAN, Senior Attorney, Southern Environmental
Law Center • AMY ADAMS, NC Campaign Coordinator, Appalachian Voices
DISCUSSION: Discussion about the coal ash spill in the Dan River, water testing from the river, current litigation and
more.
"WATERSHED: EXPLORING A NEW WATER ETHIC FOR THE NEW TRUST"
WATERSHED, produced and narrated by Robert Redford, tells the story of the threats to the once -mighty Colorado River
as the most dammed and diverted river in the world struggles to support thirty million people and the peace -keeping
agreement known as the Colorado River Pact reaches its limits. WATERSHED introduces hope. Can we find harmony
amongst the competing interests of cities, agriculture, industry, recreation, wildlife, and indigenous communities with
rights to the water?
- See more at: http://watershedmovie.com/about/film/#sthash.oS5UtzdH.dpufrWatershed.
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/default/files/CanoeTiponRiver.J PG>
About the Yadkin Riverkeeper
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15116&qid=313190>
Yadkin Riverkeeper's mission is to respect, protect and improve the Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin through education,
advocacy and action. It is aimed at creating a clean and healthy river that sustains life and is cherished by its people. To
achieve this vision, it seeks to accomplish the following objectives: sustain a RIVERKEEPER® program, measurably
improve water quality, reestablish native bio-diversity, preserve and enhance the forest canopy, bring legal action to
enforce State and Federal environmental laws, and teach and practice a "river ethic" of ecological respect to all ages. For
more information, visit Yadkin Riverkeeper.org
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15116&qid=313190> or call 336-722-4949.
Donate <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15117&qid=313190> Become a
member <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15118&qid=313190>
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/defauIt/files/i/dean.jpg>
Photo courtesy of Christine Rucker Photography
Get informed <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15119&qid=313190> Get
Involved <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15120&qid=313190> Contact Us
<http://yad kin riverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15121&qid=313190>
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15117&qid=313190> Facebook
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15122&qid=313190> Twitter
<http://yad kinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/mod ules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15123&qid=313190>
yadkinriverkeeper.org <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=15124&qid=313190>
Yadkin Riverkeeper
308 Patterson Ave
Winston Salem, NC 27101
United States

Unsubscribe from receiving this a -news alert
<http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/civicrm/mailing/unsubscribe?reset=l&jid=778&qid=313190
&h=7006a218dad5b759>
Opt out of all future mailings from Yadkin Riverkeeper
<http://yad kinriverkeeper.org/http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=l&jid=778&qid=313190&h=7
006a218dad5b759>
Waterkeeper Alliance <http://yadkinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/modules/civicrm/extern/uri.php?u=15125&qid=313190>
<http://yad kinriverkeeper.org/sites/all/mod ules/civicrm/extern/open.php?q=313190>

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
April 22, 2014
Ms. Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Resource's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed the
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2013. This PAR was received on
March 24, 2014 via email. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the requirements of
15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or comments,
please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at [phone]
(Monti. [e-mail]).
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
DWR — Central Files
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter, Environmental Specialist
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources
585 Waughtown St., Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] \ Internet: www.ncdenr.gov
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer— Made in part by recycled paper

North Carolina
Pat McCrory
Governor
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
�� •' 4John
IVED
of ENR
NCDENR 2014
Department of Environment and Natural Re
Salem
Office
E. Skvar a, II
Secretary
April 11, 2014
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Drop
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Resources has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) drop request submitted
by the City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP drop request was
received by the Division via email on March 25, 2014.
IUP #
Islu Name
140 CFR
0012
JGresco Manufacturing Co.
N/A
The review indicates that the IUP drop is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H
.0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from significant/categorical Industrial
users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are consistently
met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan(a)_ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
Icerel�y,(—omar
dr
Director, DWR
mh/thomasville. iup. drop.026
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterqualtiveAg Vatuipally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer �/ Y ` L

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Programs
I
APR
Resources
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
April 10, 2014
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Modification
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Resources has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) modifications submitted
by the City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial Users (SIUs). The IUPs were received
by the Division on March 19, 2014.
IUP #
SIU Name
40 CFR
0008
Brass Craft - Thomasville
433
0031
McIntyre Metals
433
The review indicates that the IUPs are adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H
.0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from significant/categorical Industrial
users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are consistently
met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. [e-mail]] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
incerel
on A. ee%er
mh/thomasville.iup.mod.024
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Naharall'y
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

RECEIVED
�� N.C.Dept. of E'dR
Jr, APR 14 2014
NCDENRWinstcn-
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Reso Regional office
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Programs
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
April 10, 2014
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Modification
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Resources has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) modification submitted by
the City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP was initially received
by the Division on March 28, 2014, followed by corrections received on April 10, 2014.
IUP #
1SIU Name
140 CFR
0029
lCustom Drum Services
N/A
The review indicates that the IUP is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0905
and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from significant/categorical Industrial
users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are consistently
met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan (@ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
%illncerely
t+ ho er C
mh/thomasville. iup.mod.025
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: Opportunity
\ Affirmative
a tine Action
AdM491411
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Beck, Allen <[e-mail]>
Sent:
Thursday, March 27, 2014 9:43 AM
To:
Carter, Jenifer
Subject:
RE: 3-25-14 Thomasville WWTP UCR
It wasn't really a bypass Jenifer as it discharged into the oxidation ditch like it normally does but the volume of the discharge
was much greater than normal. Usually the gate opens at 5 AM and the tank will decant one foot off the top as that's what's
programmed into the system. The problem occurred when the PLC didn't close the gate and the decanting continued an
additional 4 feet or so, and as the tank level dropped the thicker the discharge became. The operators noticed it about 7:30
AM the morning of the 25t" app. 2 hours after the gate failed to close.
Thanks,
Allen
From: Carter, Jenifer [mailto:jenifer.carter(sbncdenr.gov]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 9:32 AM
To: Beck, Allen
Subject: RE: 3-25-14 Thomasville WWTP UCR
Alan,
When did staff become aware of the bypass?
Jenifer
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print. please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Resources
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:Allen.Beck(aDthomasville-ncgov]
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 8:55 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Basinger, Corey
Subject: 3-25-14 Thomasville WWTP UCR
Jenifer,

Just wanted to let you know that on3-25 a PLC glitch/failure caused multiple "failed to close" conditions on
one of our cannibal system interchange tanks which led to the unwanted release of somewhere between
250-400 thousand gallons of 22% solid mixed liquor with an approximate NH3 content of 145 mg/L into
our oxidation ditch. That, coupled with a quantity of a soapy surfactant that came in around the same time,
is causing the nitrifying capabilities of the oxidation ditch to be inhibited. Although the elevated NH3, and
possibly phosphorous, will show as an anomaly on the DMR I don't believe this will cause a permit
compliance issue this week but when our permit limits change next week this event could become
problematic depending on the recovery time of the system. We are monitoring this situation closely.
Thanks,
Allen
%W4 P&II4S re i
6x# 4 7lwNra4-d& ne 27360
PAme [phone]

�7
NC®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder
Governor Director
February 11, 2014
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI)
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed by Jenifer Carter, of this office, on January 23, 2014.
Pretreatment Coordinator, Ms. Misty Conder, was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection
was to determine the effectiveness of the City's pretreatment program and included a review of pretreatment
program elements, POTW plant performance, Industry monitoring data, and adherence to the enforcement
response plan (ERP).
The City currently has six (6) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), four (4) of which are categorical. Three SIUs
were in significant non-compliance (SNC) for permit limits violations, though the violations did not appear to
cause any problems at the plant.. The plant has not had any limits violations since the last PCI.
Overall, the inspection showed the pretreatment program to be well implemented. Please refer to the attached
inspection report for further comments. If you have any questions please contact Jenifer Carter at (336) 771-
4957.
Sincerely,
_(WW. Corey Basinger
Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Division of Water Resources
cc: WSRO Files
S WP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Resources, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service:1-877.623-6748
Internet: hftp://www.ncwater.org
NorthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

4
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Prosram Info Database Sheet(s)l
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/Lab Supervisor/Back-up ORC
4. Last Inspection Date: 01 /03 /13 Inspection Type: ❑ PCI ® Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
(NN I C 10 10 12 14 1 1 11 12 1 01 23 141 ® S❑
Fac. Type
0
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI) INSP)
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users SIUs ? 6
SILTS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users CIUs ?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? See comments
1
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
1
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
3
PSNC
Semi -Annual Periods Total Number of SIUs in SNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
0
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
3
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
0
Semi-annual Periods
POTW INTERVIEW
17. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations? El Yes ® No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
18. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial El Yes ® No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for Limits: Custom Drum (Cd, Ni, Zn);
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 BassCraft (Se); McIntyre (Mo)
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published: To be published in February
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order,
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division? N/A
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which [:]Yes ® No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes ❑ No [_1 N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes ❑ No El N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No Is the Table Adequate? ® Yes El No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added:
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07
Page 1

their files, complete with supportine documents and conv of PFRCq Annrnval T .PttPr and rdnte, rnncictr nt with Prnaram nfi�..,..,,..., ,u
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis A
06/06/2011
® Yes ❑ No
10/01/2015
Industrial Waste Survey WS
09/20/2010
® Yes ❑ No
04/30/2015
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
03/25/2013
® Yes ❑ No
10/15/2012
Enforcement Response Plan RP
10/09/2008
® Yes ❑ No
L.Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
07/22/2009
® Yes ❑ No
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT IUP FILE REVIEW 3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTIO
29. User Name
�1. AMC 2. Bass Craft
3. Gresco
30. IUP Number
1 0028
0008
0012
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
® Yes ❑ No
I ❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date
1 01/31/16
01/31/17
01/31/17
33. Categorical Standard Applied (I.E. 40 CFR, Etc)Or N/A
40 CFR 433
40 CFR 433
N/A
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
I ® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
Z Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
b. If No, is One Needed? See Inspection Form from POT
a. ®Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes []No
a. ®Yes []No
b. ❑Yes []No
a. ®Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No®N/A
Organic Management Plan TOMP ?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
b. All Issues Resolved?
a. ®Yes []No
b.[3Yes❑NoON/A
a. ®Yes ❑No
b.❑Yes❑NoON/A
a. ®Yes []No
b.❑Yes❑NoON/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required b ]UP, including flow?
11
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No[0:1N/A
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required b ]UP, including flow?
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑NoN7,1
file include process/dilution flows as Required b IUP?
42b. For categorical lUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NOON/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sam ling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
All Re ortm Non -Compliance from SIU Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
Monitoring Violations?
azYes❑No❑N/A
azYes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑NoON/A
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.®Yes❑No❑N/A
b.®Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑NoON/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.gYes❑No❑N/A
c.®Yes❑No❑N/A
c.0Yes❑No0N/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
1.
❑ Yes ®No
I Z Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
®Yes❑No❑N/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NoR7/
as Specified in the POTWs ERP OVs, Penalties, timing, etc. ?
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
OYes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?
®Yes❑No❑N/A j
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
a. ❑Yes ®No
b. ❑Yes []No
a. ❑Yes ®No
I b. ❑Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ®No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
-11
Requested Information For You?
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

r 1LL` 1 r Y 1L` TV <. V 1y11y1L` 1\ 10.
YAMC: TTO Certification Statements not submitted for 2013, though there is a TOMP on file. Follow ERP for reporting violations.
Overall, files were well organized and current.
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments: Finch Fabricators was not inspected in 2013
Requirements: Submit the updated SUO to PERCS for Approval
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory
Marginal ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter
Unsatisfactory ❑
DATE: February 11, 2014
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

ry
Wastewater Treatment Plant
PERFORMANCE ANNUAL REPORT
2013
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility/System Name: City of Thomasville Hamby Creek Waste Treatment Plant
Responsibility Entity: City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC, 27361
Person in Charge/Contact: Morgan Huffman, Public Services Director
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC, 27361
[phone]
Applicable NPDES Permits: NC00024112 (Wastewater Treatment Plant),
WQCS00057 (Collection System),
NCG110000 COC#NCG110094 (Stormwater-Industrial Site),
WQ0006050 Non -Discharge (Sludge Disposal),
NC0088200 (Alum Lagoon)
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT NUMBER: 7010 1060 0002 0662 0274
Description of Collection System:
The Thomasville sanitary sewer collection system is comprised of a system of 226.50 miles, or 1,195,925
linear feet of pipe, and 26 sewage lift stations spread throughout the area.
Description of Treatment Process:
Hamby Creek WWTP is a 6.OMGD capacity grade 4 wastewater treatment facility using the 5-Stage
Bardenpho process with post aeration to achieve biological nutrient reduction of both phosphorus and
nitrogen. Headworks equipment consists of an automated solids removal bar screen and a grit removal
system. Secondary treatment consists of two parallel trains of treatment, each consisting of an anaerobic
zone, an anoxic zone, an oxidation ditch, and second anoxic zone, and reaeration. Removal of activated
sludge is accomplished in two circular secondary clarifiers equipped for removal of solids for return to the
process or wasting to a digestion system. Effluent from the two circular clarifiers is filtered through 10
micron disk filters and then receives disinfection via a UV system prior to post aeration and discharge into
Hamby Creek. A proprietary solids reduction process is also in place via a side stream to reduce the
amount of solids that must be removed. Waste activated sludge is belt pressed and landfilled or
anaerobically digested to standards for class B sludge as defined by EPA in CFR Part 503 then applied to
farm land as a beneficial reuse. No land application of biosolids from Thomasville occurred in 2013.
II. PERFORMANCE
In 2013 Hamby Creek WWTP treated 886.9 Million Gallons of wastewater at an average daily flow of 2.41
MGD. The treatment plant was in compliance for all effluent parameters for all 12 months of the year;
however 33 sanitary sewer overflows were experienced as summarized in the table below. Twenty of the
thirty-three sanitary sewer overflows were less than one -thousand gallons in volume. Several projects,
described below the table, are both currently under construction and planned for the future to address areas
where repeated sanitary sewer overflows have been experienced. The Water Sewer Utility Project List can
be seen on the City website. Three things that users of the system can do to help prevent overflows are:
1) NEVER place GREASE or OIL into the sanitary sewers sue. It may be liquid in your pan, but
it becomes as hard as concrete in the sewer system. Instead, place grease and oil wastes into the
garbage. Twelve of the sanitary sewer overflows in 2013 were attributable to grease blocking the
lines.
2) NEVER place down the drain anything that will not biodegrade in a few days. Put another
way, if you wouldn't leave it in your front yard and expect it to biodegrade in a few days, then
don't put it down the drain. Six of the sanitary sewer overflows in 2013 were attributable to
debris blocking the lines.
3) Make sure no trees or shrubs grow on or near any sewer lines that may pass through your yard.
Roots will seek out the water being carried in the pipes and penetrate the pipe at the joints,
creating a blockage. Three of the sanitary sewer overflows in 2013 were attributable to roots
blocking the lines.
4) Make sure no roof or yard drains are hooked into the sanitary sewer system. The sanitary sewer
system can become overloaded during rainfall events if roof or yard drains are mistakenly
connected to the sanitary sewer system. Roof and yard drains should be run off into open areas or
a rain garden for absorption into the ground and by plants.

NY
SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS
During 2013 the City of Thomasville experienced 33 sanitary sewer overflows, 27 of these reached surface
waters. There were no known environmental impacts from these sanitary sewer overflows. There were 6
spills that did not reach surface waters. These spills are summarized in the table below.
Month
Date
Location
Volume
(Gallons)
Cause
Reached
Surface Waters
of the State?
January
05-Jan-13
Randolph Street
40
Grease
No
17-Jan-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
102,000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
February
05-Feb-13
Randolph Street
200
Debris in Line
Yes
14-Feb-13
Randolph Street
650
Grease
Yes
26-Feb-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
94,450
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
26-Feb-13
Liberty Drive
12,000
Inflow/Infiltration,
Pipe Failure
Yes
26-Feb-13
W Guilford Street
1,365
Debris in Line
Yes
March
06-Mar-13
Rebecca Drive
45
Roots
No
09-Mar-13
Randolph Street
16,300
Debris in
Line/Vandalism
Yes
12-Mar-13
Fairview Road
500
Grease/Pipe Failure
Yes
29-Mar-13
Ford Street
1900
Roots
Yes
April
08-Apr-13
Fisher Ferry Street
150
Grease
Yes
28-Apr-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
10,250
Inflow/Infiltration,
Severe Natural
Condition
Yes
29-Apr-13
Cooksey Drive
500
Debris in Line
Yes
May
01-May-13
Jones Circle
50
Grease
No
06-May-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
13,200
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
06-May-13
Carolina Avenue
200
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
07-May-13
North Hamby Creek
Outfall
32,000
Debris in Line
Yes
13-May-13
Lake Road
100
Grease
Yes
July
11-Jun-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
1,393,000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
16-Jul-13
Lake Road
10
Roots
Yes
19-Jul-13
Trinity Street
20
Grease
Yes
29-Jul-13
National Highway
20
Grease
Yes
August
01-Aug-13
Liberty Drive
30
Grease
No
10-Aug-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
18,035
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
18-Aug-13
High Meadow Drive
12,000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
21-Aug-13
Lake Road
392
Debris in Line
Yes
September
11-Sep-13
Pine Woods Church
Road
200
Pipe Failure,
Yes
October
30-Oct-13
Camden Woods
Drive
20
Pipe Failure
Yes
November
11-Nov-13
Doak Street
1
Grease
No
15-Nov-13
Morrison Avenue
100
Grease
Yes
21-Nov-13
Memorial Park Road
1
Grease
No
December
23-Dec-13
Old Emanuel Church
Road
96,000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
The City of Thomasville has undertaken multiple sanitary sewer infrastructure rehabilitation projects to
address the issue of sanitary sewer overflows and has several more projects planned. The first line
replacement project has been completed and three additional projects are currently underway. These
include the rehabilitation of two of the City's largest sewage pumping stations (Northside and East
Davidson) and Phase I of a project to update and replace as necessary the entire North Hamby Creek
Outfall line. This outfall line is one of the largest and oldest lines that the City has in the collection system.
Completion of these projects should greatly decrease both the number and volume of large spills
experienced. Future currently planned large infrastructure projects include: Completion of the North
Hamby Creek Outfall project, Upgrades to the Hanks Branch Basin Collection System, and Rehabilitation

a
of Man Holes on the South Hamby Creek Outfall. Numerous smaller pipe replacement projects are
performed every year by contractors hired by the City.
In addition to these projects to address infrastructure issues the City has begun a more aggressive program
of Right -of -Way maintenance over the last several years. This program consists largely of the cutting and
removal of vegetation that has been allowed to grow within the sanitary sewer rights -of -way or easements.
Several local tree services have been employed to help in this effort along with clearing performed by City
of Thomasville personnel. In conjunction with this program a private contractor has been hired to
chemically treat select sections of the collection system that have experienced problems associated with
root intrusion into the lines. The chemicals they use kill back the root growth and prevent re -intrusion for
at least three years.
III. NOTIFICATION
Public notification of the availability of this report was made using the city government information
channel (cable channel 13) and the City web site. This report was prepared and issued in compliance with
the North Carolina Clean Water Act of 1999. Copies of this report are available at the City of Thomasville
Water Department located in City Hall, 10 Salem St., Thomasville, N.C, and on the City web site
http://www.thomasville-nc.gov/.
IV. CERTIFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
further certify that this has been made available to the users or customers of the named system and that
those users have been notified of its availability.
W. Kelly Craver Date
Responsible Person
Title: City Manager
Entity: City of Thomasville
Explanation of Acronyms Used:
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
MGD: Million Gallons per Day

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Beck, Allen <[e-mail]>
Sent:
Thursday, October 17, 2013 7:17 AM
To:
Carter, Jenifer
Cc:
Craver, Kelly
Subject:
10-16-13 Hamby Creek WWTP Equipment OOS
Jenifer,
We had to take one of our oxidation ditches out of service yesterday in order to repair a cooling fan in a
VFD. We hope to have it back in service either today or tomorrow and I do not anticipate any compliance
issues.
Thanks,
Allen
Azft VW
o� ?lranada& -&C; 27360
P4" [phone]

NODE 'SIR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Programs
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder
October 15, 2013
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
John E. Skvarla, III
A Compliance Evaluation Inspection was performed at the City of Thomasville's Hamby Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on September 19, 2013 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional Office.
Allen Beck and Misty Conder were present for the inspection. The inspection consisted of an on -site inspection
of the treatment facility and a review of related files.
There have been no NPDES limits violations since the last plant inspection in April 2012. Records were
complete and accurate, with no discrepancies noted when comparing lab data to the submitted Discharge
Monitoring Reports.
Overall, the WWTP appears to be very well operated and maintained. Please refer to the enclosed inspection
report for more detailed information. If you have any questions, please call Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
attachment
cc: Mr. Allen Beck (same address)
Ms. Misty Conder (same address)
SWP Central Files
WSRO SWP Files
North Carolina Division of Water Resources, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748
Internet: hftp:/Am.ncwater.org
None
rthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
Washington, D.C. 20460
EPA
OMB No. 2040-0057
omplaaninp Inspectmon
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 L N I 2 15 I 11 NCO024112 111 121 13/09/19 117 181 Cl 191 � I 20I I
L! J
Remarks
21111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111116
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA — - -- -- --- -- Reserved-- --- ---
671 169 7013
—! 71 UNI"74 I I I 1
I I 80
Section B: FacilityData
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Hamby Creek WWTP
10:00 AM 13/09/19
09/08/01
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
110 Optimist Park Rd
Thomasville NC 27360
12:00 PM 13/09/19
14/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)fTitles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Allen R Beck//336-883-3464 /
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Kelly Craver,PO Box 368 Thomasville NC 273610368/Assistant City
Manager/336-475-4220/3364754283 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit ■ Flow Measurement 0 Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program 0 Sludge Handling Disposal 0 Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Jenifer Carter WSRO WQ//336-771-5000/
l
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
- tA)5# /5754' �d�?
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page # 1

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3 NCO024112 11 12 13/09/19 117 18LCI
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page # 2

n
Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit
Yes
No NA
NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new application?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the facility as described in the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: There are only two clarifiers. There is not a re -aeration lagoon, but rather
two re -aeration tanks that al=e considered the 5th stage of the Bardenphro process.
There are four sludge holding tanks (formerly digesters) and a belt press.
Record Keeping
Yes
No NA
NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
00011
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Dates, times and location of sampling ■
Name of individual performing the sampling ■
Results of analysis and calibration ■
Dates of analysis ■
Name of person performing analyses
■
Transported COCs
■
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
■
❑ ❑
❑
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment:
Influent Sampling
Yes No NA
NE
Page # 3

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is sample collected above side streams?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Is proper volume collected?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Is the tubing clean?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
■
❑ ❑ ❑
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Yes
No NA
NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type representative)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
Yes No NA
NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the flow meter operational?
■
❑ ❑
❑
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Comment: The chart recorder is not used for compliance purposes. The flow meter is
used for reporting and is considered to be more accurate, as its calibration is checked
annually.
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable Solids, pH, DO, Sludge ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
0— e,........�
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
Yes No NA NE
■
Page # 4

Permit: NCO024112
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Bar Screens
Yes
No NA
NE
b.Mechanical
■
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
■
❑ Cl
❑
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the unit in good condition?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: Manual bar screen used as back-up.
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
❑
b.Mechanical
■
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches
Yes
No NA
NE
Are the aerators operational?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are setteeometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: According to Mr. Beck, SCADA system keeps DO at --1.0 at effluent end of
ditches; Settleometer test usually takes -1 hour - Performed throughout each day.
Nutrient Removal
Yes No NA
NE
# Is total nitrogen removal required?
❑
■ ❑
❑
# Is total phosphorous removal required?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Type
Biological
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Page # 5

Permit: NC0024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP ,
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Nutrient Removal
Is nutrient removal process operating properly?
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Are pumps in place?
Are pumps operational?
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
Comment:
Chemical Feed
Is containment adequate?
Is storage adequate?
Are backup pumps available?
Is the site free of excessive leaking?
Comment: None being added currently, though some chemicals are stored on site.
Secondary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/. of the sidewall depth)
Comment:
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Type of operation:
Is the filter media present?
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
Yes No NA NE
■❑❑❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
Cross flow
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page # 6

Permit: NC0024112
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Yes
No NA
NE
Is the filter free of growth?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the air scour operational?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Is the scouring acceptable?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: Backflow is flow -dependent.
Disinfection - UV
Yes
No NA
NE
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are UV bulbs clean?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is UV intensity adequate?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is there a backup system on site?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: one channel of three used at one time. Switch to a different channel every
2 weeks, and open a 2nd channel if flow > the 4 MGD.
Pump Station - Effluent
Yes
No NA
NE
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are all pumps present?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are all pumps operable?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Are float controls operable?
■
n n
n
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Comment:
Solids Handling Equipment
Yes
No NA
NE
Is the equipment operational?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Is storage adequate?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
■
❑ ❑
❑
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Page # 7

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Solids Handling Equipment Yes No NA NE
Comment: There is a cannibal solids reduction process utilizing two interchange
bioreactors that recieves some filtered RAS/WAS. There are 4 sludge holding tanks
and a belt press.
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is automatically activated standby power available? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is the generator tested under load? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Is the generator fuel level monitored? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Mr. Beck said the generator can operate the entire plant. Fuel is provided
by Rex Oil Company as needed.
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Comment:
Page # 8

Carter, Jenifer
From: Beck, Allen <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 11:36 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Craver, Kelly
Subject: 8-21-13 Equipment OOS
Jenifer,
We had to take our number one oxidation ditch out of service in order to repair a motor controller. We
hope to have it repaired and back online today but it may be tomorrow. Hopefully this will have only
minimal effects on the process.
Thanks,
Allen
'Ikoxaaviefz'y2(� 27360
N~ [phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
FILE ACCESS RECORD
SECTION SWP DATE/TIME
NAME 'Turk_ &1 i 4e REPRESENTING -let-C
Guidelines for Access: The staff of the _Winston-Salem Regional Office is dedicated to making
public records in our custody readily available to the public for review and copying. We also have the
responsibility to the public to safeguard these records and to carry out our day-to-day program
obligations. Please read carefully the following before signing the form.
1. Due to the large public demand for file access, we request that you call at least a day in
advance to schedule an appointment for file review so you can be accommodated.
Appointments are scheduled between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Viewing time ends at 4:45
p.m. Anyone arriving without an appointment may view the files to the extent that time and
staff supervision are available.
2. You must specify files you want to review.
3. There is no charge for 25 copies or less. If making more than 25 copies - there is a charge of
2.5 cents per page. (A page refers to a "single impression". A double sided copy is to be
counted as 2 pages.) Costs for electronic copies will vary depending on the media type
(diskette, tape, cd-rom), please see Receptionist for information regarding electronic copy
charges. Payment is to be made by check, money order, or cash (see Receptionist).
4. FILES MUST BE KEPT IN THE ORDER YOU RECEIVED THEM. Files may not be taken
from the office. No briefcases, large totes, etc. are permitted in the file review area. To
remove, alter, deface, mutilate, or destroy material in one of these files is a misdemeanor for
which you can be fined up to $500.00.
5. In accordance with General Statute 25-3-512, a $25.00 processing fee will be charged and
collected for checks on which payment has been refused.
6. The customer must present a photo ID, sign -in, and receive a visitor sticker prior to reviewing
files.
1.,:f.:` ...tfT•A.':-... ..0 .. -.'t-v .i ..F'. •...u::.. ...-_::.. _�i_.':._ .. ;.... :::': .... .... ... .. .. 1 .. ... .: .. .. ..._5.., a ,. ..�. .. . A,. .. .. ..,...St 2..11 ':. �:..5.....:Yi'_
FACILITY NAME COUNTY
2
3
4
5
✓;lle WC f $NPpds
1 403/13
Signato and Name of Finn/Business Date
Please attach a business card to this form if available
QX►.)✓ Y,
9:.7a Z:66
Time In Time Out

A��
. r JL)
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Pat McCrory Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
July 30, 2013
Ms. Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed the
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2012. This PAR was received on
March 20, 2013. Additions to the PAR were received as requested on July 30, 2013. Our review indicates that
the PAR is adequate and satisfies the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive
Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or comments,
please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at [phone]
(Monti. Hassan@ncdenr. gov).
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
S WP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748
Internet: http://pogal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
NorthCarolina
Natura!!rf
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

4'1
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Pat McCrory
Governor
May 02, 2013
Hamby Creek WWTP
P.O. Box 369
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Receipt of permit renewal application
NPDES Permit NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Allen Beck,
RECEIVED7
N.O.Dept. of ENR
JUN U 3 2013
Winston-Salem
Reso Re Tonal office
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
The NPDES Unit received your permit renewal application on 05-01-2013. This permit
renewal has been assigned Charles Weaver (919-807-6391) who will contact you if any
additional information is required to complete your permit renewal. Due to current backlog, you
should continue to operate under terms of your current permit, until a new permit is issued. If
you have any questions, please contact the assigned permit writer.
Sincerely,
V
Jeff Poupart
Point Source Branch Program Supervisor IV
Cc: Central Files
Winston Salem Regional Office
NPDES Unit
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 One
Phone: [phone] Internet: www.ncdenr.gov NorthCarohna
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper Naturattff

NCO024112 I RENEWAL I YADKIN-PEE DEE
FORM
2A
NPDES
APPLICATION OVERVIEW
Form 2A has been developed in a modular format and consists of a "Basic Application information" packet
and a "Supplemental Ap Hdation Information packet. The Bask Application Information packet is divided
Into two parts. Ail appll`cantsi must complete. Parts A and C. Ao..glicants.with a-desi.on flow greater than or
equal to 0.1 mgd'must also comoleto Part B..Some apoliCants must also complete the Supplemental
Application Information - aoket. The followinO� items explain which. "parts of'Form" 2A Vou must complete.
BASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION:
A. Basic Application Information for all Applicants. All applicants must complete questions A.1 through A.8. A treatment works
that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States must also answer questions A.9 through A.12.
B. Additional Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow >_ 0.1 mad. All treatment works that have design flows
-greater than or equal to 0.1 million gallons per day must complete questions 13.1 through 13.6.
C. Certification. All applicants must complete Part C (Certification).
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION:
D. Expanded Effluent Testing Data. A treatment works that discharges effluent to surface waters of the United States and meets
one or more of the following criteria must complete Part D (Expanded Effluent Testing Data):
1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mqd.
2. Is required to have a pretreatment program (or has one in place). or
3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to provide the information.
E. Toxicity Testing Data. A treatment works that meets one or more of the following criteria must complete Part E (Toxicity Testing
Data :
1. Has a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1 mqd,
2. Is required to havaa pretreatment program (or has one in place) or
3. Is otherwise required by the permitting authority to submit results of toxicity testing
F. Industrial User Discharges and RCRAICERCLA Wastes. A treatment works that accepts process wastewater from any
significant industrial users (SIUs) or receives RCRA or CERCLA wastes must complete Part F (Industrial User Discharges
and RCRA/CERCLA Wastes). SIUs are defined as:
1. All industrial users subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards under 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 403.6 and
40 CFR Chapter I. Subchapter N (see instructions): and
2. Any other industrial user that:
a. Discharges ain average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater to the treatment works (with certain
exclusions): or
b. Contributes a process wastestream that makes up 5 percent or more of the average dry weather hydraulic or organic
capacity of the treatment plant: or
C. Is designated as an SIU by the control authority.
G. Combined Sewer Systems. A treatment works that has a combined sewer system must complete Part G (Combined Sewer
Systems).
lkgy

ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NCO024112
RENEWAL YADKIN-PEE DEE
I
3ASIC APPLICATION INFORMATION
'ART A. BASIC APPLICA7riON 14FOt2MATION FOR ALL APPLICANTS:
kil treatment works must complete questions A.1 through A.8 of this Basic Application Information Packet.
k.1. Facility Information.
Facility Name HAMBY CREEK WWTP
Mailing Address P.O BOX 368
NC 27361
_THOMASVILLE,
Contact Person ALLEN BECK
Title WWTP SUPERINTENDENT / ORC
Telephone Number (336 475-4246)
Facility Address 110 OPTIMIST PARK ROAD
(not P.O. Box) THOMASVILLE, NC 27360
U. Applicant Information. If the applicant is different from the above, provide the following:
Mailing Address City of Thomasville. PO Box 368, Thomasville NC 27361
Contact Person Kell ry Craver
Title City Manager
Telephone Number [phone]
Is the applicant the owner or operator (or both) of the treatment works?
X owner X operator
Indicate whether correspondence regarding this permit should be directed to the facility or the applicant
X facility 1I applicant
U. Existing Environmental Permits. Provide the permit number of any existing environmental permits that have been issued to the treatment works
(include state -issued permits).
NPDES NCO024112 PSD
UIC Other WQ0006050
RCRA Other NCG110000 - COC # NCG110094
V4. Collection System Information. Provide information on municipalities and areas served by the facility. Provide the name and population of each
entity and, if known, provide information on the type of collection system (combined vs separate) and its ownership (municipal private etc-).
Name Population Served Type of Collection System Ownership
City of Thomasville Y 27374 sanitary only City of Thomasville
City of Trinity 6,652 sanitary only City of Trinity
Total population served 34026
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 2 of 22

i!
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT II
i
UMBER:
IMWTP, NCO024112
RENEWAL
YADKIN-PEE DEE
HAMBY CREEK!
A.5.
Indian Country.
a. Is the treatment works located in Indian Country?
❑ Yes X No
b. Does the treatmentworks discharge to a receiving water that is either in Indian Country or that is upstream from (and eventually flows
through) Indian Country?'
❑ Yes X No
A.6.
Flow. Indicate the design flow rate of the treatment plant (i.e.. the wastewater flow rate that the plant was built to handle) Also provide the
average daily flow rate and maximum daily flow rate for each of the last three years Each year's data must be based on a 12 month time period
with the 12 month of this year occumng no more than three months prior to this application submittal
a. Design flow rate 6 mad
Two Years Ago Last Year This Year
b. Annual average dailv flow rate 2.24 2.11 2.57
C. Maximum daily flow rate 5.47 3.4 5.1
A.7.
Collection System. Indicate the type(s) of collection system(s) used by the treatment plant Check all that apply. Also estimate the percent
contribution (by miles) of each.
X Separate sanitary serer 100
❑ Combined storm and sanitary sewer
A.B.
Discharges and Other Disposal Methods
a. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to waters of the U.S.? X Yes ❑ No
If yes, list how many of each of the following types of discharge points the treatment works uses:
i. Discharges of treated effluent 1
ii. Discharges of untreated or Dartially treated effluent 0
iii. Combined sewer overflow points 0
iv. Constructed emergency overflows (prior to the headworks) 0
V. Other na 0
b. Does the treatment works discharge effluent to basins ponds or other surface impoundments
that do not have outlets for discharoe to waters of the U.S.? ❑ Yes X No
If Yes, provide the following for each surface impoundment
Location: na
Annual average daily volume discharge to surface impoundment(s)
na mqd
Is discharge ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
C. Does the treatment works land -apply treated wastewater? ❑ Yes X No
If yes, provide the following for each land application site -
Location: NA
Number of acres: NA
Annual average daily volume applied to site: NA mqd
Is land application ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
d. Does the treatment works discharge or transport treated or untreated wastewater to another
treatment works ❑ Yes X No
?A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 3 o--
2

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK�VUWTP, NC0024112
RENEWAL
YADKIN-PEE DEE
If yes, describe the mean(s) by which the wastewater from the treatment works is discharged or transported to the other treatment works
(e.g., tank truck, pipe).
NA
If transport is by a oarty other than the applicant provide:
Transporter Name NA
Mailing Address
Contact Person
Title
Telephone Number ( )
For each treatment works that receives this discharge provide the following:
Name NA
Mailing Address
Contact Person
Title
Telephone Number ( )
If known provide the NPDES permit number of the treatment works that receives this discharge
Provide the average daily flow rate from the treatment works into the receiving facility mqd
e. Does the treatment works discharge or dispose of its wastewater in a manner not included
in A.8. through A.8.d above (e.g.. underground percolation well infection): ❑ Yes X No
If yes provide the following for each disposal method:
Description of method (including location and size of site(s) if applicable):
NA
Annual daily volume disposed by this method: NA
Is disposal through this method ❑ continuous or ❑ intermittent?
:PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 4 of 22

=ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEKiWWTP, NCO024112
RENEWAL
YADKIN-PEE DEE
WASTEWATER DISCHARGES:
If You answered "Yes" to cuestion A 8 a complete questions A 9 through A 12 once for each outfall (including bypass points) through
which effluent is discharged.. Do not include information on combined sewer overflows In this section
If You answered "No" to question
A.8.a no to Part B. "Additidnai Application Information for Applicants with a Design Flow Greater than or Equal to 0.1 mgd "
A.9. Description of Outfall.
a. Outfall number 001
b. Location
27360
(City or town if applicable)
(Zip Code)
DAVIDSON
NC
(County)
(State)
35 DEG 50 MIN 54 SEC
80 DEG 06 MIN 51 SEC
(Latitude)_
(Longitude)
C. Distance from shore (if applicable) NA
d. Depth below surface (if applicable) NA
e. Average daily flow rate 2.18
ft
ft
mqd
f. Does this outfall have either an intermittent or a periodic discharge? ❑ Yes X No
(go to A 9 q )
If yes, provide the following information:
Number f times Per Year discharge occurs:
Average duration of each discharge:
Average flow per discharge:
mqd
Months in which discharge occurs:
q. Is outfall equipped with a diffuser? ❑ Yes X No
A.10. Description of Receiving Waters
a. Name of receiving water HAMBY CREEK
b. Name of watershed (if known) LOWER YADKIN
United States Soil Conservation Service 14-digit watershed code (if known):
C. Name of State Management/River Basin (if known): YADKIN PEE DEE
United States Geological Survey 8-digit hydrologic cataloging unit code (if known):
03040103
d. Critical low flow of receiving stream (if applicable)
acute NA cfs chronic NA
cfs
e. Total hardness of receiving stream at critical low flow (if applicable): NA
mg/1 of CaCO3
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 5 of 22

112 I RENEWAL I YADKIN-PEE DEE
.11. Description of Treatment
a. What level of treatment are provided? Check all that at)ply
❑ Primary X Secondary
Indicate the following:removal rates (as applicable):
Desiqn BOD5 removal or Design CBOD5 removal
85
Design SS removal
85 0�0
Design P removal
85
Desiqn N removal
85 %
Other AMMONIA 85 Rio
C. What type of disinfection is used for the effluent from this outfall? If disinfection varies by season please describe:
ULTRAVIOLET
If disinfection is by chlorination is dechlorination used for this outfall? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Does the treatment plant have post aeration? X Yes ❑ No
Outfall number: 001
low Rate
emperature (Winter)
emperature (Summer) I 28.8 1 °C 22.7 1 or I Call
IOCHEMICAL OXYGEN BOD5
'EMAND (Report one) CBOD5
ECAL COLIFORM
OTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS (TSS)
A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA fors 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 6 of 22

I NUMBER:
ALAHAMBY CREEK 'WV1 TP. NC0024112 PERMIT
RENEWALsTeo.
YADKIN PEE DEE
1_,070,000 god (per 1/1 study in 201 Facilities Plan)
Briefly explain any steps underway or planned to minimize inflow and infiltration
Outfall projects pending
i.2. Topographic Map. Attach to this application a topographic mar) of the area extending at least one mile beyond facility property boundaries This
map must show the outline of the facility and the following information (You may submit more than one map if one map does not show the entire
area.
a. The area surrounding the treatment plant including all unit Processes
b. The major pipes or other structures through which wastewater enters the treatment works and the pipes or other structures through which
treated wastewater is discharged from the treatment plant Include outfalls from bypass piping if applicable
c. Each well where wastewater from the treatment plant is infected underground
d. Wells, springs, other surface water bodies, and drinking water wells that are: 1) within Y, mile of the property boundaries of the treatment
works. and 2) listed in public record or otherwise known to the applicant
e. Any areas where the sewage sludge produced by the treatment works is stored treated or disposed
f. If the treatment works receives waste that is classified as hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRA by truck rail
or special Pipe, show on the map where the hazardous waste enters the treatment works and where it is treated stored and/or disposed
.4. Operation/Maintenance Performed by Contractors)
Are any operational or maintenance aspects (related to wastewater treatment and effluent quality) of the treatment works the responsibility of a
contractor? X Yes ❑ No
If yes, list the name. address..telephone number, and status of each contractor and describe the contractor's responsibilities (attach additional
Pages if necessary)
Name: K & R Haulin
Mailing Address: 707 Dillion St
Thomasville NC 27360
Telephone Number: [phone]
Responsibilities of Contractor. Daily operation of belt press for biosolids removal transport of biosolids to landfill
for each. (If none go to question B.6.
)
List the outfall number (assigned in question A 9) for each outfall that is covered by this implementation schedule
Indicate whether the planned improvements or implementation schedule are required by local State or Federal agencies
❑ Yes ❑ No
\ Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 7 of 22

LTION MAP:

BwDGE owlN '
S.S. MANHOLE TANK ND. 6 TANK W. 2
NO.2 RM UENr INFLUENT
A4'IEBNG DEWATEND 6000$
FILTER /SCREEN a DIGESTER
AND WASHER ro uxDRLL 1
BUILDING
ro w'ASIE ,�
TO uNDRLL SUPEWATEM
3
pNx RwM SCREENIN68
uuN scsm
SOLIDS
COMPACTED 80LID5 TO LANOFBL
SION BUILDING
wAsrE sw6GE
BUILDING
3
MTERCIIANGE I
MANHOLE BIOREACTOR No. t 1 CHANGE BIDRFACTIXI OECAM /
NO. Tat
INTERCHANGE
BIOREACfOR No.2 G.Q,j -,I- CHEMICAL '
STORAGE
E� AND
CANNIBAL y '
MD PROCESS I- FEED BLDG. 6' So
SECONDARY PUIIGE SOLIDS
SLUDGE FLOCCULATION '
PUMP CLARIFIER
ANAEIOBK: AN --C STATION-
sEECTOR 6ElBCTOR
CIARFIEI EFRIIENT
I I g ' Iiii
NO.T NO.2
"'-------------R'-OC---�----------------------- _
-- ----- r---------
-- LLD-------------' r -- --- —----- - --------- ' � � ----�--
1y RFAeunox � � -------- --_.
< 1 REAEDATION ETwE
Ir I
rEi TANK 3 i
N0.3
RNAL CIMIF�A, ' FILTER BACKWASH
IBp, PUMPING STATION
NEW ' a�i v.rnvnax PNun J J
OXIDATION RBaeanox J G T T
DITCHES TANK - Ms i
44
mwaff
V DD FILTERS '
MANHOLE EFFLUENT REUSE s
NO.PUMPB
1D3 - -- ' ' '
BECONDAR sEoNOAR- ;
Ty op 11 DDiyNFECTION
_ I
RRAS6
ETURN ALTNAT® SWDDE RA61 P.S.
_ MANHOLE
NO.104
� Aa:rmMa
WASTE DRAM
FLTER EFF. BUILDING STATIC AERATOR
FINAL CLARIRER
ry4 2 O WASTE ON m
PUMPING
C STATION �
RAa
wnsTB DRNN
PROCE
OTHER FLO
CHENIK
ms

ILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL
C. If the answer to B.5•.b is "Yes." briefly describe, including new maximum dailv inflow rate (if aDDlicable)
d.
YADKIN PEE DEE
Schedule Actual Completion
Implementation Stage MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYYY
Begin Construction
End Construction
Begin Discharge
Attain Operational Level
e. Have appropriate permits/clearances conceming other Federal/State requirements been obtained? n Yes l-1 No
Describe briefly:
3.6. EFFLUENT TESTING DATA (GREATER THAN 0.1 MGD ONLY)
Outfall Number: 001
POLLuANr
\MMONIA (as N)
27.0
Mq/L
0.339
MNL
1057
SM4500NH3D-1997
0.1
:HLORINE (TOTAL
tESIDUAL. TRC)
)ISSOLVED OXYGEN
11.0
Mg/L
8_9
Mq/L
1042
Hach 10360
1.0
-OTAL KJELDAHL
IITROGEN (TKN)
7.84
M /L
Mq--
1.37
M
�
56
EPA351.1
0.2
IITRATE PLUS NITRITE
IITROGEN
12 4
M L
—�
1.83
M �
55
EPA353.2
0.1
)IL and GREASE
9
MgfL
2.77
Mg/L
24
EPA1664A
5
'HOSPHORUS (Total)
4.06
M /L
0.195
Mq/L
615
SM450OPE-1999
0.05
OTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
296
Mg/L
274
MNL
3
SM2540C
10.0
_
rosy
)THER
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 8 7550-22 Page 8 of 22

HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
Indicate which parts of Form 2A you have completed and are submitting:
:ertify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were Prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
Sinnpd to acsi,rp th.} nr,e l,fi.A nnrc --1 ..........
Telephone number [phone]
)on request of the Permitting authority, you must submit any other information necessary to assure wastewater treatment practices at the treatment
)rks or identify aporopriate Permitting requirements
:ND COMPLETED FORMS TO:
NCDENR/ DWQ
Attn: NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
, Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 9 of 22

ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
e
a
IETALS (TOTAL RECOVERABLE)
CYANIDE PHENOLS AND HARDNESS
,NTIMONY
<25
UQ/L
7.83
Ug/L
26
EPA200.8
0.5
,RSENIC
<10
Uq/L
2.17
UQ/L
27
EPA200.8
2.0
;ERYLLIUM
<5
UQ/L
1
UQ/L
3
EPA200.8
0.5
:ADMIUM
<2
Uq/L
0.48
Uq/L
134
EPA200.8
0.15
:HROMIUM
6
Uq/L
2.45
UQ/L
216
EPA200.8
0.2
TOPPER
11
UQ/L
3.88
UQ/L
119
EPA200.8
2
EAD
7
Up/L
1.05
UQ/L
203
EPA200.8
0.5
IERCURY
4.54
NQ/L
1.13
Nq/L
193
EPA1631
1.0
IICKEL
101
UQ/L
10.2
Uq/L
216
EPA200.8
0.5
ELENIUM
<5
UQ/L
1.55
UQ/L
217
EPA200.8
2.0
ILVER
<5
UQ/L
1.05
Ua/L
115
EPA20008
0.5
HALLIUM
<20
Uq/L
10.3
UQ/L
3
EPA200.8
0.5
INC
88
Uq/L
32.1
Uq/L
119
EPA200.8
5
,YANIDE
0,005
MQ/L
0.002
MQ/L
114
EPA335.4
0.005
OTAL PHENOLIC
MP
:OMPOUNDS
12
Uq/L
9
UQ/L
3
_
EPA420.1
10
IARDNESS (as CaCO3)
70
UQ/L
63.6
Ug/L
3
SM2340C
0.662
Ise this space for a separate sheet) to
provide information on other metals requested by the permit writer
IOLYBDENUM
<10
Uq/L
2.58
UQ/L
27
EPA200.8
2
,LUMINUM
292
UQ/L
104
Ug/L
26
EPA200.8
50
A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 10 of 22

AGILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
ZROLEIN
<10
ua/L
<5
ua/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uq/L
,CRYLONITRILE
<200
uq/L
<50
UQ/L
3
EPA 624
10-200
uq/L
!ENZENE
<10
ug/t
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 u L
!ROMOFORM
<10
W/L
<5
uQ/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
:ARBON
ETRACHLORIDE
<10
u0/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 u L
:HLOROBENZENE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uq/L
:HLORODIBROMO-
9ETHANE
<10
ucl/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uq/L
:HLOROETHANE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 624
10 ug/L
-CHLOROETHYLVINYL
THER
<10
u /L
5
uQ/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
;HLOROFORM
<10
uQ/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
'ICHLOROBROMO-
IETHANE
<10
uq/L
<5
u_ /c/LL
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
1-DICHLOROETHANE
<10
uq/L
<5
ug/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
,2-DICHLOROETHANE
<10
ua/L
<5
u0/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uQ/L
RANS-I.2-DICHLORO-
THYLENE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 u0/L
1-DICHLORO-
THYLENE
<10
uQ/L
<5
ug/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uq/L
2-DICHLOROPROPANE
<10
UQ/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uQ/L
3-DICHLORO-
ROPYLENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uQ/L
THYLBENZENE
<10
uq/L
<5
UQ/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 uQ/L
ETHYL BROMIDE
<10
u /L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 624
10 ug/L
ETHYL CHLORIDE
<10
uq/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 624
10 uq/L
ETHYLENE CHLORIDE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 624
10 u0/L
1.2.2-TETRA-
HLOROETHANE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
THRORO-
YLENE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
DLUENE
<10
ug/L
<5
u0/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
4 Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Paae 11 of 22

4CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
1
RICHLOROETHANE
<10
ug/L
<5
ug/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
1 2
RICHLOROETHANE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
RICHLOROETHYLENE
<10
uq/L
<5
uq/L
3
EPA 624
5-10 ug/L
'INYL CHLORIDE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 624
10 ug/L
Ise this space (or a separate sheet) to provide information on other volatile organic compounds requested by the permit writer
LCID-EXTRACTABLE COMPOUNDS
'-CHLORO-M-CRESOL
<20
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10-20 uq/L
'-CHLOROPHENOL
<10
ug/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
A-DIMETHYLPHENOL
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
1.6-DINITRO-O-CRESOL
<50
ug/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
50 uq/L
!.4-DINITROPHENOL
<50
uq/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
50 uq/L
!-NITROPHENOL
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
I-NITROPHENOL
<50
ug/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
50 ug/L
'ENTACHLOROPHENOL
<50
ug/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
50 ug/L
'HENOL
<10
uq/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
!! 4 66-
"RICHLOROPHENOL
<10
/L
u —g--
<10
u/L
�—
3
EPA 625
10 u/L
_�
Ise this space (or a separate sheet) to provide information on other acid -extractable compounds requested by the permit writer
3ASE-NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS
10ENAPHTHENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA625
10 uq/L
4CENAPHTHYLENE
<10
ug/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
4NTHRACENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10ug/L
BENZIDINE
<100
uq/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
50-100
ug/L
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
BENZO(A)PYRENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces'EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 12 of 22

XILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUINBER:
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RIVER BASIN:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
itfall number. 001
(Complete once for each outfall discharging effluent to waters of the United States.)
t BENZO-
.UORANTHENE
<10
u /L
�—
<10
u /L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
?NZO(GHI)PERYLENE
<10
uq/L
<1p
ua/L
3
EPA 625
10ug/L
NZO(K)
.UORANTHENE
<10
�
<10
�
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
S (2-CHLOROETHOXYI
<10
/L
uq—
<10
u /L
�
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
=THANE
S (2-CHLOROETHYL)-
<10
u /L
�L
<10
u /L
�_
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
'HER
S (2-CHLOROISO-
MPYL) ETHER
<10
uq/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
S (2-ETHYLHEXYL)
iTHALATE
<20
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10-20 uq/L
BROMOPHENYL
iENYL ETHER
<10
uq/L
<10
OWL
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
)TYL BENZYL
iTHALATE
<10
UCl/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
7,HLORO-
\PHTHALENE
<10
uQ/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
-HLORPHENYL
iENYL ETHER
<10
uq/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
iRYSENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
<10
u L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 un/L
BENZO(A.H)
lTHRACENE
<10
ug/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
!-DICHLOROBENZENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
I-DICHLOROBENZENE
<10
uQ—/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
I-DICHLOROBENZENE
<10
uq/L
<10
up/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
3-DICHLORO-
:NZIDINE
<20
�
<20
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10-20 uq/L
ETHYL PHTHALATE
<10
uQ/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
METHYL PHTHALATE
<10
Uq/L
<10
ua/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
t-DINITROTOLUENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
i-DINITROTOLUENE
<10
uq/L
<10
ua/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
(DRA ENYL-
/DRAZINE
<50
uq/L
<50
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10-50 uctlL
� Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Reolaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 13 of 22

LcALi I T NAML ANU r'tKMI I NUMUM PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: RIVER BASIN:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
itfall number: 001 (Complete once for each outfall discharging effluent to waters of the United States.)
UORANTHENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
UORENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10 u0/L
°XACHLOROBENZENE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ua/L
1 AD E ERO
<10
ug/L
<10
/L
1_
3
EPA 625
10 uo/L
IXACHLOROCYCLO-
<10
uq/L
<10
u9/L
3
EPA 625
10 u0/L
iNTADIENE
?XACHLOROETHANE
<10
u0/L
<10
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10 u0/L
3ENO(1.2.3-CD)
'RENE
<10
u /L
-q—
<
10
uQ/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
DPHORONE
<10
ug/L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
PHTHALENE
<10
uq/L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 625
10 u0/L
rROBENZENE
<10
u0/L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 625
10 ua/L
VITROSODI-N-
:OPYLAMINE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
VITROSODI-
iTHYLAMINE
<10
uq/L
<10
ug/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
VITROSODI-
!ENYLAMINE
<10
uq/L
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 un/L
ENANTHRENE
<10
u0/L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 625
10 uQ/L
RENE
<10
u0/L
<10
u0/L
3
EPA 625
10 ug/L
4-
ICHLOROBENZENE
<10
uq/L
-7
<10
uq/L
3
EPA 625
10 uq/L
this space for a separate sheet) to provide information on other base neutral compounds reauested
by the permit
wnter
this space (or a separate sheet) to provide information on other pollutants (e.g., pesticides) reauested by the permit wnter
Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Paae 14 of 22

PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
If no biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete.
E.I. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
X chronic C7 acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 1 Test number: 2 Test number: 3
a. Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
Manual title Shc
Chr,
Ceriodaphnia - TGP3B
Not listed
001
2/2/09 / 2/5/09
2/4/09
Not listed
Ceriodaphnia - TGP3B
23.5 hr
001
5/5/09 / 5/7/09
5/6/09
7 Days
Ceriodaphnia - TGP3B
22.25 hr
001
7121109 / 7/23/09
7/22/09
7 Days
Edition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002, July 1994
EPA 600-4-91-002, July 1994
EPA 600-4-91-002, July 1994
Page number(s)
Pq 44-53
Pq 44-53
Pq 44-53
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
24-Hour composite X X
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
Before disinfection
X
After disinfection I X X X
After dechlorination
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 15 of 22

ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 1 Test number: 2 Test number: 3
e. Describe the point in the treatment process at which the sample was collected
ample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
:hronic toxicity
X
X
X
cute toxicity
Q. Provide the type of test performed.
static
static -renewal
X
X
X
low -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify tvpe� if receiving water specify source
.aboratory water
Reconstituted DI (Diamond
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Springs Bottled Water)
teceiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify 'natural' or type of artificial sea safts or brine used
resh water
X
X
X
salt water
i. Give the percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
* , * k ,
' s �, h' a.
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether Parameter meets test method specifications)
H
7_5-7
8.1
alinity
emperature
25.1
25.0
,mmonia
iissolved oxygen
8_6
8_5
8.4
1. Test Results.
,cute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC5o
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
Other (describe)
A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 16 of 22

CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HA_MBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
ronic:
NOEC
%
%
o
�o
I C25
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % RPd
Reduction
0.00%
-14.24%
-4.61 %
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance
-eference toxicant data available?
No
Yes
Yes
is reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
:eptable bounds?
iat date was reference toxicant test
/ /
5/13/2009/ /
7/22/2009/ /
i (MM/DD/YYYY)?
ier (describe)
I. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
❑ Yes X No If Yes describe:
Reduction Evaluation?
I. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information If you have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity. Wthm the Past four and one-half years Provide the dates the information was submitted to the Permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 17 of 22

GILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
io biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
replete.
I. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the oast four and one-half years
X chronic Fl acute
>.. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicitv test conducted in the last four and one-half years Allow one
column per test (where each species constdutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 4 Test number: 5 Test number: 6
a. Test information.
st Species & test method number
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
Pimephales promelas —
1000.0
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
e at initiation of test
22.2 hr
24 hr
23.2 hr
tfall number
001
001
001
tes sample collected
8/10109 / 8112/09
8/1010918111 /09 /8/13/09
9/8/09 / 9/10/09
to test started
8/12/09
8/11/09
919/09
ration
7 Days
7 Days
7 Days
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
nUel title
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
ition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
2002
2002
2002
ne number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 53-111
Pq 141-196
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
-Hour composite
X
X
X
ab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection. (Check all that apply for each
fore disinfection
er disinfection
X
X
X
er dechlorination
Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 18 of 22

-AGILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP NC0024112
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 4 Test number: 5 Test number: 6
e. Describe the point in the treatment Process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity or both
Chronic toxicity
X
X
X
Acute toxicity
q. Provide the type of test performed
Static
Static -renewal
X
X
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type* if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
X
X
Salt water
1 Give the Percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
90% 90% 90%
d k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether Parameter meets test method specifications)
>H
8_0
7_7
7.9
ialini
Femperature
25.1
25.2
25.5
\mmonia
dissolved oxygen
7_5
8.28
7.9
I. Test Results.
kcute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
%
%
%
LC5o
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Fage 19 of 22

ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WV1,TP,
NC0024112
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
:hronic:
NOEC
%
100 %
%
IC25
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % R WitJ�j�
5.85%
-20.47%
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance
s reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Vas reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
Yes
cceptable bounds?
Mat date was reference toxicant test
8/12/2009/ /
8/11 /2009/ /
9/16/2009/ /
in (MM/DD/YYYY)?
)ther (describe)
A. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
❑ Yes X No If yes describe•
Reduction Evaluation?
'.A. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information If you have submitted biomonitorina test information or information reaardmg the
cause v anthm the Past four and one-half years Provide the dates the information was submitted to the Permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
% Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550 22 Page 20 of 22

LCILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
mom
QC.I
k, � �.'==F .•e.^� Ea 1 i �b ¢��E � �t .r L
4! 4F`,`"l.'ie3,,,, �`M,§_4,,
x pia
''�'''
)TWs meeting one or more of the following criteria must provide the results of whole effluent toxicity tests for acute or chronic toxicity for each of the
-illty s discharge points: 1) PO'TWs with a design flow rate greater than or equal to 1.0 mgdo 2) POTWs with a pretreatment program (or those that are
auired to have one under 40 CFR Part 403): or 3) POTWs required by the permitting authority to submit data for these parameters
• At a minimum these results must include quarterly testing for a 12-month period within the past 1 vear using multiple species (minimum Df two
species), or the results from four tests performed at least annually in the four and one-half years prior to the application provided the results
show no appreciable toxicity, and testing for acute and/or chronic toxicity, depending on the range of receiving water dilution Do not include
Information on combined sewer overflows in this section. All information reported must be based on data collected through analysis conducted
using 40 CFR Part 136 methods In addition, this data must comply with QA/QC requirements of 40 CFR Part 136 and other appropriate QA/QC
requirements for standard methods for analytes not addressed by 40 CFR Part 136
• In addition, submit the results of any other whole effluent toxicity tests from the past four and one-half years If a whole effluent toxicity test
conducted during the past four and one-half years revealed toxicity, provide any information on the cause of the toxicity or any results of a
toxicity reduction evaluation, if one was conducted.
• If you have already submitted any of the information requested in Part E you need not submit it again Rather, provide the information
requested in question EA for previously submitted Information. If EPA methods were not used report the reasons for using alternate methods.
If test summaries are available that contain all of the information requested below, they may be submitted in place of Part E.
no biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
ME ete.
1. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
X chronic I acute
2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years Allow one
column per test (where each Species constitutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 7 Test number: 8 Test number: 9
a. Test information.
est Species & test method number
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
le at initiation of test
23.9 hr
23.68 hr
23.3 hr
iffall number
001
001
001
ites sample collected
10/13/09 / 10/15109
11/03/09 111/05109
12/1109 / 12/3/09
ite test started
10/14/09
11/04/09
12/2/09
cation
7 Days
7 Days
7 Days
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
anual title
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimatinq
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
lition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed, Oct
2002
2002
2002
Ige number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
'-Hour composite
X
X
X
-ab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
!fore disinfection
ter disinfection
X
X
X
ter dechlorination
� Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 i£ 7550-22. Page 21 of 22

WILITY NAME AND PERMIT N.UMBVER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 7 Test number: 8 Test number: 9
ample was collected: I Past disinfection & final aeration I Past disinfection & final aeration I Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
hronic toxicity
X
X
X
cute toxicity
g. Provide the type of testyerformed.
tatic
tatic-renewal
X
X
X
low -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify types if receiving water, specify source
aboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
;eceiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
resh water X X
salt water
90%
90%
X
90%
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether parameter meets test method specifications)
H 7_8 7_7 7_9
;alinity
'emperature 25.0 24.5 24.8
ammonia
)issolved oxygen 7.9 8.1 8.3
I. Test Results.
\cute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC50
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 22 of 22

CTION
akAHAMBY CREEK IWWTP, NC0024112, PERMIT RENEWALS
YADKIN PEE DEE
hronic:
NOEC
%
%
%
IC2§
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
-5.57
-22.57
-0.61 %
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance
reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
ias reference toxicant test within
xeptable bounds?
Yes
Yes
Yes
chat date was reference toxicant test
10/14/2009/ /
11/18/2009/ /
12/16/2009/ /
in (MM/DD/YYYY)?
ther (describe)
.3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
Reduction Evaluation?
❑ Yes X No
If Yes describe:
,4. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information If you have submitted biomonitorina test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, within the Past four and one-half years Provide the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
k Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 23 of 22

iAMt ANU FhKMI a NUMIShK. PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
BY CREEK W1NTP, NC0024112. RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
• If You have already submitted any of the information requested in Part E. you need not submit it again Rather. Provide the information
requested in question EA for Previously submitted information If EPA methods were not used report the reasons for using alternate methods
If test summaries are available that contain all of the information requested below, they may be submitted in Place of Part E.
If no biomonitodnq data is required, do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete.
E.1. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
Xchronic El acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Corn fete the foliowin chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years. Allow one
column Per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 10 Test number: 11 Test number: 12
a. Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
23.48 hr
001
1 /12/10 / 1114/10
1 /13/10
7 Days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
9.27 hr
001
2/2/10 / 214/10
213/10
7 Days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
6.02 hr
001
3/2/10 / 314/10
313/10
7 Days
Manual title
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Edition number and Year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002 4t ed. Oct
2002
2002
2002
Page number(s)
Pa 141-196
Pa 141-196
Pq 141-196
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
24-Hour composite X X X
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
Before disinfection
After disinfection X X X
After dechlorination
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 24 of 22

i
=ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 10 Test number: 11 Test number: 12
e. Describe the point in thb treatment process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
T
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
Chronic toxicity
X
X
X
Acute toxicity
g. Provide the type of test performed.
Static
Static -renewal
X
X
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type* if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
X
X
Salt water
i. Give the percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
gg�
F'
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether parameter meets test method specifications)
PH
7_5
7_4
7.4
Salinity
Temperature
25.2
25.5
25.6
Ammonia
Dissolved oxygen
8_2
7_9
8_2
I. Test Results.
Acute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LCeo
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 25 of 22

1CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
ironic:
NOEC
%
%
%
I C -5
%
%
%
Control percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
-16.29%
-5.04%
-19.73*
m. Quality Control/QualityAssurance.
reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
as reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
Yes
:ceptable bounds?
'hat date was reference toxicant test
1/20/2010/ /
2/17120101 /
3/10/20101 /
n (MM/DD/YYYY)?
Cher (describe)
3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation. Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
❑ Yes X No If yes describe:
Reduction Evaluation?
4. Summary of Submitted Biamonitoring Test Information If you have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, Wthm the oast four and one-half years prowde the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
\ Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 26 of 22

PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
If no biomonitoring data is required, do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete. —
E.1. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one -hall years
X chronic M acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 13 Test number. 14 Test number: 15
a. Test information.
Test Species 8 test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
22.33 hr
001
4/6/10 / 4/8/10
4/7/10
7 days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
23.7 hr
001
5/4/10 / 5/6/10
5/5/10
7 days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
22 hr
001
618/10 /6/10/10
6/9/10
7 days
Manual title
Short Tenn Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Edition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
2002
2002
2002
Page number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pg 141-196
Pg 141-196
C. dive the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
24-Hour composite X X X
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that appiv for each
Before disinfection
After disinfection X X X
After dechlorination
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 $ 7550-22 Page 27 of 22

-ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT MBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 13 Test number: 14 number: 15
-Test
e. Describe the point in the treatment Process at which the sample was collected
3amPle was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection Mir al aeration
f. For each test. include Whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity acute toxicity, or both
3hronic toxicity
X
X
X
Acute toxicity
a. Provide the type of testPerfonned
Static
Static -renewal
X
X
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify tvpe6 if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water. specify 'natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
X
X
Salt water
i. Give the Percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether Parameter meets test method specifications)
'H
7.51
7_7
7.7
3alini
temperature
25.1
25.3
24.7
4mmonia
dissolved oxygen
8_5
8.5
8.0
I. Test Results.
4cute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC-5-0
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-8 & 7550-22 Page 28 of 22

I
�
I
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
RENEWAL
FjYADKIN PEE DEE
Chronic:
NOEC
%
%
%
IC95
%
%
Control Percent survival
100 %
91.67 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
-15.02%
-6.73%
-9.19%
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance
Is reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Was reference toxicant test within
acceptable bounds?
Yes
Yes
Yes
What date was reference toxicant test
run (MM/DD/YYYY)?
4/14/2010/ /
5/19/2010/ /
6l16/2010/ /
Other (describe)
t.s. i oxicity Keduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation?
❑ Yes X No If Yes describe:
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
-PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550 22 Page 29 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK VVWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
If no biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete
E.I. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the Past four and one-half Years
X chronic ❑ acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicily test conducted in the last four and one-half years. Allow one
column Per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this Page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 16 Test number: 17 Test number: 18
a Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
Plmephales promelaS —
1000.0
Age at initiation of test
22.92 hr
23.2 hr
24.5 hr
Outfall number
001
001
001
Dates sample collected
8/3/10 /8/5/10
1112/10 /11/4/10
11/8/10 / 11/9110 / 11/11/10
Date test started
8/4/10
11/3/10
11/9/10
Duration 7 days 7 days 7 days
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
Manual title
Short Term Methods for Estimatina
Short Term Methods for Estmatng
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Edition number and year of Publication
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
2002
2002
2002
'aqe number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
Pq 53-111
C. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
>4-Hour composite X X X
3rab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
3efore disinfection
>fter disinfection X X X
\fter dechlorination
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550 22 Page 30 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMlil NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 16 Test number: 17 Test number: U
e. Describe the point in Ithe treatment Process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
Chronic toxicity
x
x
x
Acute toxicity
q. Provide the type of test performed.
Static
Static -renewal
x
x
x
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type* if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water. specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
x
x
x
Salt water
i. Give the percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether Parameter meets test method specifications)
PH
7_7
7_6
7.6
Salinit
Temperature
24.8
24.6
24.3
Ammonia
Dissolved oxygen
8_2
8_1
8.6
I. Test Resufts.
Acute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC50
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
PA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 31 of 22

=ACILITY NAME AND PERMI NUMBIER:
HAMBY CREEK WN VTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Chronic
NOEC
%
%
100 %
IC25
%
%
%
Control percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
-2.02%
-11.87%
m. Quality Control/Quality! Assurance.
Is reference toxicant data availabie?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Was reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
Yes
acceptable bounds?
What date was reference toxicant test
8/18/2010/ /
11/17/2010/ /
11/$/2010/ /
run (MM/DD/YYYY)?
Other (describe)
E.3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
❑ Yes X No If Yes describe:
Reduction Evaluation?
EA. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information If You have submitted biomonitorina test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, vAthin the past four and one-half years provide the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of resuts: (see instructions)
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 32 of 22

t_ PERMITACTION REQUESTED:
NC0024112, RENEWAL I YADKIN PEE DEE
a,.
If no biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete
E.1. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
X chronic ❑ acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one -hall years. Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this Page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 19 Test number: 20 Test number: 21
a. Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b._ Give toxicity test methods followed
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
21.62 hr
001
2/7/11 / 2/9111
2/9/11
7 days
Ceriodaphnia — 10020
19.23 hr
001
5/9/11 / 5/11/11
5111/11
7 days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
22.13 hr
001
8/8111 / 8/10/11
8/10111
7 days
Manual title
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Short Term Methods for
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Edition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
2002
2002
2002
Page number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
c. roe me sample collection methods) used For muttiPle grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used.
24-Hour composite
X
X
X
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
Before disinfection
After disinfection
X
X
X
After dechlorination
:PA Forth 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA fortes 7550-6 & 7550-22 0age 33 of 22

\CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 19 Test number: 20 Test number: 21
e. Describe the point in the !treatment process at which the sample was collected.
ample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
hronic toxicity
X
X
X
cute toxicity
Q. Provide the type of test Derfonned.
tatic
tatic-renewal
X
X
X
low -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type: if receiving water, specify source
aboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
eceiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If: salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
resh water
X
X
X
alt water
i. Give the percentage effluentused for all concentrations in the test series
90% 90% 90%
xH �' Pj�4 FgB,ygk
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether parameter meets test method specifications)
H
7_9
8_1
8_2
alinity
emperature
25.0
24.9
25.0
,mmonia
iissolved oxygen
$_0
7_6
7_7
I. Test Results.
,cute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC50
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
'A Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 34 of 22

1CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
ironic:
NOEC
%
%
%
IC25
%
%
%
Control Percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
10.11 %
-8.04%
11.84%
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance.
reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
'as reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
Yes
:ceptable bounds?
'hat date was reference toxicant test
2/16/2011 / /
5/18/2011 / /
8/18/2011 / /
n (MM/DD/YYYY)?
Cher (describe)
,3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation. Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
❑ Yes X No If Yes describe
Reduction Evaluation?
4. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information. If you have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, within the past four and one-half years Provide the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
\ Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 35 of 22

Mt ANU FtZKMi f NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Y CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
If no biomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
complete.
E.1. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
X chronic n acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years. Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number. 22 Test number: 23 Test number: 24
a. Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
Ceriodaphnia-1002.0
23.0 hr
001
11/7111 /11/9/11
11/9111
7 days
Ceriodaphnia-1002.0
18.82 hr
001
2/6/12 /2/8/12
2/8/12
7 days
Ceriodaphnia-1002.0
21.63 hr
001
517/12 /5/9/12
5/9112
7 days
Manual title
Chronic oxicity cily of Effluents —y
Tuents
onun i erm metnoas for Estimation
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Edition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed. Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002, 4t ed Oct
2002
2002
2002
Page number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
24-Hour composite
X
X
X
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
Before disinfection
After disinfection
After dechlorination
X
X
X
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550 22 Page 36 of 99

I I
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK 9NWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 22 Test number: 23 Test number: 24
e Describe the point ini the treatment process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
Chronic toxicity
X
X
X
Acute toxicitv
g. Provide the type of test Performed.
Static
Static -renewal
X
X
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water specify type; if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Reidsville
Lake Reidsville
Lake Hunt
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
X
X
Salt water
i. Give the Percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
k. Parameters measured during the test (State whether Parameter meets test method specifications)
p
7_9
7_7
7.9
Salinity
Temperature
24.8
24.6
24.5
Ammonia
Dissolved oxygen
8_1
8_1
8_0
I. Test Results.
Acute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
LC5o
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 37 of 22

,CILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, N'C0024112
ironic:
NOEC
%
IC25
%
Control percent survival
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
10.49%
M. Quality Control/Quality Assurance.
reference toxicant data available?
Yes
as reference toxicant test within
Yes
ceptable bounds?
iat date was reference toxicant test
11I17/2011/ /
i (MM/DD/YYYY)?
her (describe)
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
%
100 %
23.53%
Yes
Yes
2/16/2012/ /
J. I oxicity Reduction Evaluation Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity Reduction Evaluation?
j] Yes X No If yes describe•
YADKIN PEE DEE
100 %
-7.8%
Yes
Yes
5/18/20121 /
L Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information. If you have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, within the oast four and one-half years Provide the dates the information was submitted to the Permitting authority and a summary
of the results
Date submitted: /_ / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 38 of 22

ANu FhKM11'NUMBEK: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, I RENEWAL I YADKIN PEE DEE
���• �.� ������� ouunuueo uuormanon. it LVA methods were not used report the reasons for usingalternate methods.
L If test summaries are available that contain all of the information requested below, they may be submitted in place of Part E.
EA. Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the past four and one-half years
X chronic ❑ acute
E.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test conducted in the last four and one-half years. Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this Pape if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 25 Test number: 26 Test number: 27
a. Test information.
Test Species & test method number
Age at initiation of test
Outfall number
Dates sample collected
Date test started
Duration
b. Give toxicity test methods followed.
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
22.92 h r
001
816/12 / 818/12
8/8/12
7 days
Ceriodaphnia—1002.0
23.2 h r
001
11 /5112 /11 /7/12
11 /7/12
7 days
Ceriodaphnia — 1002.0
24.5 hr
001
2/11/13 /2/13/13
2/13113
7 days
Manual title
cunu
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
anon: 1 erm methods for Estimatin g
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
Short Term Methods for Estind
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
uents
Edition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed. Oct
2002
2002
2002
Page number(s)
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
Pq 141-196
c. Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
24-Hour composite
x
x
x
Grab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection (Check all that apply for each
Before disinfection
After disinfection
After dechlorination
X
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Pa a 39 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK' WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 25 Test number: 26 Test number: 27
e. Describe the point in the treatment process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
Past disinfection & final aeration
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity or both
Chronic toxicity
X
X
X
Acute toxicity
q. Provide the type of test performed.
Static
Static -renewal
X
X
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type: if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Hunt
Lake Hunt
Lake Brandt
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
X
X
Salt water
i. Give the Percentage effluent used for all concentrations in the test series
x o
F 90 /0 90% 90%
a f„�ci'•}z.;
DO ELI
k. Parameters measured during the test. (State whether parameter meets test method specifications)
pH
--
1 g_
8_0
7_6
Salinity
Temperature
24.5
24.9
25.1
Ammonia
Dissolved oxygen
7_9
8_1
8.3
I. Test Results.
Acute:
Percent survival in 100%
effluent
%
%
%
LCsn
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
Other (describe)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550 22 Page 40 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112
PERMIT
ACTION REQUESTED-
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Chronic:
NOEC
o/
o/
IC25
%
%
%
Control percent survival
100 %
100 %
100 %
Other (describe) % Reduc
-7.58%
-0.82%
14.45%
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance
Is reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Was reference toxicant test within
Yes
Yes
Yes
acceptable bounds?
What date was reference toxicant test
8/15/2012/ /
11/14/2012/ /
2/13/2012/ /
run (MM/DD/YYYY)?
Other (describe)
E.3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation. Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
Yes X No If yes, describe:
Reduction Evaluation?
EA. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information. If You have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity within the past four and one-half years provide the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions
41,
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550=22 Paoe Al of 22

ACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
no Diomonitoring data is required do not complete Part E. Refer to the Application Overview for directions on which other sections of the form to
omDlete.
A Required Tests.
Indicate the number of whole effluent toxicity tests conducted in the Past four and one-half years
X chronic n acute
:.2. Individual Test Data. Complete the following chart for each whole effluent toxicity test Conducted in the last four and one-half years Allow one
column per test (where each species constitutes a test) Copy this Page if more than three tests are being reported
Test number: 28 1 Test number: Test number:
a. Test information.
est Species & test method number
Pimephales Promelas —
1000.0
age at initiation of test
24 hr
lutfall number
001
!ates sample collected
2/11/13 12/13/13 /2/14/13
late test started
2/11/13
oration
7 days
b. Give toxicity test methods followed
lanual title
Short Term Methods for Estimating
Chronic Toxicity of Effluents
dition number and year of publication
EPA 600-4-91-002. 4t ed Oct
2002
age number(s)
Pq 53-111
c._ Give the sample collection method(s) used For multiple grab samples indicate the number of grab samples used
4-Hour composite
X
irab
d. Indicate where the sample was taken in relation to disinfection. (Check all that apply for each
efore disinfection
fter disinfection
X
fter dechlorination
k Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 42 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
T.YADKIN PEE DEE
Test number: 28 Test number: Test number:
e. Describe the point in the treatment process at which the sample was collected
Sample was collected:
Past disinfection & final aeration
-T
f. For each test, include whether the test was intended to assess chronic toxicity, acute toxicity, or both
Chronic toxicity
X
Acute toxicity
Q. Provide the type of test performed.
Static
Static -renewal
X
Flow -through
h. Source of dilution water. If laboratory water, specify type; if receiving water, specify source
Laboratory water
Lake Brandt
Receiving water
i. Type of dilution water. If salt water, specify "natural" or type of artificial sea salts or brine used
Fresh water
X
Salt water
i. Give the percentage effluent used
for all concentrations in the test series
. ,
Y
v'
k. Parameters measured during
90%
the test (State whether parameter meets
test method specifications)
PH
7.5
Salinity
Temperature
24.8
Ammonia
Dissolved oxygen
8.3
I. Test Results.
Acute:
Percent survival in 100.%
effluent
LC-5-0
95% C.I.
%
%
%
Control percent survival
%
%
%
Other (describe)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 43 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PER !!T NUMBER:
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK. WWTP, NC0024112,
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
Chronic:
NOEC
100 %
%
%
ICZF
%
%
%
Control percent survival
100 %
%
Other (describe)
%
%
m. Quality Control/Quality Assurance.
Is reference toxicant data available?
Yes
Was reference toxicant test within
acceptable bounds?
Yes
—
What date was reference toxicant. test
2/11/2013/
run (MM/DD/YYYY)?
Other (describe)
E.3. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation. Is the treatment works involved in a Toxicity
Reduction Evaluation?
❑ Yes X No If yes describe:
EA. Summary of Submitted Biomonitoring Test Information if you have submitted biomonitoring test information or information regarding the
cause of toxicity, within the past four and one-half Years provide the dates the information was submitted to the permitting authority and a summary
of the results.
Date submitted: / / (MM/DD/YYYY)
Summary of results: (see instructions)
RE
w
L
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 44 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F.I. Pretreatment program.' Does the treatment works have or is subject of an approved pretreatment Program?
X Yes [ No
F.2. Number of Slamcant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Cateaorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
Number of non-caite(torical SIUs. 2
Number of CIUs. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Advanced Motorsports Coatings
Mailing Address: 1.7 High Tech Blvd
Thomasville, NC, 27360
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Anodized aluminum coatings (Type II and Type III) of small parts along with some dyeing of parts
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materials) Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Anodized aluminum parts for the motorsport industry
Raw material(s): Coating of pre -manufactured parts
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or Intermittent
4,500 qpd (X continuous or intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
500 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical Pretreatment standards X Yes M No
If subiect to categorical Oretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 45 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F.B. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharae by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at.le treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes X No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass specify units)
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER: I Emi
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that !twill) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.113 through F.15. X No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLAIRCRAlor other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years)
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received) Include data on volume and concentration if
known. (Attach additionalsheets if necessary.
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency)•
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)_ Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 46 of 22

X Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
Number of CIUs. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Brasscraft - Thomasville
Mailing Address: 1024 Randolph St
'ihomasville NC 27360
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Plating of plumbing valves and fittings
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s) Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Plumbing valves fittings
Raw material(s): Brass copper, nickel chrome plating
F.6. Flow Rate.
Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the averaae daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (qpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
20,000 qpd (X continuous or intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (qpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
6,500 qpd (X continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards X Yes ❑ No
If subject to categorical retreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Re laces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 47 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK'W'WTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) it the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes ;K No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes I . X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply)'
❑ Truck E] Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass specify units)
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUNDI. WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER
F.12. Remediation Waste. Doers the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.1',3 through F.15.) X No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received) Include data on volume and concentration if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
C. Is this waste treated(or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes M No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
d. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous L l Intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule
3
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:`
HAMBY CREEK W'WTP, NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 48 of 22

X Yes I ❑ No
F.2. Number of Siunifican't Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
Number of Cl Us. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Custom Drum Services
Mailing Address: P.O Box 7072
_High Point, NC 27264
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Reconditions steel and plastic drums and totes by chemical treating and washing them out
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Reconditioned steel and plastic drums and totes
Raw material(s): sodium hydroxide water, paints boiler chemicals
F.6. Flow Rate.
e. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
5,000 gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
210 gpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes R No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards n Yes X No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards which category and subcategory?
EPA Forth 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 49 of 22

024
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F 9 RCRA Waste Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ iRail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F 11 Waste Description Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER' REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F 12 Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) X No
F 13 Waste Origin Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal eff'iciency):
Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ Intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule.
ILITY NAME AND PERMI_T_NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED: YADKIN PEE DEE
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 50 of 22

X Yes El No
F.2. Number of Significant lndustrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs) Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that disch4o to the treatment works.
Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
Number of Cl Us. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Finch Industries, Inc..
Mailing Address: P(3 Box 1847
Thomasville NC 27361
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Mirror manufacturing, glass fabrication, and screen printing
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Mirror manufacturing, glass fabrication, and screen printing
Raw material(s): Glass, paint, silver, copper, inks
F.6. Flow Rate.
Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (qpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
29,000 qpd (X continuous or intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (goad) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
2,500 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards X Yes ❑ No
If subiect to categorical pretreatment standards. which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 51 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEKWWTP, NC0024112, I RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes . X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport Methbd by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck Q Rail M Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass specify units)
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) X No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received) Include data on volume and concentration if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ Intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule
,ILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 52 of 22

GENERAL INFORMATION:
X Yes C7 !No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
Number of CIUs. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Greco Manufacturing, Inc.
Mailing Address: 216 E. Holly Hill Rd.
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Preparation of textile or motorsports chemicals based on blending or synthesis of formulations.
F.S. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe ail of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal Product(s): Textile auxiliary chemicals and motorsports track coatings.
Raw material(s): Surfactants, proprietary chemicals
F.6. Flow Rate.
Process wastewater flow rate Indicate the average daily volume of Process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (qpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
250 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons Per day (gbd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
2,650 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes X No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 53 of 22

i I'
FACILITY NAME AND PERMlil'NLIMBER:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112,
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
RENEWAL
YADKIN PEE DEE
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference)! at: the treatment works in the oast three years?
Yes X No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.Q. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail f7 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass specify units)
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been noted that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F,13 through F.15.) X No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received) Include data on volume and concentration if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
i. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes No
If Yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency)'
j. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous I l Intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule
x m
M
_ r }
x
.,i
�..
kX
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99)'Reiblaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 54 of 22

X Yes 1 [71 No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs) Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that discharge to the treatment works.
Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
Number of Cl Us. 4
F.3. Significant Industrial' User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: McIntyre Metals. Inc.
Mailing Address: 310 Kendall Mill Rd.
Thomasville, NC 27360
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge
Manufacture of metal display racks
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materials)Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Metal displays from wire, tube and sheet metal
Raw material(s): Steel Aluminum powder coatings cleaning materials
F.6. Flow Rate.
Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (qpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
3920 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
Non -Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent
720 qpd ( continuous or X intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits X Yes n No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards X Yes M No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards which category and subcategory?
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 55 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMI IT NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP, NC0024112, RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
F.B. Problems at the Trealtment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) of the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes X' No If Yes describe each episode
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes X No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass specify units)
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) X No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received) Include data on volume and concentration if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
k. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
I. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ Intermittent If intermittent describe discharge schedule
mill -
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 56 of 22

RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
G.1. System Map. Provide a magi indicating the following: (may be included with Basic Application Information)
a. All CSO discharge points.
b. Sensitive use areas potentially affected by CSOs (e.g., beaches, drinking water supplies, shellfish beds, sensitive aquatic ecosystems, and
outstanding natural resource waters).
C. Waters that support threatened and endangered species potentially affected by CSOs.
G.2. System Diagram. Provide a diagram, either in the map provided in G.1 or on a separate drawing, of the combined sewer collection system that
includes the following information.
a. Location of major sewer trunk lines, both combined and separate sanitary.
b. Locations of points where separate sanitary sewers 'feed into the combined sewer system.
C. Locations of in -line and off-line storage structures.
d. Locations of flow -regulating devices.
e. Locations of pump stations.
CSO OUTFALLS:
G.3. Description of Outfall.
b. Location
(City or town, if applicable) (Zip Code)
(County) (State)
(Latitude) (Longitude)
C. Distance from shore (if applicable) ft.
d. Depth below surface Of applicable) ft.
e. Which of the following were monitored during the last year for this CSO?
❑ Rainfall ❑ CSO pollutant concentrations ❑ CSO frequency
❑ CSO flow volume ❑ Receiving water quality
How many storm events were monitored during the last year?
GA. CSO Events.
Give the number of CSO events in the last year.
events (❑ actual or ❑ approx.)
b. Give the average duration per CSO event.
hours (❑ actual or ❑ approx.)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99) Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22 Page 57 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT !NUMBER: PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
HAMBY CREEK WWTP NC0024112 RENEWAL YADKIN PEE DEE
C. Give the average volume per CSO event.
million gallons (❑ actual or ❑ approx.)
d. Give the minimum rainfall that caused a CSO event in the last year
Inches of rainfall
G.5. Description of Receivinti Waters.
G.6. CSO Operations.
Describe any known water quality impacts on the receiving water caused by this CSO (e.g., permanent or intermittent beach closings permanent or
intermittent shell fish bed closings, fish kills, fish advisories, other recreational loss or violation of any applicable State water quality standard)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22. Page 58 of 22

Carter, Jenifer
From: Conder, Misty [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 9:54 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: RE: 2012 PAR
Attachments: Copy of HWA AT Hamby Creek 2010 Approved 2012 reneals.xls
Here you go Jenifer. I'll look at AMC and get one or the other straightened out and get to you next week. The public
notice should run next week. I've been out of the office more than I should the last couple weeks. I will forward it ASAP.
From: Carter, Jenifer [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 11:43 AM
To: Conder, Misty
Subject: 2012 PAR
Misty,
• Could you send me the latest version of your Allocation Table... you forgot to include it with all the other PAR
documents.
• Regarding AMC: the narrative says there were 4 chronic & 4 TRC violations. The IDSF says that 12 samples were
taken, but shows only 25% chronic & 25% TRC violations. Either the narrative or the IDSF needs to be corrected. If
the narrative is correct, then you'll need to take retroactive enforcement and amend the SNCR & IDSF. Public notice
can be noted in the 2013 PAR, and any NOVs/fines will be added to the PPS for 2013.
• Don't forget to email/send me a copy of the Public Notice for 2012 SNC.
Thanks Misty!
Jenifer
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
FILE ACCESS RECORD
SECTION <_e�l,l Y�i�� G2 wJa ttr DATE/TIME '7/3/13
NAME P6FOE REPRESENTING SELC
Guidelines for Access: The staff of the Winston-Salem Regional Office is dedicated to making
public records in our custody readily available to the public for review and copying. We also have the
responsibility to the public to safeguard these records and to carry out our day-to-day program
obligations. Please read carefully the following before signing the form.
1. Due to the large public demand for file access, we request that you call at least a day in
advance to schedule an appointment for file review so you can be accommodated.
Appointments are scheduled between 9-00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Viewing time ends at 4A5
p.m. Anyone arriving without an appointment may view the files to the extent that time and
staff supervision are available.
2. You must specify files you want to review.
3. There is no charge for 25 copies or less If making more than 25 copies there is a charge of
2.5 cents per page. (A page refers to a "single impression". A c(,ouble sided copy is to be
counted as 2 pages.) Costs for electronic copies will vary depending on the media type
(diskette, tape, cd-rom), please see Receptionist for information regarding electronic copy
charges. Payment is to be made by check, money order, or cash (see Receptionist).
4. FILES MUST BE KEPT IN THE ORDER YOU RECEIVED THEM. Files may not be taken
from the office. No briefcases large totes etc are permitted in the file review area To
remove, alter, deface, mutilate, or destroy material in one of these files is a misdemeanor for
which you can be fined up to $500.00.
5. In accordance with General Statute 25-3-512, a $25.00 processing fee will be charged and
collected for checks on which payment has been refused.
6. The customer must present a photo ID, sign -in, and receive a visitor sticker prior to reviewing
files,
FACILITY NAME
2
3
4
5
1-113113,
ignature-'and Name of Firm/Business Date
Please attach a business card to this form if available
COUNTY
714-vi`ds oy�
Time In Time Ou

RECEIVED
� N.C.Dept. of ENR
NCD NR APR PH
3 2013
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resourc s Winston-Salem
Division of Water Quality Regional Office
Pat McCrory Charles Wakild, P.E. John Skvarla
Governor Director Secretary
March 25, 2013
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Sewer Use Ordinance
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the recent revisions made to the City of Thomasville Sewer Use Ordinance
(SUO). The SUO was initially received by the Division on January 31„ 2013, followed by revisions,
received on March 22, 2013, via email.
The review indicates that the SUO is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0900
and 40 CFR 403 are met. Please forward a copy of the final SUO to the PERCS upon adoption,
including the applicable documentation of adoption.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan cr.ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
incerel
�44Wk
ha tNP.
mh/thomasville.suo.2013
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarofina
Internet: www.nnity I A qualitva Ar Ivaturaffi An Fnnal Onnnrfunifv 1 Affirmafiva Acfinn Fmnlnver

AIFFMA,
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Pat McCrory Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
January 14, 2013
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI)
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed by Jenifer Carter, of this office, on January 3, 2013. Pretreatment
Coordinator, Ms. Misty Conder, was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection was to determine the
effectiveness of the City's pretreatment program and included a review of pretreatment program elements, POTW plant
performance, Industry monitoring data, adherence to the enforcement response plan (ERP), and an industry inspection.
The City currently has six (6) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), four (4) of which are categorical. Two SIUs were in
significant non-compliance (SNC) for reporting during this review, one of which was also in SNC for permit limits
violations. The plant did not have any limits violations since the last PCI.
Overall, the inspection showed the pretreatment program to be run very proficiently. Please refer to the attached
inspection report for further comments. If you have any questions please contact Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: WSRO Files
SWP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: hftp://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq
One
NorthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
` PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI• Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)l
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conde
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/Lab Supervisor/Back-up ORC
4. Last Inspection Date: 01 /19 /12 Inspection Type: ❑ PCI ® Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
�l N r n n 2 4 1 1 2 01 03 13 � 0
Fac. Type
0
(FACC)
`J (DTIA) (TYPI(INS
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users SIUs ?
6
P)
SIUS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users CIUs ?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? See comments
0
10. Number of SIUs Not Sam led B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? No dischar a/closed
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
0
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP
—
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
2
PSNC
Semi -Annual Periods Total Number of SIUs in SNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
2
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
1
Semi-annual Periods
POTW INTERVIEW _
17. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations? ❑ Yes ® No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
18. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial ❑ Yes L9 No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for Limits: Custom Drum (Cd, Ni, Zn)
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 SNC for Reporting: Custom Drum & Gresco
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published: To be published in February
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order, N/A
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division?
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which Yes ® No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes El No Is the Table Adequate? ®Yes ❑ No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? El Yes ® No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added:
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 1

�..• � ��.-.��...a=�.,�..a. � � a.vvav-aa•a i.a..i.a.aa�a. a�a a�u r au yr - a avwvaa.va�. rr i vt rr uaw, vva uy a va rr 11GJ VViJ�' Vll 1V�l(LLL11ilVa11Va1G 1a1
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter, and dates consistent with Program Info:
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If A61icab
Headworks Analysis A
06/06/2011
® Yes ❑ No
10/01/2015
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
09/20/2010
® Yes ❑ No
04/30/2015
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
06/05/2007
® Yes ❑ No
completed... to be submitted
Enforcement Response Plan RP
10/09/2008
® Yes ❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
07/22/2009
® Yes ❑ No
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW(3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION)
29. User Name
1. Custom Drum 2.
3.
30. IUP Number
0029
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑
I❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date
1 01/31/16
33. Categorical Standard Applied I.E. 40 CFR, Etc. Or N/A—�
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
10 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No J
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ Ro-11
❑ Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. ®Yes []No
a. ❑Yes QNo
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. If No, is One Needed? See Inspection Form from POT
b. []Yes ❑No
b. []Yes []No
11 b. []Yes []No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑WIN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan TOMP ?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. ®Yes ❑No
a. []YesQNo
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.❑Yes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
o❑N/A
i7r
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required b IUP, includingflow?
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SILT submit all reports
❑Yes®No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CAT), does
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
11
file include process/dilution flows as Required b IUP?
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Re ortin -Compliance from SIU Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.❑Yes❑No®N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.❑Yes❑No®N/A
b.pYes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
To resample January
c.❑Yes❑No®N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
i ® Yes ❑ No
1 ❑ Yes ElNo
ElYes [INo
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP OVs, Penalties, timing,etc. ?
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
I ®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection? Penalty letter not
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
received by industry et
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
a. ❑Yes ®No
a. —_-]Yes []No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. Is SILT in Compliance with Order?
b. ❑Yes []No 11
b. ❑Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes [INo
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ®No
ElYes ❑ No
❑Yes El No
Requested Information For You?
11
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
No problems noted
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fac. Type
❑N N C 0 0 2 4 1 1 2 01 03 13 ID SO
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP) (FACC)
1. Industry Inspected: Gresco (ATTL Products Inc.)
2. Industry Address: 216 East Holly Hill Rd, Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Mixing and repackaging of non -hazardous chemicals
4. Industry Contact: Randy Ransom
Phone: [phone]/ Cell: 336 406-2885 Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview
® Yes
❑ No
B. Plant Tour
® Yes
❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour
❑ Yes
❑ No
D. Sampling Review
® Yes
❑ No
E. Exit Interview
® Yes
❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
No deficiencies noted. Misty is well adept at performing industry inspections. This particular industry buys products, creates new
mixtures, re -packages and sells new products. It was verified during the inspection that no hazardous materials are being handled,
and that no chemical reactions are taking place as a result of the mixing. That and the fact that the SIC code provided by the
industry does not suggest that this a category of industry regulated by the Code of Federal Regulations. Misty has communicated
this to the PERCS unit in Raleigh, who will make the final determination if an Industrial User Permit is required. If not, it will be
up to the City's discretion as to whether or not a permit is warranted for Gresco, based on factors such as overall risk to the plant
and the health and safety of its staff.
Due to changing email addresses at Gresco during the IU Permit Renewal Process and resulting miscommunication, 3`d and 4th
quarter sampling was missed in 2012. Ms. Conder has required Gresco to perform two extra sampling events in January 2013 to
make up for the missed sampling.
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments:
Requirements: Submit the updated SUO to PERCS for Approval
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory
Marginal ❑
Unsatisfactory ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter DATE: January 14, 2013
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

ATT
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Pat McCrory Charles Wakild, P.E. John Skvarla
Governor Director Secretary
January 8, 2013
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Renewal
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
N.0RECEIVED fENR
JAIL 2 5 2013
Winston-Sa1em
Reoion2l off fee
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, ,and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) renewal submitted by the
City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP was initially received by
the Division on March 20, 2012, followed by more information received on January 4, 2013, through
email.
IUP # 1SIU Name 140 CFR
0012 lGresco Manufacturing, Inc. N/A
The review with the recent information received, indicates that the IUP is adequate and the minimum
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan(o-),ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
Sincerel
Chart W kit , P.E.
mh/thomasviIle. iup.ren.023
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NorthCarofina
Internet: www.ncwaterqualit .org Natunal&
An F,� 1 (lnnnrhm4v I Aff rmnfivo Artinn FmnlnvA..f

Carter, Jenifer
From: Conder, Misty [[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:13 PM
To: Hassan, Monti
Cc: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: Gresco permit renewal
Monti,
hi getting ready for Jenifer's inspection, I realized Gresco had slipped through the cracks and we never got the approval of
their permit. You wanted clarification of exactly which subpart they fall under for the 414 categorical listing. I had sent
them an e-mail requesting clarification but never got a response back. They apparently never got the e-mail, and at
sometime had changed their e-mail address.
In any case, I took the opportunity of meeting with them during Jenifer's inspection to see if we could get the permit
issues resolved. Based on our discussions, Gresco's SIC code does not apply to any of the listed SIC codes for the various
subparts for 414. Mr. Ransom stated they were not commodity (Subpart F) and that the only thing close might be Subpart
G or Subpart H. However he didn't feel they were a bulk chemical manufacturer (Subpart G), they blend chemicals,
rather than actually manufacturing them. In fact, Mr. Ransom stated that there is no chemical reaction occurring in their
mixed products. Even after time, each of the components used to make their blend can be analyzed individually and
unchanged in the product. So there does not appear to be any manufacture of a chemical in that sense. And again in both
the bulk and the specialty subparts specific SIC codes are listed and Gresco does not fall under those codes. Thus, I don't
see that they have any monitoring requirements.
It is my belief and Jenifer agreed that it appears that Gresco does not actually need a permit. Mr. Ransom had been
interested last year in dropping his permit but changed his mind at the last minute because he thought he would sell the
business and that the permit would be transferrable. He now understands that the permit is not transferrable and is no
longer looking at selling his business. Thus he may consider requesting dropping his permit again.
In order to resolve the renewal issue, can we approve the permit based on the fact that they are doing more monitoring
than is necessary or required at this point? Then if they choose to drop the permit, they can make the request to drop.
But as of now, he doesn't meet flow triggers or the 5% limits, and although he blends organic chemicals, he doesn't
really fall under any of the subparts for the 414 categorical listing that would require a permit. If Mr. Ransom comes up
with some other process for business expansion, it is likely that he would need a different permit anyway and that could
be addressed in the future.
Laboratory Supervisor - Pretreatment
Hamby Creek WWTP
Thomasville, NC
Ph: 336-475-4246
Fax: [phone]

SV/`/�.c'
NCDE�IR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Chuck Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
December 28, 2012
Subject: End of 2012 Pretreatment Mailing
Dear Pretreatment Professionals:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
As we draw to the close of another great pretreatment year, I wanted to provide you an update on some
issues, inform you on this year's upcoming workshops and distribute the Pretreatment Program Info
Database sheets.
1) NC Pretreatment Professionals Honor Roll: In case you missed the Annual Pretreatment Conference
held September 23-25t' in Wrightsville Beach, this year's addition to the Honor Roll is Janna
Scherer with Moore County.
2) Rulemaking: The following rule revisions became effective January 1, 2012.. More detail on both
of these topics will be presented at the 2013 Pretreatment Annual Report Workshops.
a. The requirement to judge compliance of monthly average and daily max limits for the
same parameter separately.
b. Compliance judgment for any IU in violation of .0903 (34) Parts (C), (D) or (H).
3) Model Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO): The revised NC DWQ Model SUO posted on our website in
August of 2011reflects the revisions to NCAC 15A 02H .0900. Updated SUOs (in draft form is
sufficient) are due to the Division by December 31, 2012. All POTWs must include the SUO
Checklist updated August 2011 when submitting their SUO for review. Documentation of adoption
and an attorney's statement are required at the time of adoption. Please contact PERCS
pretreatment staff as soon as possible if your program has not yet submitted an updated SUO by this
due date.
In addition, review your Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) to determine if any changes are required
due to changes made in the SUO. In particular, if you decided to take advantage of the change from
30 days to 45 days to be considered SNC for reporting your ERP may need revision.
4) Metal Standards Triennial Review: Request for review of the fiscal analysis prepared for proposed
amendments to the Surface Water Quality Standards Rule is an information item on the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) agenda for January 10, 2013. Public Hearings are
anticipated for early 2013.
5) Division Review of IUPs: The Division continues implementation of the streamlined permit review
process. After attending the IUP workshop and a thorough Division review of three program IUPs, a
permit writer may be approved to participate in this process. Permits submitted under this process
are not subject to a full Division review. Benefits to the POTW include less paperwork to submit
and immediate approval of your permits. More information is posted on the Permit Writing
Guidance page of our website.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Ogle
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ PERCS Unit FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NCO rth fC�ay�rrolina
Internet: http://portal.ncdenr.om/webtwq/ PERCS Unit: http://portal.ncdenr.om/web/wa/swo/ps/pret � I L ilt i[CC
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer

End of 2012 Pretreatment Mailing
Page 2 of 2
December 28, 2012
6) Staff Assignments: Staff assignments remain the same. We continue to meet our goals for project
review of 30 days for IUPs and SIU drops and 90 days for ERP, HWA, IWS, LTMP and SUO.
Please note that PERCS has committed to a 30 day review of updated SUO submissions due to the
2011 Rule changes.
Monti Hassan, 919-807-6314 [[e-mail]]: Chowan, Hiwassee, Little Tennessee,
Lumber, Neuse, New, Roanoke, Yadkin
Sarah Morrison, 919-807-6310 [[e-mail]]: Broad, Cape Fear, Catawba, French
Broad, Tar -Pamlico.
7) Workshops: The following workshops are planned for 2013. The invitation and directions for these
workshops are posted on the Training page of our website:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/pret/training. Please register by emailing your pretreatment
staff member and please do so early, as space is limited at each site.
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) — January 31 and February 5.
Headworks Analysis (HWA) — February 28, March 5, October 24 and October 29.
Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) Writing — Per demand. We presented 4 IUP workshops in
2012 and had great attendance. We will be working with pretreatment staff in the piedmont/western
regions to schedule a workshop for those that have already expressed interest. Please contact your
pretreatment staff member if you are interested in attending this workshop.
8) Pretreatment Program Info Database Sheets: Please review your attached program info sheet and
historical SNC sheets, if applicable, and make necessary updates to any of the information presented.
Send the corrected sheets back with your PAR, due March 1, 2013. If all the information was
correct, please indicate that in your PAR. Especially note the due dates as this may be the only
reminder you get. Please note:
a. All pretreatment programs (full and modified) must submit a PPS form with their PAR
per an EPA requirement of the State.
b. Historical SNC sheets only list currently Active SIUs that had SNCs from 2005-2011.
9) Email Addresses: PERCS often uses email to send out mass mailings. To make this an effective
and cost saving tool, we ask that you keep PERCS updated on your current email address as well as
which staff member is the "primary" contact for your POTW - see "prim" field next to staff names
on Program Info sheet, and email field below names.
As always, please contact your pretreatment staff member (as listed above) or me at 919-807-6383
[email: Deborah. [e-mail]] with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Dg/dec2012_mass_mailing
Enclosures: Program Info sheet(s)
Historical SNC sheet(s), if applicable
Cc: PERCS Pretreatment Staff (via email)
All RO Pretreatment Contacts (via email)

Carter, Jenifer
From: Beck, Allen [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 11:16 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer; Basinger, Corey
Cc: Smith, George; Huffman, Morgan
Subject: 12-6-12 City of Thomasville Maintenance Notification
Jenifer and Corey,
I just talked with George Smith @ 11:05 and informed him that we will need to
shut down our UV disinfection system in order to safely install a valve operator
breaker in the system. The down time from shut down to re -start is anticipated to
be approximately 15 minutes and minimal to no environmental impact is
anticipated. If there are questions please feel free to contact me.
Thanks,
Allen
Allen Beck
Wastewater Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]

Division of Water Quality
September 6, 2012
To: Corey Basinger
Regional Supervis , Surface ater Protection, WSRO
Through: Cindy A. Moore
Supervisor, Aquatic Toxicology Unit
From: Carol Hollenkamp �`
Quality Assurance O cer, Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Subject: Whole effluent toxicity test results
Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit # NCO024112/001
Davidson County
The aquatic toxicity test using flow -proportional composite samples of effluent discharged from
Thomasville WWTP has been completed. Thomasville WWTP has a permitted effluent discharge that is
4.0 MUD entering Hamby Creek (7Q10 of 0.43 CFS). Whole effluent samples were collected on August 7
and August 9 by Jenifer Carter and facility representative Vince Llenza for use in a chronic Certodaphnia
dubia pass/fail toxicity test. The test using these samples resulted in a pass. Toxicity information follows.
Test Type
Test Concentrations
Test Result
Control Survival
Control Mean Reproduction
Test Treatment Survival
Treatment Mean Reproduction
First Sample pH
First Sample Conductivity
First Sample Total Residual Chlorine
Second Sample pH
Second Sample Conductivity
Second Sample Total Residual Chlorine
3-Brood Ceriodaphnia dubia pass/fail
90% sample
Pass
100%
18.6
100%
23.9
7.46 SU
455 micromhos/cm
<0.1 mg/L
7.41 SU
460 micromhos/cm
<0.1 mg/L
Test results for the above samples indicate that the effluent would not be predicted to have water quality
impacts on receiving water. These samples were split and tested by Meritech, Inc. The chronic
Ceriodaphnia dubia pass/fail toxicity test run by Meritech, Inc. also resulted in a pass. Please contact us if
further effluent toxicity monitoring is desired. We may be reached at [phone].
Basin: YAD07
cc: Central Files
Jenifer Carter, WSRO
Aquatic Toxicology Unit Environmental Sciences Section

TOXICITY SAMPLE COLLECTION FO ARO FRO MRO RRO WaRO WiRO WSROI_ \
Facility/Water Body i / I �� � rc.t �' � ��
NPDES # I NC 1 0 1 0 1,-- 141 / I-P Outfall # L mo/
County FT—)� f C y +
Basin/Sub-basin Y21KE%�
Receiving Stream
---
Collector(s) (print) 4
Grab El Composite
Date Began Time Began
/ %, / :/ �,tn
Sampling Site
Description
Samples per Hour for Hours
Date End Time End
Container: LD4L (1 gal) PE cubitainer 00ther (describe) # of containers
Chlorinated: ❑ Yes [] o Collected on Ice: 011yes ❑ No Shipped on Ice: es ❑ No
Method of Shipment: Courier Lj-'gus ❑ Staff ❑ Other (explain):
Date/time of transfer to r r ���---•------_ __________
Comments:
�1 1
-split" sample, splitting lab name: ,
' _1n i ML . ,.i.7' J.J:,,o.:, In ATV 1 nh**
** Pack sample with su i ienr ice zu muuuui.� .r< <� ��»� -� -- _ -------
ector /
Date:
�.. /
Si ature:- a '�`� L (- ,c -
torLtabsef.Onnl Temperature Rcd
- recei t, °C on Ice
RECEIVED CONDUCTIVITY, TRC,
date mhos/cm - µmhos/cm mg/L
time
date date
by time time
from
Lab
Comments:
ISbip sam les to: DWQ/Environmental Sciences Branch
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Mail Service Center 1621
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
ESB Courier #: 520101
by
Street address: 4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
phone: [phone]

NC DENR - Div. Of Water Quality Region — ---
OXICITY SAMPLE COLLECTION F071ZR ARO FRO MRO RRO WaRO WiRO WSRO
Facility/Water Body
NPDES # NC 0 LO ; ' L 1 Outfall #
County
Basin/Sub-basin /r
Receiving Stream
Date Began
Collector(s) (print)
Grab Composite
Sampling Site L79rVL.<7i t t
Description
Samples per Hour for El Hours
Date End Time End
Container: 2-4L (I gal) PE cubitainer [-]Other (describe) # of containers —
Chlorinated: ❑ Yes ®'No Collected on Ice: [ Yes ❑ No Shipped on Ice: EI-Yes ❑ No
Method of Shipment: Courier ET Bus ❑ Staff Other (explain):
o - Date/time of transfer to er: i - � t"A Z- / '' "%' (see reverse for additional transfers)
f l
Comments:
"S lit'.sam le, splitting lab name: i a
* Pack
Signature
with
ice to maintain tempt
i.
U. V TO 4. U G unlit "ell very lu Fl / V {dlU
rt Date:x
or Lab Use Only:
ATU
Sample No.
-
Temperature
a receipt, °C
Rcd
on Ice
RECEIVED
date
time
by
from
CONDUCTIVITY,
mhos/cm - µmhos/cm
date
time
by
TRC,
mg/ -
date
time
by
Lab
Comments:
IShip samples to
z
DWQ/Environmental Sciences Branch
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Mail Service Center 1621
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
ESB Courier #: 520101
Street address: 4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
phone: [phone]

LT•YWA IREC91D
N.0 neot, of ENR
NCD NR AUG 0 2 2012
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resourc s Winston-Salem
Division of Water Quality Re ioAel office
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E. Uee rreeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 30, 2012
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Drop
Program: City of Thomasville (NPDES #: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) drop request submitted by
the City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP drop request was
received by the Division on July 3, 2012.
IUP # 1SIU Name
0030 jUnilin Flooring
The review indicates that the IUP drop is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H
.0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti.Hassanpncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
incerel ,
I kc iltl "vim
m h/th om a svi I le. i u p. d ro p.023
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 North'rall�C/arofina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org �atK
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

�X J
r' • RECEIVED
...v�N,D.Dept. of ENR
NCDENR
AUG 0 2 2012
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resour
Division of Water Quality
es
Winston-Salem
Re ioaal office
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Dee Freeman
Governor Director
Secretary
July 30, 2012
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permits
Program: City of Thomasville (NPDES #: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permits (IUPs) submitted by The City of
Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial Users (SIUs). The IUPs were initially received by the
Division on March 20, 2012, followed by revisions/corrections received on July 3, 2012.
IUP #
SIU Name
IUP
0028
Advanced Motorsports
Renewal
0008
Brass Craft
Renewal
0018
Finch Industries
Renewal
The review indicates that the IUPs are adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H
.0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan (a�ncdenr.govI or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
ol- ' Nharcerely
mh/thomasville. iup. ren.022
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 7�TOne 1
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 1 v orthCaroli 1a
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org %1 �RtuNR//�/
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer (! ► v [ ";/

........
RECEIVED
NCDENR
N.C.Dept. of ENR
auk a z 2012
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resour
es
Division of Water Quality
Winston-Salem
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
R
Governor Director
Secretary
July 27, 2012
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit Renewal
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES #: NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) submitted by The City of
Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP was received by the Division on
July 3, 2012.
IUP #
ISIU Name
11up
0031
1McIntyre Metals
IRenewal
The review indicates that the IUP is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0905
and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan(o)ncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
i cerely
Char es a Ild
mhlthomasville. iup. ren.021
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan. PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One 1, 1
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 Noft'� Caro' lna
Internet: www.nnity \ Affirmative
rg
Action
a at vigil ,
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affrmative Action Employer �/ ►' K `�/

w<
lee
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
May 22, 2012
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit #s NCO024112 and NCG110094
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Natural resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
A Compliance Evaluation Inspection was performed at the City of Thomasville's Hamby Creek
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) on April 24, 2012 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional
Office. Mr. Allen Beck and Ms. Misty Conder were also present for the inspection. The inspection
consisted of an on -site inspection of the treatment facility and stormwater outfalls, and a review of related
files.
NCO024112
There have been no NPDES limits violations since the last plant inspection in June 2010. Overall, the
plant appeared to be well -maintained and operating properly.
When comparing lab data to the submitted Discharge Monitoring Reports, several discrepancies were
noted with the BOD and Conductivity data. These were thought to be due to transcription and/or
formatting problems, and none of the errors led to a change in compliance status. Ms. Conder, lab
supervisor, said a complete review of similar data would be conducted, and amended DMRs submitted as
needed.
NCG110094
Mr. Beck has been tasked with keeping track of the NPDES stormwater permit and its requirements. The
stormwater outfalls were well marked. Each outfall drains to the same creek along the property line, and
there was a discussion as to whether or not one common downstream point could be used instead of each
point that enters the creek. It would be more difficult to pinpoint a cause should a problem occur, as the
creek receives runoff from unknown upstream sources as well. If you choose to use one common point, be
prepared to investigate the cause of any problems that arises.
The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP) is required to be updated annually. The SPPP needs to
be updated to include plant upgrades completed in 2009, as well as City property across Baptist Childrens
Home Road, which has been and can be used in emergencies for dumping sludge. Any BMPs utilitized to
keep the sludge on site (i.e. earthen berm) should be included, as well as any addition outfalls that drain
the site.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877 623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
continued on reverse...
One
NorthCarolina
atzmal if
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer

Qualitative monitoring has been conducted and documented as required at each outfall. Analytical
monitoring is not required since no vehicle maintenance is performed on site.
Staff stormwater training is required annually. Training has not been documented. Please make sure the
required training is documented, with records being maintained along with the SPPP.
Overall, the WWTP was compliant with its NPDES permits, though a little more oversight on the
paperwork end of things may be warranted. Please review the enclosed inspection form for more detailed
information from the inspection. If you have any questions, please call Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
attachments
cc: Mr. Allen Beck (same address)
Ms. Misty Conder (same address)
SWP Central Files
WSRO SWP Files

s.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 INI 2 15 I 31 NCO024112 111 121 12/04/24 117 181 C I 19I S I 20I I
Remarks
21111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111i6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating 61 QA ------------------ =------- Reserved —--------- ---------
67I 169 70131 711 N I 721 N I 73 L U 74 751 I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:00 AM 12/04/24
09/08/01
Hamby Creek WWTP
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
110 Optimist Park Rd
Thomasville NC 27360
12:45 PM 12/04/24
14/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Allen R Beck//336-475-4246 /
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
Kelly Craver,PO Box 368 Thomasville NC 273610368/Assistant City
No
Manager/336-475-4220/3364754283
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit ■ Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenance ■ Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program E Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Jenifer Carter WSRO WQ//336-771-5000/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
4
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page # 1

.q
NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3I NCO024112 I11 12I 12/04/24 117 18I CI
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Page # 2

L
Permit: NCO024112
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
Comment: There are only to final clarifiers.
There is not a re -aeration lagoon, rather two re -aeration tanks that are considered the
5th stage of the Bardenpho process.
There are four sludge holding tanks (formerly digesters) and a belt press.
Record Keeping
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Yes No NA NE
nn■n
n■nn
n■nn
■nnn
■nnn
Yes No NA NE
Page # 3

Permit: NCO024112
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping
Comment: Several discrepencies werer noted between the Conductivity and BOD lab
data vs what was submitted on the DMRs. None of the errors lead to a change in
compliance status, and were due to transcription and/or formatting errors. Amended
DMRs to be submitted as needed after a thorough internal review is completed.
Influent Sampling
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
Is sample collected above side streams?
Is proper volume collected?
Is the tubing clean?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
Comment:
Effluent Sampling
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
Is proper volume collected?
Is the tubing clean?
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type representative)?
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment: The chart recorder is not used for compliance purposes. The flow meter is
used for reporting and is considered to more accurate, as its calibration is checked
annually.
Yes
No
NA
NE
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
■nnn
■nnn
■nnn
■ n n n
■nnn
■nnn
Yes No NA NE
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? ■ 0 n n
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable Solids, pH, DO, Sludge ■ n n n
Judge, and other that are applicable?
Page # 4

W
Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
■
b.Mechanical
■
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
■
n
n
n
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
■
n
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
■
n
n
n
Is the unit in good condition?
■
n
n
n
Comment: The manual bar screen is used as back-up during high flows and
maintenance.
Grit Removal
Yes No
NA
NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
n
b.Mechanical
■
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
■
n
n
n
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
■
n
n
n
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
■
n
n
n
Comment:
Oxidation Ditches
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are the aerators operational?
■
n
n
n
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
■
n
n
Q
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
■
■
n
n
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
■
n
n
n
Is the DO level acceptable?
■
n
n
n
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
n
n
n
■
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
■
n
n
n
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
n
n
n
■
Comment:
Nutrient Removal
Yes
No
NA
NE
Page # 5

Permit: NC0024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP `
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Nutrient Removal Yes No NA NE
# Is total nitrogen removal required?
# Is total phosphorous removal required?
Type
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
Is nutrient removal process operating properly?
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Are pumps in place?
Are pumps operational?
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
Comment:
Chemical Feed
Is containment adequate?
Is storage adequate?
Are backup pumps available?
Is the site free of excessive leaking?
Comment: Chemical feed (alum, feric, caustic, acid) available if needed, though
nothing currently being added.
Secondary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/< of the sidewall depth)
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
Page # 6

Permit: NC0024112
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Secondary Clarifier
Comment: sludge depth less than 3 feet in 12-foot deep clarifier during the inspection.
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Type of operation:
Is the filter media present?
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
Is the filter free of growth?
Is the air scour operational?
Is the scouring acceptable?
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
Comment:
Disinfection - UV
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
Are UV bulbs clean?
Is UV intensity adequate?
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
Is there a backup system on site?
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
Comment: one channel of three used at a time.
Pump Station - Effluent
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
Are all pumps present?
Are all pumps operable?
Are float controls operable?
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
Comment:
Solids Handling Equipment
Is the equipment operational?
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
Is storage adequate?
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
Cross flow
■❑❑❑
■nn❑
■❑❑n
❑n■❑
❑❑■❑
■n❑❑
Yes No NA NE
■nn❑
■❑❑❑
■n❑❑
■❑❑❑
■❑❑❑
■000
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE

Permit: NCO024112
Inspection Date: 04/24/2012
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Solids Handling Equipment
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
Comment: There is a cannibal solids reduction process utilizing two interchange
bioreactors that receives some filtered RASMAS. There are 4 sludge holding tanks
and a belt press.
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Comment: The cannibal system and belt press are shut down by the SCADA system
in the event of a power loss. The generators are tested monthly. Fuel is provided by
Rex Oil Company as needed.
Effluent Pipe
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
Comment: Regular visits to the effluent pipe should be made with a right of way
properly maintained to allow access. It is recommended that contact be made with the
new land owners in order to establish a working relationship with them.
Yes No NA NE
■nnn
■nnn
■nnn
■nnn
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
nnn■
nnn■
nnn■
Page # 8

A'4
' jfn
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
May 14, 2012
Ms. Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed
the Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2011. This PAR was
received on March 26, 2012. Minor corrections to the PAR were received as requested on May 11, 2012.
Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .O908(b)
and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at (919)
807-6314 ([e-mail]).
Sincerely,
cic�6_
Jemfer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
SWP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
Nne
orthCarolina
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 273610368
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOV-2012-MV-0017
Permit No. NCO024112
Hamby Creek WWTP
Davidson County
Dear Mr Craver:
Division of Water Quality
Charles Wakild, P.E.
Director
March 13, 2012
A review of Hamby Creek WWTP's monitoring report for December 2011 showed the following violations:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
Parameter
Date
Frequency Required
Violation
Chromium, Total (as Cr)
12/03/11
Weekly
0 of 1 required value reported
Selenium, Total (as Se)
12/03/11
Weekly
0 of 1 required value reported
Nickel, Total (as Ni)
12/03/11
Weekly
0 of 1 required value reported
Mercury, Total (asHg)
12/03/11
Weekly
0 of 1 required value reported
Lead, Total (as Pb)
12/03/11
Weekly
0 of 1 required value reported
Cyanide, Total (as Cn)
12/31/11
2 X month
0 of 2 required value reported
Remedial actions, if not already implemented, should be taken to correct the above noncompliance problem. Submit
amended DMR if necessary to both Central Files and this office. Please be aware that these violations of your NPDES
permit, and any additional violation of State law, could result in enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Jenifer Carter at [phone].
cc: SWP — Central Files
W.$RO Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Nne
orthCarolina
Natura"b,
An Equal Opportun� 1 Afrmative Action Employer
1

Carter, Jenifer
From: Gore, Deborah
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 12-59 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Carter, Jenifer; Hassan, Monti
Misty,
Jenifer called me the other day and mentioned that you are interested in taking Gresco off the SIU list. We were
concerned that they might be categorical and I wished I had pulled the 40 CFR out right then, but I wanted to get the
permit file... Anyway, there are no pretreatment standards for 415 — Inorganic chemical manufacturing so they are not
considered categorical. I didn't see a new SUO for Thomasville, so you'll have to evaluate if they are a SIU based on the
definition currently in your SUO — 5% of any POC or 25,000 gpd of process wastewater. If you need any assistance in
making that determination, give Monti or me a call.
Deborah
Deborah Gore
PERCS Unit Supervisor
919-807-6383
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.

NOV- -mV- (D(-I-
Cover Sheet from
Staff Member to
Regional Supervisor
DNIR Review Record
Facility: Permit/Pipe No.: N�00,�24-1 I--)- Month/Year
J�C • �a�
Parameter
Date Parameter
Dated Parameter
i2 t�h
12 N�
Other Violations
Monthly Average Violations
Permit Limit DMR Value
Weekly/Daily Violations
Permit Limitll'vpe DMR Value
Monitoring Frequency Violations
Permit Frequency
(,19a -L�
J-t* .
Values Reported
% Over Limit
Over Limit
# of Violations
1
1
r✓
Completed by: ) ��� Date: G2
Regional Water Quality Is
Supers isor Signoff: Date:
�G�

YIF
4*
Mja
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Nat6ral
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P.E.
Governor Director
February 15, 2012
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Audit Inspection (PAI)
City ofThomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Resource,s
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On January 19, 2012, Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional Office performed an audit of the City
of Thomasville's pretreatment program. Ms. Misty Conder was present for the inspection. The purpose
of this inspection was to determine the effectiveness of the pretreatment program and included a review of
pretreatment program elements, POTW plant performance, industry monitoring data, adherence to the
enforcement response plan (ERP) and an industry inspection.
The City currently has seven (7) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), four (4) of which are categorical.
AMC was in significant non-compliance (SNC) for reporting during the last semi-annual period of 2011.
There were no other industries in SNC for reporting or limits violations during the last two semi-annual
periods. The attached audit report evaluates twelve (12) areas. Each area is noted in the report, with
observations and comments.
Overall, the inspection showed the pretreatment program to be well implemented. Please refer to the
attached inspection report for further comments. If you have any questions please contact Jenifer Carter
at [phone].
Sincerely,
attachment
cc: SWP — Central Files
WSRO Files
Sarah Morrison — PERCS Unit
Ms. Misty Conder (same address)
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877 623 6748
Internet: www.ncwatergLlaiity.org
W. Corey Basinger
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
NorthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity `, Affirmative Action Employer

MMA
NCD NR NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT AUDIT REPORT
Background Information [Complete prior to audit; review Program Info Database Sheet(s)]
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator
4. Address of POTW:
Mailing P.O. Box 368
City Thomasville Zip Code 27360
Phone Number 336-475-4220 Fax Number 336-475-4283 E-Mail Misty.Conder(a)thomasville-nc.gov
5. Audit Date 01/19/2012
6. Last Inspection Date: 01/19/2011 Inspection Type: ® PCI ❑ Audit
7. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection and Program Info Sheet(s)? ®Yes ❑ No
If No, Explain.
8. In the last year has the POTW experienced any NPDES or Sludge Permit compliance problems? ❑Yes ® No
If Yes, Explain.
9. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑Yes ® No
PCS (WENDBKodiniz
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fact. Type
N �NIC10 10 12 14 11 11 10 �01 119112 U U
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP)
(FACC)
10. Current ...................................................... Users ....
11. Current Number ofCategorical Industrial Users(CIUS)?......................................................................._.............................................. 4 _.... CIUS.
.................................I.__....................................
12. Number of SIUs Not Inspected by POTW in the Last Calendar Year? (SIU closed1 1 ...........
.......................................................I...... ..................................................................................................._......_..............................................
13. Number of SIUs Not Sampled, by POTW in the Last Calendar Year? 0
.............................................................................................................................................
14. Enter the Higher Number of 12 or..1.3................................................................................................................................................................................. 1.................. NOIN...
........................................_........................................................... .
15. Number of SIUs with No IUP, or with an Expired IUP_......_..........................._........._............................._.........................................._.. 1 ^ NOCM
........................................_...............................__...._................................................... .
16. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of Last 2 0 PSNC
Semi -Annual Periods (Total Number of SIUs in.SNC) .................................................................................................................................
SNC) ..........................
.......................................................................................................................
17. Number of SIUs in SNC for Reporting During Either of Last 2Serni-Annual Periods 1 MSNC
................................................................................................................................................_............................................... _...
18. Number of SIUs in SNC for Limits Violations.During.Either,of Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods 0 SNPS
...................................................................... .
19. Number of SIUs in SNC for Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of Last 2 0
Semi -Annual Periods .......... ...................................................................................... ..........................
............................................................................................................................................ .....
20. Number of SIUs in SNC for Self_Monitoring Requirements that were Not Inspected or Sampled 0 SNIN
MC DWO Pretreatment Audit Forst Revised: Julv 25, 2007 Page 1

21. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW- Review POTW files, verify POTW has copy of each Program
Element in their File, complete with all su000rtina documents and PERCS Approval Letter, and dates consistent with Program Info.
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In rile
Date Next Due, If
Applicable
Headworks Analysis (HWA)
6/6/2011
N Yes ❑ No
10/1/2015
Industrial Waste Survey (IWS)
9/20/2010
N Yes ❑ No
4/30/2015
Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO)
6/5/2007
N Yes ❑ No
12/31/2012
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
10/9/2008
N Yes ❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
7/22/2009
N Yes ❑ No
Legal Authority (Sewer Use Ordinance-SUO)
22. Do you have any towns and/or areas from which you receive wastewater which are not in your annexed jurisdiction?
N Yes ❑ No If yes, Please list these towns and/or areas. Trinity
23. If yes to #22, Do you have current Interjurisdictional Agreements (IJAs) or other Contracts? ®Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
A copy, if not already submitted, should be sent to Division.
24. If yes to #22, Have you had any trouble working with these towns or districts? ❑Yes N No ❑ N/A
If yes, Explain.
25. Date of Last SUO Adoption by Local Council 9/17/2007
26. Have you had any problems interpreting or enforcing any part of the SUO? ❑ Yes N No
If yes, Explain.
Enforcement (Enforcement Response Plan-ERP)
27. Did you send a copy of the ERP to your industries? N Yes ❑ No
If no, POTW must send copy within 30 days.
28. Have you had any problems interpreting or enforcing any part of the ERP (i.e. any adjudications, improper enforcement, etc.)?
[:]Yes N No If yes, Explain.
29. List Industries under a Schedule or Order and Type of Schedule or Order N/A
Resources
30 Please Rate the Following: S=Satisfacto M=Mar inal U=Unsatisfactory
Rating
Explanation, if Unsatisfactory
Personnel Available for Maintaining
More, possible full-time, help with the FOG program would be
POTW's Pretreatment Program
❑S
NM
❑U
appreciated.
Access to POTW Vehicles for
Sampling, Inspections, and
NS
❑M
❑U
Emergencies
Access to Operable Sampling
Some equipment is old and may need to be replaced.
Equipment
❑S
NM
❑U
Availabity of Funds if Needed for
Additional Sampling and/or Analysis
NS
❑M
❑U
Reference Materials
NS
❑M
❑U
Staff Training (i.e. Annual and
Regional Workshops, Etc.)
NS
❑M
❑U
Computer Equipment (Hardware and
Software)
NS
❑M
❑U
31. Does the POTW have an adequate data management system to run the pretreatment program?
N Yes ❑ No Explain Yes or No. Excel
32. How does the POTW recover the cost of the Pretreatment Program from their industries?
Explain. Surcharges for exceeding BOD and/or TSS limits.
NC DWO Pretreatment Audit Form Revised: Julv 25, 2007 Page 2

Public Perception/ Participation
33. Are there any local issues affecting the pretreatment program (e.g.. odor, plant closing, new or proposed plants)?
® Yes ❑ No If yes, Explain. Reduced flow due to industry closings/economy
34. Has any one from the public ever requested to review pretreatment program files? ® Yes ❑ No
If yes, Explain procedure. If no, How would the request be addressed? Only request was for grease trap info. More formal
requests would be required in writing.
35. Has any industry ever requested that certain information remain confidential from the public? ® Yes ❑ No If yes, Explain
procedure for determining whether information qualified for confidential status, as well as procedure for keeping files confidential
from public. If no. how would the request be addressed? Gresco sent a written request, which was granted. No formal
written procedure exists, though Ms. Conder is aware that she has authority to decide what is/isn't public information.
36. In addition to annual inspection, does the POTW periodically meet with industries to discuss pretreatment? ❑ Yes ® No
Not a regular practice, though she does phone/email contacts when needed.
37. Is the public notified about changes in the SUO or Local Limits? ® Yes ® No Changes to SUO published on the City's
website. Changes to local limits are available upon request.
38. Were all industries in SNC published in the last notice? ❑Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A Will be done in February as usual.
Permitting (Industrial Waste Survey-IWS)
39a.How does the POTW become aware of new or changed Users? Water Use/Billing records.
39b.Once the POTW becomes aware of new or changed Users, how does the POTW determine which industries have the reasonable
potential to adversely impact the WWTP and therefore require a new permit or a permit revision? (Who is an SIU?)
An application is reviewed, and sampling performed when necessary.
40. Does the POTW receive waste from any groundwater remediation projects (petroleum, CERCLA) or landfill leachate?
❑ Yes ® No If Yes, How many are there?
Please list each site and how it is permitted, if applicable.
41. Does the POTW accept waste by (check if applicable) ❑Truck ❑Dedicated Pipe N/A
42. If the POTW accepts trucked waste, what controls are placed on this waste? (example. designated point, samples drawn,
manifests required) N/A
43. How does the POTW allocate its loadings to industries? Check All that apply.
❑ Uniform Limits ® Historical Industry Need ❑ By Surcharge ® Categorical Limits ❑ Other
Explain Other: Sampling Data, HWA
44. Review POTW's copy of current allocation tables for each WWTP. Are there any over allocations? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, Which parameters are over allocated?
45. If yes to #44, What is being done to address the over allocations? (short term IUPs, HWA to be revised, pollutant study, etc.)
46. Does the POTW keep pollutant loading in reserve for future growth / safety? ® Yes ❑ No
If yes, what percentage of each parameter 25-30%
47. Has the POTW experienced any difficulty in allocation? (for example: adjudication by an industry) ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, Explain.
48. How does the POTW decide on which pollutants to limit in the permits? Monitor for? (for example: were only those pollutants
listed on the application limited; categorical parameters; NPDES Pollutants of Concern)
NPDES permit limits, 40CFR, IWS
49. How does the POTW decide what the monitoring frequency should be for the various pollutants in industry permits? Explain.
Loading to POTW, potential to impact POTW, PERCS and 40CFR requirements.
NC DWO Pretreatment. Audit Form Revised: Julv 25. 2007 Page 3

Permit Compliance
50. Does the POTW currently have or during the past year had any permits under adjudication? ❑ Yes ® No �—
If yes, Which Industries, and what was (will be) the outcome of the adjudication? y
51. Demonstrate how the POTW judges compliance. This should include compliance judgment on all violations of limits, reporting
requirements, and permit conditions, as well as for SNC. Enters data into database and monitors quarterly. Compliance
judgment performed as per PERCS. Notifications and enforcement per ERP.
52. Does the POTW use the Division's model inspection form or equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No
If no, Does the POTW form include all DWQ data? ❑ Yes ❑ No
53. Were all SIUs evaluated for the need of a slug/spill control plan during their most recent inspections? ® Yes ❑ No
If no, Explain.
54. What criteria are used to determine if a slug/spill control plan is needed? All SIUs required to have one.
55. What criteria does the POTW use to determine if a submitted slug/spill control plan is adequate? Must describe BMPs,
containment procedures, & training. Contact info must be updated.
56. How does the POTW decide where the sample point for an SIU should be located?
Downstream of all processes and prior to domestic.
57. Has the POTW established a procedure to ensure that representative samples will be taken by the POTW or SIU each time?
(example: correct location; proper programming of sampler; clean equipment; swirling the sample bucket uniformly)
POTW: ® Yes ❑ No SIU: ® Yes ❑ No If yes, Explain.
58. Who performs sample analysis for the POTW for Metals Meritech
Conventional Parameters in-house
Organics Meritech
59. Explain the Chain of Custody Procedure used for both in house and commercial lab samples.
Sample types, location, times & signatures adequate to show handling of samples from time pulled to time arriving at lab.
Lonv/Short Term Monitoring Plan (L/STMP) and Headworks Analvsis (HWA)
60a. Is LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® YES ❑ NO ❑N/A
60b. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® YES ❑ NO
60c. Is LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in Table or Equivalent? ® YES ❑ NO Is Table Adequate? ❑ YES ❑ NO Excel
60d. All LTMP/STMP effluent data on Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR)? ® YES ❑ NO
60e.
60f.
If NO to any above, list violations
Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to LTMP/STMP?
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added:
61. Do you complete your own headworks analysis (HWA) ® Yes ❑ No
If no, Who completes your HWA? Phone (� --
62. Do you have plans to revise your headworks in the near future? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, What is the reason for the revision? (check all that apply)
❑ Increased average flow
❑ More LTMP data available
Explain.
❑ YES ® NO
❑ NPDES limits change ❑ Other
❑ Resolve over allocation ❑ 5 year expiration
63. In general, what is the most limiting criteria of your HWA? ®Inhibition ❑ Pass Through ❑Sludge Quality
64. Do you see any way to increase your loadings in the future (Example: obtaining more land for sludge disposal)? ❑ Yes ® No
Explain.
Summary
65. Do you plan any significant changes to the pretreatment program or changes to the WWTP that may affect pretreatment?
FOG program being scaled up. Still deciding what to do with Alum sludge from WTP.
NC DWO Pretreatment Audit Form Revised: July 25, 2007 Page 4

INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (TUP) FILE REVIEW
66. User Name
1. AMC, LLC
2. Unilin Flooring
3. Finch Industries
67. IUP Number
0028
0030
0018
68. Does File Contain Current Permit?
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
69. Permit Expiration Date
01/31/2012
06/30/2012
01/31/2012
70. Categorical Standard Applied (I.E. 40 CFR, Etc.) Or N/A
40 CFR 413
40 CFR 433
71. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
72. Does File Contain Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
I to Yes ❑ No 11
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
73. a. Does File Contain Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. EYes [:]No
®Yes ❑No
Rb
a. ®Yes []No
b. If No, is One Needed? (See Inspection Form from POTW)
b. ❑Yes ❑No
[]Yes[]Nob.
❑Yes []No
74. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certification, Does File Contain a Toxic
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Ye 007,1/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan TOMP)?
75. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from Division?
a. EYes ❑No
a. EYes []No
a. EYes []No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.❑Yes❑NomN/A
b.❑Yes❑NomN/A
b.❑Yes❑NomN/A
76. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did POTW Complete its
® Yes ❑ No
❑Yes❑NomN/A
® Yes ❑ No
Sampling as Required b IUP, includingFlow?
]I
77. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custody Forms?
® Yes ❑ No
❑Yes❑No®N/A
® Yes ❑ No
78. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, ,Did SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A ip
Yes❑NoON/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required b IUP, includingFlow?
79. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports on
❑YesONo❑N/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
®Yes❑No❑N/A
l I
time?
80a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑Yes❑NomN/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
❑Yes❑No®N/A
]1
file include process/dilution flows as Required b IUP?
80b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑NomN/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑NoON/A
production rates and/or flows as Required b IUP?
81. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did POTW Identify All Limits
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
82. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did POTW Identify All
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No®N/A
Re ortin Non-Com liance from SIU Sampling?
83. a. Was POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.®Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑NomN/A
a.❑Yes❑NomN/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW within 30 Days?
b.mYes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑NomN/A
b.❑Yes❑NomN/A
c. If applicable, did POTW resample and obtain results within 30 days of
becoming aware of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of SIU?
c.❑Yes❑NomN/A
c.❑Yes❑NomN/A
c.❑Yes❑NomN/A
84. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was SIU in SNC?
I ® Yes ❑ No
11 ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
85. During Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken as
®Yes❑No❑N/A
Yes❑NomN/A
IP
❑Yes❑NomN/A
Specified in POTW's ERP OVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
86. Does File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
❑YesENo❑N/A
11 ❑Yes❑NomN/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
87. Does File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?
❑Yes❑No®N/A
I ❑Yes❑No®N/A
11 ❑Yes❑No®N/A
88. a. Does File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
a.❑YesmNo❑N/A
❑Yes❑NomN/A
a.❑Yes❑NomN/A
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
IF�gYesE3M[3N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
89. Did POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any Requested
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
Information For You?
FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
AMC: Slug Control Plan needed updated NC (regional at after hours) emergency contact info. TTO certification not
submitted, so scheduled to sample per TOMP in February. Penalty notices for violations pending.
Unilin Floorin¢: This SIU has not discharged since —2007
Finch Industries: Not inspected in 2011.
NC DWp Pretreatment Audit Form Revised: July 25, 2007 Pape 5

INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fac.
Type
( N I N I C 10 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 011 191 121 LEI LS_I L2_I
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP)
(FACC)
1. Industry Inspected: Advance Motorsports Coatings, LLC (AMC)
2. Industry Address: 17 High Tech Blvd; Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Aluminum Parts (Type II & III anodizing)
4. Industry Contact: Alex Davis/ Eddie Leonard Title: Plant Operations/ Facility Mgr.
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? ❑ Yes ❑ No
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview ® Yes ❑ No
B. Plant Tour ® Yes ❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour ® Yes ❑ No
D. Sampling Review ® Yes ❑ No
E. Exit Interview ® Yes ❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
Ms. Conder performed a good inspection overall at the plant, and was very thorough.
Audit SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Audit Comments: There were no deficiencies noted during the inspection. The City's pretreatment program has been well
maintained by Ms. Conder.
Requirements: Make sure an inspection is performed at Finch Industries in 2012.
Required updates to SUO are due by 12/31/2012.
Recommendations: As the FOG program continues to be expanded, make sure the proper resources are available for continued
success.
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Ratinir
® Satisfactory ❑ Marginal
Audit COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter
(Winston-Salem Regional Office)
❑Unsatisfactory
DATE: February 15, 2012
rJ
NC DWQ Pretreatment Audit Form Revised: Julv 25, 2007 Page 6

-TgQ1g6sV(f l �
440A
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, P. E. Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
January 17, 2012
MEMORANDUM
To: Modified Pretreatment Program Contacts
From: Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Requirements for Modified Programs
Dear Pretreatment Coordinators:
ALL Pretreatment Programs in North Carolina must send in their Pretreatment Annual Reports
(PAR) by March lst of every year. Two copies of the PAR should be sent to the Division's
Central Office.
PARS from "Full" Pretreatment programs must follow the PAR Workshop Guidance Manual
updated in January 2012. The Manual is posted on our website
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/pret/parguide) along with corresponding forms. For
dates and locations of PAR workshops, information is attached and also on our website
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/pret/training).
ALL Modified Pretreatment Programs in North Carolina must send in a PAR or call to schedule
a meeting with Division's Pretreatment staff by March I" of every year. While modified
pretreatment programs are encouraged to submit a complete PAR as described in the PAR
Workshop Guidance Manual, they must submit information concerning all of the following:
I. A completed copy of Significant Non -Compliant Report (SNCR) forms for the
calendar year. If you had no SIUs in SNC please write "none" on a blank form, date
it and send it in. A copy of form is on our website.
2. If you have any IUs in SNC, any IUs that were Public Noticed in the previous
calendar year, or any IUs that were placed on or completed items in a compliance
schedule, consent order, or administrative order, you must also submit the following:
2a. A narrative as described in PAR Workshop Guidance with a written explanation
of what actions you have taken and what is being done to resolve each situation
of an IU in SNC.
2b. A copy of any schedules issued to your IUs, and a description of progress to
date with those schedules.
2c. A copy and affidavit of any Public Notice of IUs in SNC.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] PERCS Unit FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarohna
Internet: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wol PERCS Unit: http://portal.ncdenr.org/webtwa/swolos/oret NaturallyAn Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

3. Pretreatment Performance Summary (PPS) form. This requirement was added to the
Division's 106 workplan with EPA that the data be entered for all approved programs
— it used to be just for the full programs. A copy of the form is on our website.
4. Copies of any additional information required by the Division's Regional Office
related to Pretreatment Annual or Semi -Annual Reporting.
The Division's pretreatment program is still very committed to keeping the burden of paper work
to a minimum. We will not request information that is not essential. The Division's PERCS Unit
will also be providing you with feed back on how the requested information is being managed.
As stated in the State Pretreatment regulations 15A NCAC 2H .0908(c) "In lieu of submitting
annual reports, Modified Pretreatment Programs . . . . . may be required to meet with
Division personnel periodically to discuss enforcement of pretreatment requirements and other
pretreatment implementation issues." If any Modified Pretreatment Program would like to
exercise this alternative to submitting a Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR), you must call and
schedule a meeting with Division Pretreatment staff prior to March 1st of each year. During
these meetings the Division will assist you in evaluating compliance, determining Significant
Non -Compliance, check your enforcement activities, document proper implementation of the
pretreatment regulations and gather necessary information to maintain our database.
Remember compliance judgment, SNC determination, and enforcement actions for sampling
during the period January through June must be done by September 1 and for sampling during
the period July through December must be done by March 1 of each year. Thank you, and if you
have any questions or comments, please contact myself at [phone] or via email
[Deborah. Gore@nc denr. gov] .
cc: Central and Regional Office Pretreatment staff

Wastewater Treatment Plant
PERFORMANCE ANNUAL REPORT
2011
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility/System Name: City of Thomasville Hamby Creek Waste Treatment Plant
Responsibility Entity: City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC, 27360
Person in Charge/Contact: Allen Beck, Plant Superintendent
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC, 27360
[phone]
Applicable NPDES Permits: NC00024112 (Wastewater Treatment Plant),
WQCS00057 (Collection System),
NCG 110000 COC#NCG 110094 (Stormwater-Industrial Site),
WQ0006050 Non -Discharge (Sludge Disposal),
NC0088200 (Alum Lagoon)
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT NUMBER: 7009 0820 0002 0795 4089
Description of Collection System:
N.C.Dept. of ENR
FEB 2 7 2012
Winston-Salem
The Thomasville sanitary sewer collection system is currently comprised of a system of 209.35 miles, or
1,105,367 linear feet of pipe, and 26 sewage lift stations spread throughout the area.
Description of Treatment Process:
Hamby Creek W WTP is a 6.OMGD capacity grade 4 wastewater treatment facility using the 5-Stage
Bardenpho process with post aeration to achieve biological nutrient reduction of both phosphorus and
nitrogen. Headworks equipment consists of an automated solids removal bar screen and a grit removal
system. Secondary treatment consists of two parallel trains of treatment, each consisting of an anaerobic
zone, an apoxic zone. an oxidation ditch, and second anoxic zone, and reaeration. Removal of activated
sludge is accomplished in two circular secondary clarifiers equipped for removal of solids for return to the
process or wasting to a digestion system. Effluent from the two circular clarifiers is filtered through 10
micron disk filters and then receives disinfection via a UV system prior to post aeration and discharge into
Hamby Creek. A proprietary solids reduction process is also in place via a side stream to reduce the
amount of solids that must be removed. Waste activated sludge is belt pressed and landfilled or
anaerobically digested to standards for class B sludge as defined by EPA in CFR Part 503 then applied to
farm land as a beneficial reuse. No land application of biosolids from 'Thomasville occurred in 2011.
II. PERFORMANCE
In 2011 Hamby Creek W WTP treated 771.5 Million Gallons of wastewater at an average daily flow of
2.114 MGD. The treatment plant was in compliance for all effluent parameters for all 12 months of the
year•, however 32 sanitary sewer overflows were experienced as summarized in the table below. Seventeen
of the thirty-two sanitary sewer overflows were less than one -thousand gallons in volume. The City has
applied with the State Revolving Loan fund and been notified that funding has been allocated for three

projects to be performed on the collection system that will help to make Thomasville's sanitary sewer
system more reliable and to reduce the number of sanitary sewer overflows experienced. These include the
upgrade of two of the largest pump stations the city maintains as well as the first phase of the replacement
of the North Hamby Creek Outfall Line. Three things that users of the system can do to help prevent
overflows are: 1) NEVER place grease or oil into the sanitary sewer system. It may be liquid in your pan,
but it becomes as hard as concrete in the sewer system. Instead, place grease and oil wastes into the
garbage. 2) Make sure no trees or shrubs grow on or near any sewer lines that may pass through your yard.
Their roots will seek out the water being carried in the pipes and penetrate the pipe at the joints, creating a
blockage. 3) Make sure no roof or yard drains are hooked into the sanitary sewer system. The sanitary
sewer system can become overloaded during rainfall events if roof or yard drains are mistakenly connected
to the sanitary sewer system. Roof and yard drains should be run off into open areas or a rain garden for
absorption into the ground and by plants.
SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS
During 2011 the City of Thomasville experienced 32 sanitary sewer overflows, 25 of these reached surface
waters. There were no known environmental impacts from these sanitary sewer overflows. There were 7
spills that did not reach surface waters. These spills are summarized in the table below.
Month
Date
Location
Volume
Cause
Reached
(Gallons)
Surface Waters
of the State?
January
Zero
Compliant
February
04-Feb-11
W Cooksey Drive
10000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
07-Feb-11
W Holly Hill Road
50
Debris in Line
No
Pump Station
Yes
25-Feb-11
W Cooksey Drive
292500
Equipment Failure
March
10-Mar-
No
11
Blair Street
10
Debris in Line
18-Mar-
Yes
11
Julian Avenue
150000
Debris in Line
22-Mar-
Yes
11
Rodelia Street
20
Debris in Line
25-Mar-
Yes
11
Fairview Road
56
Roots
April
04-Apr-11
W Colonial Drive
83136
Pipe Failure
Yes
09-Apr-11
Blair Street
2052
Grease
Yes
29-Apr-11
Fisher Ferry Street
500
—Pipe Failure
No
May
06-May-
Old Emanuel Church
No
11
Road
1270
Pipe Failure
17-May-
Yes
11
W Cooksey Drive
44950
rower Outage
June
09-Jun-11
W Colonial Drive
100
_Debris in Line
Yes_
21-Jun-11
Spruce Street
100
Grease
Yes
July
02-Jul-11
Oakwood & Fairway
325
Grease
Yes
05-Jul-11
Randolph Street
820
Grease
Yes
Inflow/Infiltration,
Yes
Old Emanuel Church
Severe Natural
09-1u1-11
Road
238705
Condition
12-Jul-11
Spruce Street
10
Pipe Failure
Yes
23-Jul-11
W Cooksey Drive
50
Pump Station
Yes

Equipment Failure
August
03-Aug-
Yes
11
W Colonial Drive
105
Pipe Failure
September
20-Sep-11
King Row
500
_ Grease
No
23-Sep-11
Cox Avenue
3500
Roots
Yes
Old Emanuel Church
Yes
23-Sep-11
Road
79000
Inflow/Infiltration
October
15-Oct-11
_
Burke Trail
760
Roots
Yes
Pump Station
Yes
29-Oct-11
W Cooksey Drive
1500
Equipment Failure
November
04-Nov-
Yes
11
W Cooksey Drive
3750
Inflow/Infiltration
04-Nov-
Yes
11
W Cooksey Drive
45938
Inflow/Infiltration
08-Nov-
Baptist Childiel 's
No
11
Home Road
350
Pipe Failure
08-Nov-
No
11
Pineywood Road
4815
Pipe Failure
16-Nov-
Old Emanuel Church
Yes
11
Road
18297
Inflow/Infiltration
December
14-Dec-
Yes
11
Liberty Drive
450
Grease
28-Dec-
Yes
11
Ward Street
50
Grease
III. NOTIFICATION
Public notification of the availability of this report was made using the city government information
channel (cable channel 13) and the City web site. This report was prepared and issued in compliance with
the North Carolina Clean Water Act of 1999. Copies of this report are available at the City of Thomasville
Water Department located in City Hall, 10 Salem St., Thomasville, N.C, and on the City web site
http:/Iwww.tholiiasville-nc.eov/ .
IV. CERTIFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
further certify tiiat u i5 na` been made ava:labiC t0 tiic users Gr cuswai;i is of the nal-ned system avid t1h t
those users have been notified of its availability.
2`�3�1Z
Kel# Crater Date
Responsible Pkrson
Title: City Manager
Entity: City of Thomasville
Explanation of Acronyms Used:
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
MGD: Million Gallons per Day

�161211d z, ���
WOMA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
December 29, 2011
Subject: End of 2011 Pretreatment Mailing
Dear Pretreatment Professionals:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
As we draw to the close of another great pretreatment year, I wanted to provide you an update on some
issues, inform you on this year's upcoming workshops and distribute the Pretreatment Program Info
Database sheets.
1) Rulemaking: The Pretreatment Rules NCAC 15A 02H .0900 were approved by the Environmental
Management Commission (EMC) on January 13, 2011 and were approved by the Rules Review
Commission (RRC) on February 17 and March 17, 2011. The Rules are final and effective as of
April 1, 2011.
a. The requirement to judge compliance of monthly average and daily max limits for the
same parameter separately becomes effective 1/l/2012.
b. Compliance judgment for any industrial user in violation of .0903 (34) Parts (C), (D) or
(H) becomes effective 1/l/2012.
More detail on both of these topics will be presented at the Pretreatment Annual Report Workshops.
2) Model Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO): The 2011 NC DWQ Model SUO and checklist were posted on
our website on August 12, 2011. The Model SUO includes many revisions to address the revisions
to NCAC 15A 02H .0900 - Local Pretreatment Programs. All POTWs must include the SUO
Checklist updated August 2011 when submitting their SUO for review. Unless otherwise specified,
updated SUOs are due to the Division by December 31, 2012.
Review your Enforcement Response Plan to determine if any changes are required due to changes
made in the SUO. In particular, if you decided to take advantage of the change from 30 days to 45
days to be considered SNC for reporting your ERP may need revision.
3) Metal Standards Triennial Review: Work continues on preparation of the fiscal note. Public
Hearings are anticipated for mid to late 2012.
4) Division Review of IUPs: In order to use available resources more effectively and recognizing the
maturity and experience prevalent in the pretreatment program, the Division has implemented a
process to streamline the Division review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permits (IUPs). After
attending the IUP workshop and a thorough Division review of three program IUPs, a permit writer
may be approved to participate in the streamlined permit review process. Permits submitted under
this process will not be subject to a full Division review. Benefits to the POTW include less
paperwork to submit and immediate approval of your permits. Information is posted on the Permit
Writing Guidance page of our website.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ PERCS Unit FAX: 9IM07-6489 \ Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NOrthCarohna
Internet: http://Dortal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ PERCS Unit: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wQ/swp/ps/pret Naturally Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer

End of 2011 Pretreatment Mailing
Page 2 of 2
December 29, 2011
5) Staff Assignments: Staff assignments have changed slightly. We continue to meet our goals for
project review of 30 days for IUPs and SIU drops and 90 days for ERP, HWA, IWS, LTMP and
SUO. Please note that the Division has committed to a 30 day review of updated SUO submissions
due to the 2011 Rule changes.
Monti Hassan, 919-807-6314 [[e-mail]]: Chowan, Hiwassee, Little Tennessee,
Lumber, Neuse, New, Roanoke, Yadkin
Sarah Morrison, 919-807-6310 [[e-mail]]: Broad, Cape Fear, Catawba, French
Broad, Tar -Pamlico.
6) Workshops: The following workshops are planned for 2012. The invitation and directions for these
workshops are posted on the Training page of our website:
http•//portal.ncdenr.orQ web/wq/swp/ps/pret/training. Please register by emailing your pretreatment
staff member and please do so early, as space is limited at each site.
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) — January 19 and January 24.
Headworks Analysis (HWA) — February 9 and July 19.
Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) Writing — Per demand. We presented 6 IUP workshops in
2011 and had great attendance — 79 completed the class. We want to continue to present this class,
but need to know which areas of the State to schedule. Please contact your pretreatment staff
member if you are interested in attending this workshop.
7) Pretreatment Program Info Database Sheets: Please review your attached program info sheet and
historical SNC sheets, if applicable, and make necessary updates to any of the information presented.
Send the corrected sheets back with your PAR, due March 1, 2012. If all the information was
correct, please indicate that in your PAR. Especially note the due dates as this may be the only
reminder you get.
Note: historical SNC sheets only list currently Active SIUs that had SNCs in 2004-2010.
8) Email Addresses: PERCS often uses email to send out mass mailings (to save money on paper and
postage). To make this an effective and cost saving tool, we ask that you keep PERCS updated on
your current email address as well as which staff member is the "primary" contact for your POTW -
see "prim" field next to staff names on Program Info sheet, and email field below names.
As always, please contact your pretreatment staff member (as listed above) or me at 919-807-6383
[email: [e-mail]] with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
f
Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Dg/dec2011_mass_mailing
Enclosures: Program Info sheet(s)
Historical SNC sheet(s), if applicable
Cc: PERCS Pretreatment Staff (via email)
All RO Pretreatment Contacts (via email)

Carter, Jenifer
From: Beck, Allen [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:14 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: FW: Power Flickering and UV Shutdown
Hi Jenifer,
I spoke with a project manager at Aquionics about our occasional IJV treatment interruptions
to see if I could get some insight into this problem . Here is his reply.
Have a great day,
Allen
From: Wesley Morin [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 8:51 AM
To: Beck, Allen
Cc: [e-mail]; Bree Trembly
Subject: Power Flickering and UV Shutdown
Allen,
It was nice speaking with you over the phone yesterday. As you explained yesterday, when the power flickers at your
plant, you have instances where the UV lamps shut off. You then have a 15 minute window where the UV lamps are
cooling down and warming back up. During this 15 minute timeframe, your plant is discharging to a stream. You then
have to report this untreated discharge.
As I explained yesterday, the lamps shutting off during electrical interruption is a common occurrence not only for our
line of UV products but across the industry. It is also standard across the UV industry to see these long cool down and
warm up times.
There are a couple of options that you can take to remediate or limit this occurrence.
1) You can add power conditioning to the power supplied to the UV units so that they do not shut down during
power flickering events. This option is very expensive as the UV units draw a lot of power and the amount of
electrical equipment needed would be large.
2) The second option is to add a diversion line to your plant to divert the water back to the head in the case of a UV
shutdown. This is likely much less costly than the first option. It would require some automatic valves and some
additional control logic built into the UV programming.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
Wes Morin
Project Manager
Aquionics Inc.
21 Kenton Lands Road
Erlanger, KY 41018. USA
Tel: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]
web: www.aauionics.com
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or other dissemination or use of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as
information could be intercepted, corrupted lost, destroyed, arrive late or
incomplete, or contain viruses.
The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required please request a hard copy
version.
PkI

Carter, Jenifer
From: Beck, Allen [[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 8:07 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: 9-26-11 City of Thomasville Report for no UV Treatment
Jenifer,
Last night we had a temporary power outage that resulted in an 11 minute span
where there was either diminished or no UV kill on our effluent discharge. During
this 11 minute span it is my best estimation that less than 2000 gallons passed
through the system and it is unlikely any negative impact was made on the
receiving water.
I'm not sure if this even qualifies as a reportable event but I prefer erring on the
side of caution. If you would, please reply to this email and if I don't hear from you
today I'll call the 24 hr. reporting number later today. Please put this in our file
and, as always, if you have any questions please let me know.
Thanks,
Allen
Allen Beck
Wastewater Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]
1

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor . Director Secretary
June 06, 2011
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Headworks Analysis - Approved
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP (NPDES: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Headworks Analysis (HWA) for the Hamby Creek WWTP submitted by
the City of Thomasville. The HWA was initially received by the Division on December 28, 2010,
followed by more information received on April 6, 2011.
The Division concurs with the HWA calculations for all pollutants of concern -with corrections
discussed below. The HWA, allocation table, removal rate, and mass balance spreadsheets are
attached for your files, with all the corrections marked. They have also been emailed to you.
1) HWA Corrections: Please feel free to contact PERCS if you have any questions about the changes
outlined below, or if the POTW does not agree with the modifications. None of the corrections
caused any over allocation that were not resolved by another correction. All corrected
spreadsheets were emailed to you for your files, with the changes highlighted. Please ensure the
POTW's paper and electronic HWA, AT, and other supporting documents contain these corrected
documents, especially the Allocation Table. As needed, please mark any original documents as
"replaced" or "voided."
a) Uncontrollable flow has been recalculated using SIUs average flow during HWA period not SIU
permitted flow (see mass balance spreadsheet).
b) The NPDES limit of TP has been converted to 0.39 mg/I using the permitted summer seasonal
load and permitted flow of 6 MGD (3570/182.5 days" 8.34" 6).
c) Mercury removal rate has been recalculated correcting the units (see removal rate spreadsheet)
d) Stream standards for Cr, Pb, Hg, Ni, and Se have been deleted from the HWA spreadsheet
since these are NPDES limited parameters.
e) Literature Inhibition criteria for chromium, copper, and zinc were updated to use the NC 2006
Literature values.
f) Uncontrollable concentrations for TSS and silver have been updated (see mass balance
spreadsheet)
g) The allocation table (AT) was updated with correct SIU limits. Please keep the AT updated
every time the IUPs are modified/renewed.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St Ralegh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-62M748 NorthCarolina
Internet www.ncwaterqualtive Acton )Vaturally
An Equal Opporlunily 1 Affirmative on Employer

2) HWA Due Date: The HWA approved today is based on primarily DMR/LTMP data for the period of
July 2009 through June 2010. Your next site specific HWA is due on October 1, 2015, unless
conditions at the POTW change significantly and thus warrant an earlier submittal (see
Comprehensive Guide, Section B).
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassanaricdenr.aovl or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
Sincerely,
oleen H. Sullins' �4d_
m h/th om a svil le. H WA. 03
Enclosures: HWAAT, removal rate, mass balance spreadsheets
cc: Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit W/ enclosures
Jennifer Carter - WSRO

/w
Workbook Name: HWA AT HambyCreek 2010 A roved.xls; Worksheet Name: HWA Page, of5
pp Printed 6/6/2011, 4:19 PM
A B
C
D
E F G H I
J K
1
Headworks Analysis Spreadsheet Spreadsheet Instructions:
POTW Name: HarMyCmaWWTP 1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered Blue cells. The rest of worksheet is
Date: 6/6/2011 protected, password is "2".
POTW NPDES # => NCO024112 2) Additional pollutants can be added in cells A34 to A42. Note all Pollutant names are linked from
POTW Sludge Permit # _> W00006050 here to other pages in HWA worksheet and also to AT worksheet (i.e., automatically entered into
other pages in HWA worksheet and also AT worksheet from HWA worksheet).
POTW NPDES Permitted Flow(MGD)= 6 -used in AT only 3) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance HWA Chapter.
POTW Average Flow(TvIGD) 2.55 wed n Itwa calculations 4) HWA, AT and HASL worksheets are linked. MAHLs, Basis, and Uncontrollable load are
automatically entered into AT from this worksheet.
Uncontrollable Flow(MGD)= ;-=u 2.473,-! " 5) If red tab notes are not visible, they can be turned on in the "Tools" menu under "options", in the
7Q10 Stream Flow(MGD)= 0.28 'view" tab click the "comment indicator only" button.
Stream Classification = C
Class of Sludge generated (A, or B) B
Sludge to Digestor Flow(MGD)= Through calc. for different POTW use Design
Sludge to Disposal Flow(MGD)= flows Criteria
%Solids to Disposal= Design Values Average Flow Permitted Flow Loading
Sludge Site Area(acres)= WWTF Influent BOD (mg/I) 215 275.9 117.2 X
Sludge Site Life(yrs)= WWTF Influent TSS (mg/1) 215 2727.3 1159.1 X
Age of Sludge Site(yrs)= WWTF Influent NH3 (mg/I) 20 250.0 106.3 X
WWTF Influent Total N(mg(l) 25-1 X
Pass -Through Loading Calculations WWTF Influent Total P (mg/1) 6 6.0 1 2.5 X
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
Pollutant
NPDES LIMIT
(mg/1)
Plant Removal
Rate I%)
Removal rate
Source
NPDES Loading
(lbs/day)
Stream
Standard
(mg/I)
Stream
Standard Source
Standard
Loading
(lbs/day)
Design Criteria
Loading (lbs/day)
Pass-Thru
Loading
(lbs/day)
Minimum
Pass-Thru
Basis
24
BOD
4
98.55
Site Specific RR
5,867
10,759
10,759
Design
25
TSS
30
98.9
Site Specific RR
58,001
10,759
10,759
Design
26
Ammonia
1
99.6
Site Specific RR
5,317
1,001
1,001
Design
27
Arsenic
45
Literature Value
0.05
NCWQS - C
2.1457
2.1457
Stream Std
28
Cadmium
67
Literature Value
0.002
NCWQS - C
0.1430
0.1430
Stream Std
29
Chromium
0.0523
82
Literature Value
6.1792
^€
6.1792
NPDES
30
Copper
89.05
Site Specific RR
AL POC
31
Cyanide
69
Literature Value
0.005
NCWQS - C
0.3807
0.3807
Stream Std
32
Lead
0.026
61
Literature Value
1.4178
._ <�, a
1.4178
NPDES
33
Mercury
0.000013
Site Specific RR
0.01418°<.
0.01418
NPDES
34
Molybdenum
33
Literature Value
35
Nickel
0.0921
42
Literature Value
3.3771
3.3771
NPDES
36
Selenium
0.0052
50
Literature Value
0.2212
0.2212
NPDES
37
Silver
75
Literature Value
AL POC
38
Zinc
75.62
Site Specific RR
AL POC
39
Total Nitrogen
90.95
Site Specific RR
1251
1251.000
Design
40
Total Phos.
». i039
93.49
Site Specific RR
127.4060
300.24
300.240
Design
41
Oil & Grease
81.35
Site Specific RR
42
Aluminum
98.63
Site Specific RR
43
Antimony
44
if
45
46
Ih
4711
Modeled after: Chapter 5-HWA Guidance, Appendix 5-A
Revision Date: February 2008

Page 2 of 5
Workbook Name: HWA AT Hamby Creek 2010 Approved.xls; Worksheet Name: HWA Printed 6/6/2011, 4:19 PM
A B C D E F G H I J K
49
Average Influent NH3 (mgA)B
Average Anaerobic Digester NHS (mg/I)
Inhibition Loading Calculations only enter when have ANAEROBIC digester
50
51
52
lPollutant
Primary
Removal Rate
(%)
Primary
Removal Rate
Source
A.SJNit,/T.F.
Inhibition
Concentration
(mg/1)
A.SJNit rr.F.
Inhibition
Concentration
Source
A.S./Nit,IT.F.
Inhibition
Loading
(Ibs/day)
Digestor
Inhibition
Concentration
(mg4)
Digestor
Inhibition
Conc. Source
Digestor Inhibition
Loading (lbs/day)
Minimum
Inhibition
Loading
(lbs/day)
Minimum
Inhibition
Loading
Source
53
BOD
54
TSS
55
Ammonia
480
Literature Value
10209.1600
10208.16
AS/NitnT i
56
Arsenic
0.1
Literature Value
2.1267
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF i
57
Cadmium
I
Literature Value
21.2670
21.2670
ASAJit/TF i
58
Chromium
0':394
LIT-2006
8.3792
8.3792
AS/Nit/TF i
59
Copper
"' -0.48
LIT-2006
10.2082
1
10.2082
AS/Nit/TF i
60
Cyanide
0.1
Literature Value
2.1267
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF i
61
Lead
0.5
Literature Value
10.6335
10.6335
AS/Nit/TF i
62
Mercury
0.1
Literature Value
2.1267
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF i
63
Molybdenum
64
Nickel
0.25
Literature Value
5.3168
5.3168
AS/Nit/TF it
65
Selenium
66
Silver
0.25
Literature Value
5.3168
5.3168
AS/Nit/TF i
67
Zinc
I
LIT-2006
21.2670
21.2670
AS/Nit/TF i
68
Total Nitrogen
69
Total Phos.
70
Oil & Grease
71
Aluminum
15
Mfg/Literature
319.0050
319.0050
AS/Nit/TF i
72
Antimony
73
f'
74 Ig
75 1h
7611
Modeled after: Chapter 5-HWA Guidance, Appendix 5-A
Revision Date: February 2008

I
Workbook Name: HWA AT HambyCreek 2010 A roved.xls; Worksheet Name: HWA Fage3of5
pp Printed 6/6/2011, 4:19 PM
A B C D E F G H I J K
77
78
Sludge Loading Calculations
79
Pollutant
Sludge Ceiling
Concentration
Limit (mg/kg)
Sludge Ceiling
Load
(lbs/day)
Sludge Ceiling
Load
- HASL Calc. -
(lbs/day)
Cumulative Sludge
Rate Limit
(lbs/(acre•life))
Cumulative
Sludge Loading
(lbs/day)
Class A Limits
Monthly
Average Rate
Limit (mg/kg)
Class A Limits
Monthly Avg.
Loading
(lbs/day)
Class A Limits
Mon. Avg. Load. -
HASL Cale. -
(lbs/day)
Minimum
Sludge
Loading
(lbs/day)
Minimum
Sludge
Loading
Sorce
80
BOD
81
TSS
82
Ammonia
83
Arsenic
75
36
41
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
84
Cadmium
85
34
39
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
85
Chromium
86
Conoer
4300
1338
1500
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
87
Cvanide
88
Lead
840
267
300
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
89
Mercury
57
15
17
0.0000
HASL - Cl.,
90
Molybdenum
75
0.0000
Cumul. Slud
91
Nickel
420
374
420
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
92
Selenium
100
89
100
0.0000
HASL - Cl.,
93
Silver
94
Zinc
7500
2498
2800
0.0000
HASL - Cl.
95
Total Nitroen
96
Total Phos.
97
Oil & Grease
98
Aluminum
99
Antimony
100
f
101
102
h
10311
104
Modeled after: Chapter 5-HWA Guidance, Appendix 5-A
Revision Date: February 2008

Page 4 of 5
Workbook Name: HWA AT Hamby Creek 2010 Approved.xls; Worksheet Name: HWA Printed 6/6/2011, 4:19 PM
A I B I C D E F G H I J K
Maximum Allowable
Headworks Loading
Calculations
106
Minimum Pass
Through Loading
(lbs/da
Pass Through
Source
Minimum
Inhibition Loading
(lbs/da)
Minimum
Inhibition Loading
Source
Minimum
Sludge Loading
(lbs/da)
Minimum
Sludge Loading
Sorce
Allowable
Headworks
Loading Ibs/da)
Maximum Allowable
Headworks Loading
Source
107
BOD
10758.6
Design
10758.6
Design
108
TSS
10758.6
Design
10758.6
Design
109
Ammonia
1000.8
Design
10208.1600
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
1000.8
Design
110
Arsenic
2.1457
Stream Std
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
111
Cadmium
0.1430
Stream Std
21.2670
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
0.1430
Stream Std
112
Chromium
6.1792
NPDES
9.3792
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
6.1792
NPDES
113
Copper
10.2082
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
10.2082
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
114
Cyanide
0.3807
Stream Std
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
0.3807
Stream Std
115
Lead
1.4178
NPDES
10.6335
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
1.4178
NPDES
116
Mercury
0.01418
NPDES
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
0.01418
NPDES
117
Molybdenum
118
Nickel
3.3771
NPDES
5.3168
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
3.3771
NPDES
119
Selenium
0.2212
NPDES
0.2212
NPDES
120
Silver
5.3168
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
5.3168
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
121
Zinc
21.2670
AS/Nit1TF inhibiti
21.2670
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
122
Total Nitrogen
1251.0
Design
1251.0000
Design
123
Total Phos.
300.2
Design
300.2400
Design
124
Oil & Grease
125
Aluminum
319.0050
AS/Nit/TF inhibiti
319.0050
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
126
Antimony
127
f
128
129
h
130
I
131
Modeled after: Chapter 5-HWA Guidance, Appendix 5-A
Revision Date: February 2008

AO►
Workbook Name: HWA AT HambyCreek 2010 A roved.xls; Worksheet Name: HWA Page5of5
PP Printed 6/6/2011, 4:19 PM
A B C D E F G H I J K
132
133
Maximum Allowable
Industrial Loadin
s Calculations
Design vs. Pass-
Thru Warning
134
Pollutant
Maximum
Allowable
Headworks Loading
(Ibs/day)
MAHL Basis
Check to Use
HASL Calcs
W
Uncontrollable
Concentration
(Mgt')
Uncontrollable
Source
Uncontrollable
Load (lbs/day)
maximum
Allowable
Industrial
Load (lbs/day)
135
BOD
10758.6000
Design
250
Literature
5156.2050
5602.3950
136
TSS
10758.6000
Design
264
Mass Balance
5444.9525
5313.6475
137
Ammonia
1000.8000
Design
31.7
Sampling
653.8068
346.9932
138
Arsenic
2.1267
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
0.0025
Sampling
0.0516
2.0751
139
Cadmium
0.1430
Stream Std
0.001
Sampling
0.0206
0.1224
140
Chromium
6.1792
NPDES L N/A
0.0025
Samoling
0.0516
6.1277
141
Copper
10.2082
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
0.072
Sampling
1.4850
8.7232
142
Cyanide
0.3807
Stream Std
N/A
0.0025
Sampling
0.0516
0.3291
143
Lead
1.4178
NPDES
0.0025
Sampling
0.0516
1.3662
144
Mercury
0.01418
NPDES
0.0001
Mass Balance
0.00206
0.01212
145
Molybdenum
0.0025
Sampling
0.0516
146
Nickel
3.3771
NPDES
0.007
Sampling
0.1444
3.2327
147
Selenium
0.2212
NPDES
0.0048
Mass Balance
0.0990
0.1222
148
Silver
5.3168
AS/Nit/fFinhtbiti
N/A
.. 77
0.0516
5.2652
149
Zinc
21.2670
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
0.1567
Mass Balance
3.2319
18.0351
150
Total Nitrogen
1251.0000
Design
35.4
Mass Balance
730.1186
520.8814
151
Total Phos.
300.2400
Design
5.0664
Mass Balance
104.4936
195.7464
152
Oil & Grease
94
Sampling
1938.7331
153
Aluminum
319.0050
AS/Nit/TF inhibition
3.14
Sampling
64.7619
254.2431
154
Antimony
0.0125
Sampling
0.2578
155
f
156
g
157
h
158
1
Modeled after: Chapter 5-HWA Guidance, Appendix 5-A
Revision Date: February 2008

Name: HWA AT Hamby Creek 2010 Approved.xls; Worksheet Name: HASL Page 1 of 1
Printed 6/8/2011, 4:21 PM
Headworks Addendum for Sludge Loadings (HASL) worksheet
POTW Name => Hamby Creek WWTP Spreadsheet Instructions:
POTW NPDES # => NCO024112 MAHL_sv = ((:I_potw' C_inf' 8.34) / (%_adj) Ibs/day
POTW Sludge Permit # => w 0006050 1) Data entered only in Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
( flow POTW g t proteced, password is "2". Q_potw = Average (mgd)
Date => 6/6/2011 g )
POTW Average Flow => 2.55 mgd C_inf = Average influent concentration (mgd)
Avg. sludge flow to Disposal => 0 mgd 2) This spreadsheet changes based on the class of sludge generated %—adj = Per percentage of Sludge Limit as decimal
Average % Solids to Disposal =>1 0.00 % inputted in cell C13 of the HWA spreadsheet. The title and the limits in (example: enter 117% as 1.17)
Sludge Site Area permitted => 0 acres column G of this spreadsheet are updated automatically. 8.34 = Conversion Factor
POLLUTANT
mium
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Selenium
3) Formulas in Comprehensive Guidance HWA Chapter, Section K.
CUMULATIVE
Flag if>
LOADING data
Enter actual
80% of
from most recent
Flag if
MAXIMUM SLUDGE % of
Applicable
CUMULATIVE Sludge Report for % of
Greater
Sludge Ceiling CONC. from most Applicable
Ceiling
Flag if >
SLUDGE the most heavily Cumulative
than
Concentrations recent Sludge Report Ceiling Conc.
Conc.
100% of
LOADING LIMITS loaded field' Limit
80%
Limits or LTMP Data Limit
Limit
the Limit
Ibs/acre Ibs/acre
mg/dry kg mg/dry k %
Flag
Flag
36
75
34
85
13381
1
4300
2671
i
840
I'll
1
57
IF Greater than 80% Flag POTW MUST SUBMIT
LAND APP & METALS MANAGEMENT PLAN n/a
75
420
100
7500
If Greater than 80% of the concentration limit POTW
MUST SUBMIT METALS MANAGEMENT PLAN n/a
Calculate MAHL_sv
based on % of
Monthly Average
Concentration Limits
to Protect Sludge
Quality (insert these
values into HWA)
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
If over ceiling cone.
POTW must reduce
MAHL n/a
1 The most heavily loaded field is determined for each polluntant indivisually, and is the field that contains the highest amount (Ibs/acre) of that polluntant.

a
Removal Rate Calculations
Date
Spreadsheet
Instructions:
1) Data
entered only
Heavy
Bordered cal'
Rest of
worksheetis
protected,
password is
„2„
'u -10 2) For below
detection data,
.arch-10 enter "<" in "<"
column, and
'� ril-10 enter detection
Ma -10 level in Influent
or Effluent
June-10 mg/lcolumns.
Spreadsheet
will auto-
matically
calculate
averages and
removal rates
using 1/2
value entered.
3) Document
removal Rate
choice
4) Formulas in
Compre-
hensive Guide
Column Averages => secfionEpter, F2.548333
page 1.
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
Removal Rates
Page 1 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
137
137
<
2
1
118
118
1.8
1.8
116
116
1.2
1.2
160
160
1.35
1.35
149
149
2.141
2.14
112
112
2.14
2.14
106
106
2.95
2.95
126
126
1.98
1.98
98
98
<
2
1
103
103
2.02
2.02
128
128
<
2
1
122
122
2.76
2.76
122.9167
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>r-9875759/761
Literature/Default RR =>
F1.778333
85.00
13 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 98.55
M
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
308
1.5
1.5
252
1.9
1.9
2701
270
2.77
2.77
225
225
2.62
2.62
225
225
3.13
3.13
239
239
2.33
2.33
266
266
13.7
13.7
226
226
1.03
1.03
245
245
1.44
1.44
292
292
1.62
1.62
270
270
1.02
1.02
275
275
1.02
1.02
257.75
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
2.84
98.90
85.00
0 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 98.90
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
23
23
<
0.1
23.9
23.9
<
0.1
25.5
25.5
<
0.1
30.8
30.8
<
0.1
20.5
20.5
<
0.1
22.7
22.7
<
0.1
24.2
24.2
<
0.1
20.3
20.3
0.43
24.4
24.4
0.11
24.2
24.2
<
0.1
22.3
22.3
0.1
26.1
26.1
0.1
23.99167
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
33 % of data is BDL
RR for this 1IWA =>

Removal Rate Calculations
Column Averages => 0.095
99.60
85.00
99.60
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
Removal Rates
Page 2 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999

Removal Rate Calculations
Date
0
Column Averages =>
ARSENIC
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.00510.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
0.0044
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0027
50 % BDL
45.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 45.00
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xis
Removal Rates
Page 3 of 8 pages
616/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
CADMIUM
<
Influent
mgfL
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
mgfL
Used in
Calculation
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<1
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.0021
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
<
0.002
0.001
0.0010
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0010
50 %BDL
7-71
67.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 67.00
CHROMIUM
<
Influent
mg&
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
0.006
0.006
<
0.005
0.0025
0.014
0.014
<1
0.005
0.0025
0.012
0.012
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
0.008
0.008
<
0.005
0.0025
0.009
0.009
<
0.005
0.0025
0.0141
0.014
<
0.005
0.0025
0.005
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
0.006
0.006
0.002
0.002
0.0070
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>I
0.0025
50 % BDI
82.00
63 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 82.00

Removal Rate Calculations
in,
Date
Ma -10
June-10
Column Averages =>
.-
<
Ini
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
0.002
0.009
0.009
0.038
0.006
0.006
0.043
0.043
0.004
0.004
0.041
0.041
0.007
0.007
0.035
0.035
0.003
0.003
0.039
0.039
0.004
0.004
0.034
0.034
0.003
0.003
0.025
0.025
0.003
0.003
0.037
0.037
<
0.002
0.001
0.048
0.048
0.003
0.003
0.047
0.047
0.003
0.003
0.053
0.053
0.0024
0.0024
0.0368
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0040
89.05
86.00
4 % of data is BDL
RR for this 1 iWA => 89.05
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
Removal Rates
Page 4 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
CYANIDE
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
0.0025
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0025
50 %BDL
69.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 69.00
..
<
Influent
mgfL
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
mgLL
Used in
Calculation
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
0.027
0.027
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
0.0068
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/DefaultRR=>1
0.0025
50 % BDI
61.00 %
96 % of data is BDL
RR for this I IWA => 61.00

Removal Rate Calculations
Date
1 March-101
Column Averages =>
MERCURY
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
-499�05
0.0000249
{4195E-06
0.00000385
�0> Q145
0.000145
2. 506
0.00000235
0.000296
i=<I,206
0.00000123
r 51
0.0000854
f-Ofi
0.0000011
,67E-05
0.0000567
*ii,7M06
0.00000171
2j�05J
0.0000291
Af,73E=06
0.00000173
�44E{05
0.0000244
r1"6
0.00000154
0:Q002621
0.000262
5 $ErD6
0.00000108
0.0000267
6
0.00000136
0.0000116
>1111
.' '6
0.00000113
1'6E-0
0.0000116
14 fi,,W,
0.00000113
2:68E-05
0.0000268
128Q6
0.00000128
0.00008335
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>I
0.00000162
98.05
60.00
0 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA=> 9$05°/
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
Removal Rates
Page 5 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
MOLYBDENUM
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
: 0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<0
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
0.0025
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0025
50 %BDL
33.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 33.00
NICKEL
<
Influent
in
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.01
0.005
0.028
0.028
<
0.01
0.005
0.012
0.012
<
0.01
0.005
0.008
0.008
0.016
0.016
1 0.008
0.008
<
0.01
0.005
1 0.006
0.006
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
1 0.006
0.006
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
0.007
0.007
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
0.012
0.012
0.008
0.008
0.0065
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0078
50 % BDI
42.00
58 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 42.00

Removal Rate Calculations
Date
fk1
1 March-101
Column Averages =>
SELENIUM
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.01
0.005
<
0.005
0.0025
0.0048 j
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
F-0.0025
50 %BDL
50.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR fir this 11WA => 50.00
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
Removal Rates
Page 6 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
SILVER
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<1
0.005
0.0025
<
0.005
0.0025
<
0.0051
0.0025
0.0025
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0025
50 %BDL
75.00
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this HWA => 75.00
M
Used in
alculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
0.053
0053
0.053
0.185
0.041
0.041
0.173
0.173
0.042
0.042
0.181
0.181
0.043
0.043
0.134
0.134
0.043
0.043
0.175
0.175
0.04
0.04
0.192
0.192
0.045
0.045
0.144
0.144
0.038
0.038
0.155
0.155
0.037
0.037
0.141
0.141
0.028
0.028
0.149
0.149
0.025
0.025
0.184
0.184
0.02
0.02
0. I555
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>
0.0379
75.62
79.00
0 % of data is BDL
RR for this I IWA => 75.62

A
Removal Rate Calculations
Date
1 December-091
1 March-101
une-1
Column Averages =>
Oil & Grease
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
17
17
<
5
2.5
18
18
<
51
2.5
18
18
<
51
2.5
<
51
2.5
37
371
9
9
7
7
<
5
2.5
7
7
<
5
2.5
7
7
<
5
2.5
14
14
<
51
2.5
27
27
<
51
2.5
16.8889
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>�
3.1500
7-71
81.35
47 % of data is BDL
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xis
Removal Rates
Page 7 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
RR for this I-IWA => 81.35
Aluminum
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
0.307
0.307
0.086
0.086
5.19
5.19
0.058
0.058
3.55
3.55
<
0.025
0.0125
3.73
3.73
0.051
0.051
4.93
4.93
0.076
0.076
12.8
12.8
0.206
0.206
1.25
1.25
0.075
0.075
11.2
11.2
0.056
0.056
10.3
10.3
0.282
0.282
15.8
15.8
0.193
0.193
15.8
15.8
0.133
0.133
6.53
6.531
<
0.05
0.025
7.6156
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>L�
0.1045
98.63
8 % of data is BDL
RR for this IIWA => 98.63
<
Influent
in
Total...
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
mg1L
Used in
Calculation
4.96
4.96
0.651
0.651
5.3
5.3
1
1
5.93
5.93
0.592
0.592
5.49
5.49
1 0.263
0.263
4.19
4.18
1 0.2
0.2
4.23
4.23
1 0.171
0.171
4.48
4.48
0.264
0.264
4.27
4.27
0.108
0.108
4.81
4.81
0.144
0.144
4.98
4.98
0.274
0.274
5.16
5.16
0.125
0.125
5.47
5.47
1 0.064
0.064
4.9383
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>�
0.3213
93.49
0 % of data is BDL
RR for this I IWA => 93.49

Removal Rate Calculations
Lq
Date
N
1 March-101
1 June-101
Column Averages =>
removal -rate- Hamby 2010_PERCS.xis
Removal Rates
Page 8 of 8 pages
6/6/2011, 4:20 PM
Revision: August 1999
Antimony
<
Influent
m
Used in
Calculation <
Effluent
m
Used in
Calculation
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.0025
0.00125
<1
0.025
0.0125
<
0.0251
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<1
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
<
0.025
0.0125
0.0116F
Unpaired Site Specific RR =>
Literature/Default RR =>�
0.0125
50 %BDL
100 % of data is BDL
RR for this 11 WA =>�

Im
IUP
Count
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
SIU.Uncont. Mass. Bal
FLOW
:.D
TSS
AMMONIA
ARSENIC
INDUSTRY
NAMES
(please list alphabetically)
Industry
Permit/Pipe
number
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
MGDgal/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Advanced Motorsports
0028
t}:OUS
5,340
2.1
0.09
33.4
1.49
0.05
0.0022
0.0038
0.0002
Brasscraft
0008,0020Q
20,000
27.05
4.51
50.5
8.42
43.8
7.3058
0.0042
0.0007
Custom Drum
0029
;, 0.0050
4,950
728.8
30.09
112
4.62
5.9
0.2436
0.007
0.0003
Finch Industries
0018
-=0.0409
40,900
13.75
4.69
51.37
17.52
6.77
2.3093
0.122
0.0416
Gresco Manufacurin
0012,.,007
5,680
9.26
0.44
2.36
0.11
0.04
0.0019
0.003
0.0001
McIntyre Metals
0031
15--0.0005
470
26.08
0.10
4.14
0.02
0.2
0.0008
0.0135
0.0001
Unilin Flooring0030
Sum of Industrial Loading (Ibs/day) =>
Avg Influent loading (Ibs/day) =>
0.07731
77340
39.9236
m l lbs/da
m l
32.1852
9.8636
mg/1 lbs/da
m l
0.0430
MGDgal/day
lbs/da
lbs/da
2.5512,550,0001
122.921 2614.141
257.751
5481.571
23.991510.19531
0.00441
0.0936
Uncontrollable Load from Mass Bal (Ibs/day) =>1 2.4727
Uncontrollable Concen. from Mass Bal (mg/L) =>
Uncont. from Uncont. Sampling (mg/L + lbs/day) =>
Uncontrollable Concen. From Literature (mg/L) =>
Uncontrollable colic. to be used in HWA (mg/L) =>
Spreadsheet Instructions:
1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
protected, password is "2".
2) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance, Chapter 5, Section E, page 5.
siu-unc-massbalance Hamby 2010_PERCS.xIs
SIU.Uncont.Mass.Bal
Page 1 of 5 pages
6/6/2011, 4:21 PM
Revision: August 1999
2,574.21 5,449.384 1500.3317 0.0506
1251 1 2641 1 24.31 1 0.0025
F-2-951 6083.49 500 10310.99 31.71 653.721 0.0025 0.0516
2501 1 2501 1 25 0.003
250 �.:,:� if264 31.7 0.0025
Choose "Uncontrollable Concentration to be used in HWA" (row 31) from Uncontrollable
Concentration From "Mass Balance" (row 25),
"Sampling" (row 27), or "Literature" (row 29). Document reasons.

M
IUP
Count
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
SIU. Uncont. Mass. Bal
FLOW
Average Discharge
CADMIUM
Average Discharge
CHROMIUM.•
Average Discharge
-
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
INDUSTRY
NAMES
lease list alphabetically)
Industry
Permit/Pipe
number
MG D aUda
Conc. Load
m 1 Ibs/da
Conc. Load
m 1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
m 1 Ibs/da
Conc. Load
m 1 Ibs/da
Advanced Motorsports
0028
>0.-0053
5,340
0.0008
0.0000
0.046
0.0020
0.3006
0.0134
0.0067
0.0003
Brasscraft
0008
0.0200
20,000
0.001
0.0002
0.5383
0.0898
0.193
0.0322
0.0069
0.0012
Custom Drum
0029
0.0050
4,950
0.001
0.0000
0.0151
0.0006
0.1346
0.0056
0.0072
0.0003
Finch Industries
0018
�11
40,900
0.001
0.0003
0.0025
0.0009
0.3507
0.1196
0.0337
0.0115
Gresco Manufacurin
0012
A!0.90 7
5,680
0.0008
0.0000
0.0025
0.0001
0.017
0.0008
0.0066
0.0003
Mcln a Metals
0031
":'0 005
470
0.001
0.0000
0.0025
0.0000
0.0548
0.0002
0.0053
0.0000
Unilin Flooring
0030
Sum of Industrial Loading (lbs/day) =>
Avg Influent loading (Ibs/day) =>
0.0773
77340
1
mg/1
0.00061
0.0934
m l lbs/da
m l
1 0.1718
m l
0.0136
MGDgal/day
lbs/da
lbs/da
Ibs/da
2.55
2,550,0001
0.0011
0.02131
0.0071 0.14891
0.03681
0.7826
0.0025
0.0532
Uncontrollable Load from Mass Bal (lbs/day) => 2.4727
Uncontrollable Concen. from Mass Bal (mg/L) =>
Uncont. from Uncont. Sampling (mg/L + lbs/day) =>
Uncontrollable Concen. From Literature (mg/L) =>
Uncontrollable colic. to be used in HWA (mg/L) =>
Spreadsheet Instructions:
1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
protected, password is "T.
2) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance, Chapter 5, Section E, page 5.
siu-unc-massbalance Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
SIU.Uncont. Mass. Bal
Page 2 of 5 pages
6/6/2011, 4:21 PM
Revision: August 1999
0.0206 0.05541 0.6108 0.0396
0.00101 1 0.00271 1 0.0296 0.0019
F-0-.0-011 0.0206 0.0025 0.0516 0.072 1.48481 0.00251 0.0516
0.003 1 0.051 1 0.0611 1 0.041
1 0.0025 0.072 0.0025
Choose "Uncontrollable Concentration to be used in HWA" (row 31) from Uncontrollable
Concentration From "Mass Balance" (row 25),
"Sampling" (row 27), or "Literature" (row 29). Document reasons.

0
s
IUP
Count
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
SIU.Uncont. Mass. Bal
FLOW
LEAD
MERCURY
MOLYBDENUM
NICKEL
INDUSTRY
NAMES
(please list al habeticall)
Industry
Permit/Pipe
number
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
vera e Discharge
MGDgal/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 Ibs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Advanced Motorsports
0028
: ,,0.0653
5,340
0.0029
0.0001
0.0001
0.00000
0.0025
0.0001
0.485
0.0216
Brasscraft
0008
4.0200
20,000
0.0341
0.0057
0.0001
0.00002
0.0025
0.0004
0.2978
0.0497
Custom Drum
0029
0.0050
4,950
0.0312
0.0013
0.0001
0.00000
0.039
0.0016
0.2566
0.0106
Finch Industries
0018
"�0 04409
40,900
0.0245
0.0084
0.0001
0.00003
0.0025
0.0009
0.003
0.0010
Gresco Manufacurin
0012
*,,;A00- 7
5,680
0.0027
0.0001
0.0001
0.00000
0.0025
0.0001
0.0035
0.0002
McIntyre Metals
0031
0.0005
4701
0.005
0.0000
0.0001
0.00000
0.3781
0.00151
0.0134
0.0001
Unilin Flooring
0030
Sum of Industrial Loading (Ibs/day) =>
Avg Influent loading (lbs/day) =>I
0.0773
77340
m I
0.0156
0.00006
m I Ibs/da
m l
0.0046
m l
1 0.0831
MGDgal/day
lbs/da
lbs/da
lbs/da
2.5512,550,0001
0.00681
0.1446
1 ; �-`0.0000831 0.001771
0.00251
0.0532
0.00651
0.1382
Uncontrollable Load from Mass Bal (lbs/day) => 2.4727
Uncontrollable Concert. from Mass Bal (mg/L) =>
Uncont. from Uncont. Sampling (mg/L + lbs/day) =>
Uncontrollable Concert. From Literature (mg/L) =>
Uncontrollable colic. to be used in HWA (nig/1) =>
Spreadsheet Instructions:
1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
protected, password is "T.
2) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance, Chapter 5, Section E, page 5.
siu-unc-massbalance Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
SIU.Uncont.Mass.Bal
Page 3 of 5 pages
6/6/2011, 4:21 PM
Revision: August 1999
0.12901 1 0.00171 0.0486 0.0551
0.0063 0.0001 1 1 0.00241 1 0.0027
0.0 225 0.05161 1 1 0.0025 0.0516[-0.0071 0.1444
0.049 0.00031 1 1 0.021
0.0025 0.00011 1 0.007
Choose "Uncontrollable Concentration to be used in HWA" (row 31) from Uncontrollable
Concentration From "Mass Balance" (row 25),
"Sampling" (row 27), or "Literature" (row 29). Document reasons.

IUP
Count
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
SIU.Uncont. Mass. Bal
FLOW
SELENIUM
SILVER
ZINC
Oil& Grease
INDUSTRY
NAMES
lease list alphabet call
Industry
Permit/Pipe
number
Aver a a Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Discharge
Average Dischar a
Avera a Dischar e
MGD gal/daym
Conc. Load
1 ]bs/da
Conc. Load
m 1 Ibs/da
Conc. Load
m 1 Ibs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Advanced Motorsports
0028
4.0053
5,340
0.0025
0.0001
0.0025
0.0001
0.425
0.0189
2.5
0.1113
Brasscraft
0008
'9.02001
20,000
0.0035
0.0006
0.0025
0.0004
0.058
0.0097
2.5
0.4170
Custom Drum
0029
`�--O.'00501
4,950
0.011
0.0005
0.0025
0.0001
0.2052
0.0085
6.625
0.2735
Finch Industries
0018.4.44,0
40,900
0.0025
0.0009
0.0991
0.0338
0.1089
0.0371
2.5
0.8528
Gresco Manufacurin
0012
0;0057
5,680
0.003
0.00011
0.0022
0.0001
0.0442
0.0021
2.5
0.1184
McIntyre Metals
0031
:,i .0 0005
470
0.005
0.0000
0.0025
0.0000
0.0161
0.0001
2.5
0.0098
Unilin Flooring
0030
Sum of Industrial Loading (Ibs/day) =>
Avg Influent loading (Ibs/day) =>
0.0773
77340
me
0.0022
m l
0.0345
m l
0.0764
m l
1.7828
MGDgal/day
lbs/day
lbs/da
lbs/da
lbs/da
2 5512,550,0001
0.00481
0.10211
0.00251
0.0532
0.15551
3.30701
16.8889
359.1762
Uncontrollable Load from Mass Bal (lbs/day) => 2.4727
Uncontrollable Concen. from Mass Bal (mg/L) =>
Uncont. from Uncont. Sampling (mg/L + lbs/day) =>
Uncontrollable Concert. From Literature (mg/L) =>
Uncontrollable conc. to be used in HWA (mg/L) =>
Spreadsheet Instructions:
1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
protected, password is "T.
2) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance, Chapter 5, Section E, page 5.
siu-unc-massbalance Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
SIU.Uncont.Mass.Bal
Page 4 of 5 pages
6/6/2011, 4:21 PM
Revision: August 1999
0.09991 1 0.0186 3.2306 357.3934
0.00481 1 0.0010.15671 1 17.3307
0.0025 0.0516[-0.02L51 0.0516t 0.3741 7.7126 94 ########
0.005 0.175 50
0.0048 A`'' 0.0025 0.1567 94
Choose "Uncontrollable Concentration to be used in HWA" (row 31) from Uncontrollable
Concentration From "Mass Balance" (row 25),
"Sampling" (row 27), or "Literature" (row 29). Document reasons.

C7
IUP
Count
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
SIU.Uncont. Mass. Bal
FLOW
Dischar e
TKN
Avera e Dischar e
.Phosphorus
Avera e Dischar e
Avera e Dischar e
Avera e Dischar e
INDUSTRY
NAMES
( lease list al habeticall)
Industry
Permit/Pipe
numbergal/day
7vera
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/da
Advanced Motorsports
0028
Q;005
5,340
0.84
0.0374
2.49
0.1109
6.0222
0.2682
2.91
0.1296
Brasscraft
0008
�4.0200
20,000
44.25
7.3809
0.73
0.1218
1.71
0.2852
0.841
0.1403
Custom Drum
0029
OQSQ
4,950
31.654
1.3068
0.181
0.0075
0.639
0.0264
1.432
0.0591
Finch Industries
0018A.044q
40,900
7.24
2.4696
5.175
1.7652
0.9425
0.3215
0.3555
0.1213
Gresco Manufacurin
0012
0.0057
5,680
0.19Olbs/dayy
0.34
0.0161
0.025
0.0012
0.13
0.0062
McIntyre Metals
00310.OQ05
470
2.895
10.66
0.0418
0.0588
0.0002
22.25
0.0872
Unilin Flooring0030
Sum of Industrial Loading (lbs/day) =>
Avg Influent loading (lbs/day) =>
0.0773
77340
lm
2.0632
l lbs/da
m l
0.9027
m l
0.5436
MGD gal/daym
lbs/da
lbs/da
2.55
2,550,0001
33.70831
716.87441
0.05921 1.25901
7.61561
161.96101
4.9383
105.0228
Uncontrollable Load from Mass Bal (lbs/day) => 2.4727
Uncontrollable Concen. from Mass Bal (mg/L) =>
Uncont. from Uncont. Sampling (mg/L + lbs/day) =>
Uncontrollable Concen. From Literature (mg/L) =>
Uncontrollable conc. to be used in IIWA (mg/L) =>
Spreadsheet Instructions:
1) Applicable Values should be entered in the Heavy Bordered cells. Rest of worksheet is
protected, password is "T.
2) Formulas are discussed in the Comprehensive Guidance, Chapter 5, Section E, page 5.
siu-unc-massbalance Hamby 2010_PERCS.xls
SIU.Uncont.Mass.Bal
Page 5 of 5 pages
6/6/2011, 4:21 PM
Revision: August 1999
705.6594-0.8042 161 0582 104.4792
34.2188-0.03901 1 7.81001 1 5.0664
62.61 1290.9362 0.3 6.18661 3.141 64.75301 12.7 261.8992
35.168 0.3 3.14 5.0664
Choose "Uncontrollable Concentration to be used in HWA" (row 31) from Uncontrollable
Concentration From "Mass Balance" (row 25),
"Sampling" (row 27), or "Literature" (row 29). Document reasons.

Carter, Jenifer
From: Conder, Misty [[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 8:51 AM
To: Basinger, Corey; Carter, Jenifer
Cc: Beck, Allen; Huffman, Morgan; Craver, Kelly
Subject: Fecal reporting from 5/4/11 discharge of partially treated water
Dear Mr. Basinger,
Per our conversation on Monday 5/9/11, you stated that our verbal report of the incident was sufficient and that a written
report and a newspaper report would not be needed. This decision is based on the following facts.
1. The partial discharge was reported on 5/4/11 at 3:56 PM to Steve Mauney. Fecal samples of the effluent were
taken during the incident and about an hour after the incident for evaluation.
2. Flow discharged during the incident is estimated at 1.6MG, although this would be a little high because it includes
4 hours of discharge when all the UV units were working correctly.
3. The fecal counts in counts/ 100ml for the week are listed below and include the geometric mean for the week
which indicates we were not in violation of our permit. The geometric mean for the maximum report column is
based on using 6000 for the count for the day. The average column uses a straight average of the two fecal
samples taken on the 4ffi and then calculates the geometric mean using that average.
max rpt avg
21
21
24
24
>6000
1040
3520
36
36
7
7
15
15
47
43
2-May
3-May
4-May
5-May
6-May
7-May
Geo
Mean
4.The DMR will have >6000 counts/100ml as the reported value for 5/4/11 as well.
Please verify that this is a correct summary of our conversation.
Thank you,
Laboratory Supervisor - Pretreatment
Hamby Creek WWTP
Thomasville, NC
Ph: 336-475-4246
Fax: [phone]

Adim
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natura
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
April 29, 2011
Ms. Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed
the Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2010. This PAR was
received on April 6, 2011. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the requirements
of 15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment
Programs. A correction to the narrative was made to show that Custom Drum was not in SNC for
Chromium TRC violations in 2010. Please correct your copy to show the same.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at (919)
807-6314 (Monti. [e-mail]).
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
SWP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone]''. FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
NorthCarolina
.Vaturally
Ar. Equal Opportunity `. Atfirmat'Ne action Employer

Regional Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Review
Is the PAR on time? Does it have two copies?
Did they send any other submissions with it?
Included?
ADEQUATE?
POTW noted Corrections?
Narrative
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
PPS Form
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
SNCR
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
IDSF
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Allocation Table
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Waste Reduction Info
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Compliance Schedules
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
Public Notice
❑
YES
®
NO ❑ NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
Program Information
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
[—]YES ® NO
Historical SNC
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑ YES ❑ NO ® NA
Regional Office: WSRO
POTW: Thomasville
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Report Period: 1/1/10 to 12/31/10
® Full ❑ Modified
For modified programs evaluate shaded
items only. A Narrative is required for a
modified program only if there are SIUs
in SNC.
If No, check recommendation below.
1. Have at least 90% of SIU permits been issued within 180
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
days of expiration? See Allocation Table).
Assessment
2. Were at least 80% of SIUs inspected? (See PPS Form)
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
3. Has effective enforcement been taken against industries in
❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
SNC, including those causing pass -through or interference? (See
Assessment
Narrative and SNCR Form
4. Does public notice cover all SIUs in SNC?
❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
Note: LxceDtions snouia be exDlainea in the comment section below:
A note was included with the PAR explaining that public notice had yet to be published,
but would be published soon, and that copies would be submitted at that time.
A correction to the narrative was noted. Custom Drum was not in SNC for Chromium
during the first half of 2010.
Reviewed By: 1. Carter Date: 4/29/2011
Regional Pretreatment Annual Report Review
Thomasville PAR Reveiw Form 2010.doc
FULL PROGRAMS ONLY
Values from PPS Form
-Fill in
(PCS data)
* Alternatively, attach PPS page from PAR

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
April 26, 2011 N.C. DOot. of ENR
APR 2 9 2011
Ms. Misty Conder Winston-salem
Laboratory Supervisor Regional office
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit ([UP)
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES #: NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Pretreatment Permits (IUPs) submitted by The City of
Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial Users (SIUs). The IUPs were received by the
Division on April 6, 2011.
IUP #
SIU Name
IUP
029
Custom Drum Services Inc.
Renewal
008
Brass Craft — Thomasville
Modification
The review indicates that the IUPs are adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H
.0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti.Hassan(o-)-ncdenr.govl or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
incerely,
0 �—
V( oleen H. Sullins
mh/thomasville.iup.020
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Ralegh, North Carolina 27604 title
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 North Caroli na
Internet: www.nnily \ A rmalive rg
Acton
Naturally
, �a tural y
An Equal Opportunity 1 AffinnaGve Action Employer � y l� ` `L�

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Carter, Jenifer
Sent:
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 1:05 PM
To:
'Beck, Allen'
Subject:
RE: Power failure
Allen,
Technically speaking, email isn't supposed to count for proper notification. However, if you get a response from me
within the 24 hours required, no further notice will be required. I will respond to the email and put a copy of it in your
file.
If you don't hear from me (or whoever), then you will have to call the front desk (336-771-5000) and ask to speak to
someone else in DWQ. Or if it's after hours, call Emergency Management (800-858-0368).
This notification is duly noted. Were you able to utilize back-up disinfection at all during the 15 minutes down time?
Thanks,
Jenifer Carter
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 11:54 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: Power failure
Jenifer,
Just wanted to let you know that we had a power glitch this morning and it took
about 15 minutes to get our UV to reset. Is there any additional notifications I
need to be concerned with?
1

Thanks,
Allen
Allen Beck
Wastewater Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]

A=*YA
NCDEN
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
April 08, 2011
Ms. Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
P.O. BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject.- Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit drops
Program: City of Thomasville
NPDES #: NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
Rpe
i APR 15 2011
y/rns!cn.saleT
-_ _ Reaip�31 Our(
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed revised the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) drops submitted by
The City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial Users (SIUs). The IUP drop requests
were received by the Division on April 6, 2011.
IUP #
SIU Name
0007
Strou e Mirror, Inc.
0005
Images of America, Inc.
The review indicates that the IUP drops are adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC
2H .0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan(Qncdenr.gov] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
*incer.ely
+{ ullns
mh/thomasville. iup.d rop.019
cc: Jenifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 title
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 North Carol i n a
Internet) www.ncwaterquality.org �/�!atlllalllly
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer L

M:=��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
February 10, 2011
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed by Jenifer Carter, of this office, on January 19, 2011.
Pretreatment Coordinator, Ms. Misty Conder, was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection was to
determine the effectiveness of the City's pretreatment program and included a review of pretreatment program
elements, POTW plant performance, Industry monitoring data, adherence to the enforcement response plan (ERP),
and an industry inspection.
The City currently has eight (8) Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), four (4) of which are categorical. Two SIUs
were in significant non-compliance (SNC) for reporting during this review. The plant has had no limits violations
since August 2009.
Overall, the inspection showed the pretreatment program to be run very proficiently. Please refer to the attached
inspection report for further comments. If you have any questions please contact Jenifer Carter at [phone].
cc: WSRO Files
SWP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, VVinston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585'VVaughtown St, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] � Customer Sentice: 1-817-623-6748
Internet: wjvw %waterquality.org
Sincerely,
W. Corey Basinger
Interim Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Nne
orthCarolina
;Vaturallty
An Equal OPportunity 1 At �rmalve Action Employer

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)l
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/Lab SuvervisorBack-up ORC
4. Last Inspection Date: 01 /07 /10 Inspection Type: ® PCI ❑ Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
n N C 0 0 2 4 1 1 2 011911 ® EE
Fac. Type
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI)
(INSP)
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)?
8
SIUS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs)?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? See comments
1
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year? No dischar a/closed
2
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
2
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi -Annual Periods (Total Number of SIUs in SNC)
2
PSNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
2
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
0*
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-annual Periods
0
POTW INTERVIEW *some data not received yet for McIntyre
17. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations? El Yes ® No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
18. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for Limits: possibly McIntyre
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 SNC for Reporting: Unilin Flooring & AMC
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published: To be published in February
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order,
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division? N/A
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which ❑ Yes ® No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes El No El N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes ❑ No El N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes El No Is the Table Adequate? ® Yes El No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? ® Yes ❑ No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Aluminum & Antimony, if desired Added:
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 1

28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW- Please review POTW files, verify POTW has copy of Program Element in
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter, and dates consistent with Pro ram Info: 1 11
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis (HWA)
Submitted 12/28/10
® Yes ❑ No
pending
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
09/20/2010
® Yes ❑ No
04/30/2015
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
06/05/2007
® Yes ❑ No
Adopted 09/17/2007
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
10/09/2008
® Yes ❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
07/22/2009
® Yes ❑ No
06/01/2009
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW(3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION)
29.
User Name
1. BassCraft. 2. 11
3.
30.
IUP Number
0008
31.
Does File Contain Current Permit?
®
Yes
❑ No
I ❑ Yes ❑ No
[:1Yes ❑ No
32.
Permit Expiration Date
01/31/12
/ /
33.
Categorical Standard Applied (I.E. 40 CFR, Etc.) Or N/A
433
34.
Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35.
Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
FMYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
36.
a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. ®Yes []No
I
a. ❑Yes ❑No�_7
a. []Yes❑No
b. If No, is One Needed? See Inspection Form from POTW
b. []Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes []No 11
b. []Yes ❑No
37.
For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan (TOMP)?
38.
a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. NYes []No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
a. []Yes
[]Nob.
All Issues Resolved?
b.❑Yes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
40.
Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑NopN/A
41.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
il
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑ ON/A
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
41b.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b.
For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑NoNN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required b IUP?
43a.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
❑Yes❑NoNN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
❑Yes❑NoNN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Reportin&Non-Conipliance from SIU Sampling?
44.
a. Was the POTW Notified by SILT (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.❑Yes❑No®N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.pYes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.❑Yes❑No®N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
45.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SILT in SNC?
❑ Yes ® No
11 ❑ Yes ❑ N—o-1
❑ Yes ❑ No
46.
During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
❑Yes❑NOON/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP (NOVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
47.
Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/AI
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48.
Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?
❑Yes❑NoNN/A 11
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
49.
a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
a. []Yes NNo
1b.
a. ❑Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
❑Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
50.
Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ®No
❑Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Requested Information For You?
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
No problems noted
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY
❑N INICIO10121411 1 2 011911
(DTIA)
1. Industry Inspected: Custom Drum Services, Inc.
2. Industry Address: 1015 Trinity St., Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Reconditioning of Drums
4. Industry Contact: Jason L. Ingram
Phone: [phone]/ Cell: 336 442-5296 Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No
Inspec.Type
Inspector
Fac. Type
o
a
o
(TYPI)
(INSP)
(FACC)
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview
® Yes
❑ No
B. Plant Tour
® Yes
❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour
® Yes
❑ No
D. Sampling Review
® Yes
❑ No
E. Exit Interview
® Yes
❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
No deficiencies noted
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments:
#9: Custom drum was scheduled to be inspected in December 2010, during this State inspection of the City's pretreatment program.
Both inspections were rescheduled to this date, due to inclement weather.
Requirements:
Recommendations:
Over allocation for Silver and Copper when stream standards are used in the calculations. Since these are action level POCs, and
since the POTW is passing whole effluent toxicity, it may not be necessary to use the stream standards. You should discuss this with
the PERCS Unit, if necessary.
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: [-]Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory ® Marginal ❑
Unsatisfactory ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter
DATE: February 10, 2011
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

j tom. C.
Wastewater 'Treatment Plant _--
RECEIVED
N.C. Deot. of ENP
PERFORMANCE ANNUAL REPORT JAN 18 �011
2010
Winston-Sae-
Reglonal
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Facility/System Name: City of Thomasville Hamby Creek Waste Treatment Plant
Responsibility Entity: City of Thomasville
x 368 Thomas� /;Zk
Thomasville, NC, 27360 n r T
Person in Char a/Contact: Allen Beck Plant Superintendent
W D
g P.O. Box 368 p I JAN 2 2011
Thomasville, NC, 27360
(336) 4754246 _DENR-WATER nt iA,
Applicable Permits: NPDES NC00024112 (Wastewater Treatment Plant),
WQCS00057 (Collection System),
NCGI10000 COC#NCG110094 (Stormwater-Industrial Site),
WQ0006050 Non -Discharge (Sludge Disposal),
NC0088200 (Alum Lagoon)
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT NUMBER: 7009 0820 0002 0795 4065
Description of Collection System:
The Thomasville sanitary sewer collection system is currently comprised of a system of 209.35 miles, or
1,105,367 linear feet of pipe, and 26 sewage lift stations spread throughout the area.
Description of Treatment Process:
Hamby Creek WWTP is a 6.OMGD capacity grade 4 wastewater treatment facility using the 5-Stage
Bardenpho process with post aeration to achieve biological nutrient reduction of both phosphorus and
nitrogen. Headworks equipment consists of an automated solids removal bar screen and a grit removal
system. Secondary treatment consists of two parallel trains of treatment, each consisting of an anaerobic
zone, an anoxic zone, an oxidation ditch, and second anoxic zone, and reaeration. Removal of activated
sludge is accomplished in two circular secondary clarifiers equipped for removal of solids for return to the
process or wasting to a digestion system. Effluent from the two circular clarifiers is filtered through 10
micron disk filters and then receives disinfection via a UV system prior to post aeration and discharge into
Hamby Creek. A proprietary solids reduction process is also in place via a side stream to reduce the
amount of solids that must be removed. Waste activated sludge is belt pressed and landfilled or
anaerobically digested to standards for class B sludge as defined by EPA in CFR Part 503 then applied to
farm land as a beneficial reuse. No land application of biosolids from Thomasville occurred in 2010.
II. PERFORMANCE
In 2010 Hamby Creek WWTP treated 893.2 Million Gallons of wastewater at an average daily flow of
2.447 MGD. The plant was out of compliance for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) sampling in July and
both TKN and Low Level Mercury sampling in August. These violations are described in greater detail in
the next section of this report.

III. MONTHLY REPORT 2010
January:
Compliant
February:
Compliant
March:
Compliant
April:
Compliant
May:
Compliant
June:
Compliant
July: On the July DMR we reported a sampling violation for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen. The lab
personnel failed to pick up the required sample. NCDENR was notified and a corrective action was issued
by Thomasville.
August: On the August DMR we reported a sampling violation for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and
Low Level Mercury. Laboratory personnel failed to pick up the required samples. NCDENR was notified
and a corrective action was issued by Thomasville.
September: Compliant
October: Compliant
November: Compliant
December: Compliant
IV. SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS
During 2010 the City of Thomasville experienced 45 sanitary sewer overflows, 35 of these reached surface
waters. There were 10 spills that did not reach surface waters. These spills are summarized in the table
below.
Date
Location
Volume
(Gallons)
Cause
Reached Surface
Waters of the State?
17-Jan-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
29000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
24-Jan-10
King Row
31000
Debris in Line,
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
24-Jan-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
82300
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
25-Jan-10
Burke Trail Avenue
6700
Debris in Line
Yes
25-Jan-10
High Meadow Road
18000
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
25-Jan-10
Concord Street
27000
Debris in Line,
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
25-Jan-10
Tremont Street
3900
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
26-Jan-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
20200
Pump Station
Equipment Failure
Yes
05-Feb-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
46700
1 Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
05-Feb-10
Concord Street
5760
Debris in Line,
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
03-Mar-10
Tremont Street
860
Grease
Yes
04-Mar-10
Between Clark and Brown
500
Debris in Line
Yes
05-Mar-10
MLK Jr. Drive
0
Grease
No
27-Mar-10
Rapp Street
5000
Debris in Line
Yes
30-Mar-10
Carolina Avenue
880
Grease
Yes
09-Apr-10
Doak Street
1
Pipe Failure
Yes

09-Apr-10
Barrington Street
0
Grease
No
10-Apr-10
Burke Trail Avenue
6900
Debris in Line
Yes
19-Apr-10
Carmalt Street
5600
Debris in Line
Yes
20-Apr-10
Mason Way
11200
Debris in Line,
Vandalism
Yes
03-May-10
Meadow Wood Drive
0
Grease, Roots
No
05-May-10
Carter Drive
7480
Debris in Line,
Roots
Yes
23-May-10
Alice Drive
0
Debris in Line
No
23-May-10
Tremont Street
500
Debris in Line
Yes
27-May-10
Franklin Street
200
Pipe Failure
Yes
14-Jul-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
3120
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
27-Jul-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
65975
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
12-Aug-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
13230
Inflow/Infiltration
Yes
23-Aug-10
Cannon Street
0
Pipe Failure
No
02-Sep-10
Carolina Avenue
50
Pipe Failure
Yes
08-Sep-10
Rapp Street
25
Debris in Line
Yes
16-Sep-10
Chriswood Avenue
175
Debris in Line,
Grease
Yes
21-Sep-10
Ward Street
50
Pipe Failure
Yes
22-Sep-10
South Street
25
Debris in Line
Yes
30-Sep-10
Concord Street
7900
Inflow/Infiltration,
Severe Natural
Condition
Yes
30-Sep-10
Old Emmanuel Church Rd
678900
Inflow/Infiltration,
Severe Natural
Condition
Yes
07-Oct-10
Spruce Street
500
Debris in Line,
Other
Yes
14-Oct-10
Carmalt Street
10000
Inflow/Infiltration,
Other
Yes
15-Oct-10
Cloniger Drive
100
Grease
No
02-Nov-10
Randolph Street
0
Grease
No
05-Nov-10
Ford Street
1800
Debris in Line,
Vandalism
Yes
05-Nov-10
Mendenhall Street
30
Grease
No
30-Nov-10
Hasty School Road
1200
Grease
No
01-Dec-10
Morrison Avenue
104058
Grease
Yes
29-Dec-10
Rebecca Drive
30
Roots
No
V. NOTIFICATION
Public notification of the availability of this report was made using the city government information
channel (cable channel 13). This report was prepared and issued in compliance with the North Carolina

s., .
Clean Water Act of 1999. Copies of this report are available at the City of Thomasville Water Department
located in City Hall, 10 Salem St., Thomasville, N.C.
VI. CERTIFICATION
I certify under penalty of law that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
further certify that this has been made available to the users or customers of the named system and that
those users have been notified of its availability.
ul Rush Mitchell Date
Responsible Person
Title: Interim City Manager
Entity: City of Thomasville
Explanation of Acronyms Used:
NPDES: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NCDENR: North Carolina Dept of Environment and Natural Resources
NOV: Notice of Violation
MGD: Million Gallons per Day
DMR: Discharge Monitoring Report
BOD: Biochemical Oxygen Demand. A measure of the amount of oxygen
consuming matter in water.
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
ug/1: micrograms per liter or one part per billion
mg/1: milligrams per liter or one part per million

�r�7vi��sv, il�
A4
WDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
December 30, 2010
Subject: End of 2010 Pretreatment Mailing
Dear Pretreatment Professionals:
As we draw to the close of another great pretreatment year, I wanted to provide you an update on some
issues, inform you on this year's upcoming workshops and distribute the Pretreatment Program Info
Database sheets.
1) NC Pretreatment Professionals Honor Roll: In case you missed the Annual Pretreatment Conference
held in October 2010, this year's addition to the Honor Roll is Cheryl Douglas with the City of
Salisbury.
2) Rulemaking: The fiscal analysis was approved by the Office of State Budget and Management
(OSBM) on May 5. The Rules were published in the State Register on June 1 and the Public
Comment period was held from June 1 — August 2. The Public Hearing was held June 16 in the
Ground Floor Hearing Room of the Archdale Building in Raleigh. The Rules were meant to go
before the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on November 18. However, the Rules
were withdrawn in response to concerns raised by the NC Water Quality Association (NCWQA) in a
November 12 correspondence. A meeting was held in Raleigh on December 7 to discuss these
concerns, with follow-up comments to be submitted by December 10 in order to meet EMC
deadlines. The final Report of Proceedings/Hearing Officers Report was published on the
Pretreatment website on December 15. The Rules will go before the EMC on January 13, 2011 and
the earliest possible effective date is March 1, 2011. Note the effective date for the changes to the
Significant Noncompliance (SNC) definition would be delayed until July 1 in order to correspond
with the six month assessment period. Please check the web -site regularly for updates and details,
including an Implementation Guidance outlining exactly what the Division's expectations are for
each Rule change, including a new Model Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO).
3) Metal Standards Triennial Review: DWQ is proposing dissolved metals, which represent the portion
of the metal that is bioavailable (toxic) to aquatic life, to replace the existing total metals standards.
Please check the Pretreatment website for guidance on how to evaluate the impact of the proposed
standards on your Pretreatment Program as well as links to the websites for the Classification and
Standards Unit for the standards themselves and their development and the NPDES Unit for Limits
calculators. Check back to the web -site for updates as these Rules progress. Public Hearings are
anticipated for early to mid 2011.
4) Division Review of IUPs: The Division has agreed to work out an agreement with the NCWQA and
NCPC regarding the form and substance of DWQ's streamlined permit review policy. Numerous
pretreatment programs have been in operation for many years and there are pretreatment
professionals that are very capable of writing adequate IUPs. Cutting back on detailed reviews of
each individual permit prepared by such Control Authorities would free up resources to devote to
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: 91M07-64921 PERCS Unit FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wgl PERCS Unit: hftp://portal.ncdenr.om/web/wq/swp/ps/pret �atura!!r�
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

End of 2010 Pretreatment Mailing
Page 2 of 2
December 30, 2010
other tasks such as more training and more direct assistance to those Control Authorities that need it.
Part of this process will involve the Control Authority attending a PERCS IUP Writing Workshop.
PERCS is adding this workshop to its regular training schedule this coming year - see item 6 below
for the 2011 dates. Stay tuned to the Pretreatment web -site for more details as the policy is
developed.
5) Staff Assignments: Staff assignments remain the same. We continue to meet our goals for project
review of 30 days for IUPs and SIU drops and 90 days for ERP, HWA, IWS, LTMP and SUO.
Dana Folley, 919-807-6311 [[e-mail]]: Catawba, Chowan, Lumber, Roanoke, New
Monti Hassan, 919-807-6314 [[e-mail]]: Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, Neuse,
Yadkin
Sarah Morrison, 919-807-6310 [[e-mail]]: Broad, Cape Fear, French Broad,
Tar -Pam
6) Workshops: The following workshops are planned for 2011. The invitation and directions for these
workshops are posted on the Training page of our website:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/swp/ps/pret/training. Please register by emailing your pretreatment
staff member and please do so early, as space is limited at each site.
Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) — February 3 and February 9.
Headworks Analysis (HWA) - February 24, March 1, July 21, and October 20.
Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) Writing — March 17 and 23 and June 16 and 22.
7) Pretreatment Program Info Database Sheets: Please review your attached program info sheet and
historical SNC sheets and make necessary updates to any of the information presented. Send the
corrected sheets back with your PAR, due March 1, 2011. If all the information was correct, please
indicate that in your PAR. Especially note the due dates. This may be the only reminder you get.
Note: historical SNC sheets only list currently Active SIUs that had SNCs in 2004-2009.
8) Email Addresses: PERCS often uses email to send out mass mailings (to save money on paper and
postage). To make this an effective and cost saving tool, we ask that you keep PERCS updated on
your current email address as well as which staff member is the "primary" contact for your POTW -
see "prim" field next to staff names on Program Info sheet, and email field below names.
As always, please contact your pretreatment staff member (as listed above) or me at 919-807-6383
[email: Deborah. Gore nncdenr.gov] with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
j
Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Dg/dec20 10_mass_mai ling
Enclosures: Program Info sheet(s)
Historical SNC sheet(s), if applicable
Cc: PERCS Pretreatment Staff (via email)
All RO Pretreatment Contacts (via email)

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
RECEIVED
September 20, 2010 N.C. Dept. of ENv
Ms. Misty Conder SEP 2 3 2010
Laboratory Supervisor Winston -sale^-.
City of Thomasville, P.O. BOX 368 Regional Office
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial Waste Survey
Program: City,of Thomasville
NPDES #: NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of
Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) for the City of Thomasville. The IWS
was initially received by the Division on June 4, 2010, with additional information received on
September 10, 2010.
The review indicates that the IWS is adequate and meets the minimum requirements of 40 CFR 403.8
(f) (2). Proper completion of an Industrial Waste Survey is required by Part III (B) of your NPDES
permit.
Please remember it is the responsibility of the POTW to continue efforts to ensure that any Significant
Industrial Users (SIUs), as defined by NCAC 15A 2H .0903(b)(9) (A) through (D), are identified and
subsequently added to the City's pretreatment program. This includes evaluation of new [Us before
they commence discharge and evaluation of existing IUs determined to be not SIUs that make changes
to their process.
1) Next IWS Due Date: The IWS was conducted in 2010. Your next updated IWS is due on April 30,
2015, unless conditions at the POTW change significantly and thus warrant an earlier submittal.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: Monti. Hassan(8ncdenr.govj or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
tc
erely
,
id Coleen li saa
rnh/T �Jennifer
WS.2010
cc: Carter - 0
1 Ftle
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Emplover Ll

City of Thomasville
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
A. Sampling Points See Figure 1)
1 - Influent - The old North and South influent lines are now combined into a single
pipeline that comes into the plant's headworks facility. Composite sampling
occurs with the use of a composite sampler as flow enters the flow measuring
flume, prior to mixing with any side streams and prior to the bar screen. Grab
samples are taken from the grate openings after the flow monitoring flume and
prior to the barscreen.
2 - Effluent - Composite sampling occurs after all treatment has occurred with the use
of a composite sampler as flow leaves the static aerator and exits the plant. Grab
samples are taken from the effluent stream as it enters the top static aerator after
the flow monitoring flume and after all treatment including disinfection.
3 - Oxidation Ditch- Composite or grab samples are collected from the Post Oxidation
Ditch Splitter Box, which combines flow from both Oxidation ditches after all 5
stages of the Bardenpho process but prior to going to the final clarifiers.
4 — Sludge to Disposal - Sample sludge going to final disposal from the spigot going
into the belt press. A final belt press solid sample may also be collected from the
conveyor belt exiting the belt press building.
5 - SIUs — locations described in IUPs
6 - Uncontrollable — Composite or grab samples are collected from the Ivey Creek or
Camden Woods lift station (residential) and from the National HWY lift station
(commercial, residential, light industrial). If more than one location is needed to
ensure representative data, sampling will be rotated.
B. Pollutants of Concern (P.O.C.) Reason for Inclusion:
NPDES - POTW NPDES Permit limit
Sludge - 40 CFR 503 Sludge Land Application
EPA - EPA Required
IUP - SIU Industrial User Permit Limit
POC
List
NPDES
Required
Pollutants
40 CFR 503 Sludge
Required
Pollutants
EPA, NC
Required
Pollutants
SIU
Limited
Pollutants
Flow
Flow
Flow
BOD5
BOD5
TSS
TSS
NH3-N
NH3-N
Al
Sb
Sb
As
As
As
Cd
Cd
Cd
Cd
Cr
Cr
Cr
Cr
Cu
Cu
Cu
Cu
CN
CN
Pb
Pb
Pb
Pb
Pb
Hg
Hg
Hg
H
Mo
Mo
Effective Date: July 1, 2009 Page 1
Printed: January 23, 2014, 10:45 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A. DWQ Model Revision Date: July 29, 2004

City of Thomasville
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
Ni
Ni
Ni
Ni
Ni
Ag
A
Se
Se
Se
Se
Zn
Zn
Zn
Zn
TP
TP
TKN
NO2+NO3
Oil &
Grease
O&G
% Solids
% Solids
Sludge to
disposal
flow
Sludge to disposal
flow
C. Flow
Flow monitoring points are indicated on the attached facility diagram, see Figure 1. Flow at
influent (Pt. 1) and SIUs (Pt. 5) will be monitored during sampling events. Flow or volume of
sludge to disposal (Pt. 4) can either be monitored or calculated.
D. SIU Monitoring
Significant Industrial User monitoring will be conducted per industrial user permit (IUP).
Additionally, extra SIU sampling will be performed such that all SIUs are sampled for all LTMP
POCs at least once per year.
E. LTMP Sampling Frequency
Sampling Point
Normal
1 Year Before HWA
1- Influent
Quarterly on a Workday and
per NPDES requirement
Monthly on a Workday and
per NPDES requirement
2 — Effluent
Quarterly on a Workday and
per NPDES requirement
Monthly on a Workday and
per NPDES requirement
3 — Oxidation Ditch
Once per six months
Quarterly on a Workday
4 - Sludge to Disposal
Per Sludge Permit and
503 regulations
Per Sludge Permit and
503 regulations
5 - SIU's
Per SIU Permit
and all POC's once per year
Per SIU Permit
and all POC's once per year
6 — Uncontrollable
Once per six months
Once per six months
Effective Date: July 1, 2009 Page 2
Printed: January 23, 2014, 10:45 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A. DWQ Model Revision Date: July 29, 2004

City of Thomasville
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
F. Sampling Plan
Pollutant
Influent
(Pt.1)
Effluent
(Pt.2)
Oxidation
Ditch
Pt. 3
Sludge to
Disposal
Pt. 4
SIUs
(Pt.5)
Uncontrollable
(Pt.6)
BOD
X
X
X
X
X
TSS
X
X
X
X
X
NH3-N
X
X
X
X
X
Al
X
X
X
X
Sb
X
X
X
X
As
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cd
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cr
X
X
X
X
X
Cu
X
X
X
X
X
X
CN
X
X
X
X
X
Pb
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hg
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mo
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ni
X
X
X
X
X
X
Se
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ag
X
I X
X
X
X
Zn
X
X
X
X
X
X
TP
X
X
X
X
TKN
X
X
X
X
NO2+NO3
X
X
X
X
Oil & grease
X
X
X
X
Flow
X
X
X
%solids
X
Effective Date: July 1, 2009 Page 3
Printed: January 23, 2014, 10:45 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A. DWQ Model Revision Date: July 29, 2004

City of Thomasville
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
G. Detection Level and Sample Method
P.O.C.
Detection Level (mg/1)*
Sample Method **
BOD
2
24 hr Composite
TSS
2
24 hr Composite
NH3-N
0.1
24 hr Composite
Al
0.05
24 hr Composite
Sb
0.025
24 hr Composite
As
0.01
24 hr Composite
Cd
0.002
24 hr Composite
Cr
0.005
24 hr Composite
Cu
0.002
24 hr Composite
CN
0.01
Grab
Pb
0.01
24 hr Composite
Hg-effluent,
influent
1 ng/l (method 1631)
Grab
Hg-all other
locations
0.0002 (method 245.1)
24 hr Composite
Mo
0.1
24 hr Composite
Ni
0.01
24 hr Composite
Se
0.005
24 hr Composite
Ag
0.005
24 hr Composite
Zn
0.01
24 hr Composite
TP
0.05
24 hr Composite
TKN
0.2
24 hr Composite
NO2 + NO3
0.1
24 hr Composite
Oil & Grease
5
Grab
Sampling, preservation, and analytical method must be from 40 CFR 136.
* Graphite Furnace Determinations are required to attain the desired detection level for the
metals. However, analysis of Oxidation Ditch and Sludge to Disposal samples often cannot meet
these detection levels. In this case, analysis of these samples must obtain a detection level at
least as stringent as the applicable inhibition criteria or sludge ceiling standard.
Effective Date: July 1, 2009 Page 4
Printed: January 23, 2014, 10:45 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A. DWQ Model Revision Date: July 29, 2004

City of Thomasville
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
O
Grit
Removal
Post OD O
Splitter Box
Final
Static
Aerator
Effluent
Filters
Influent
Composite Sampler
Bar Screen
Digester Supernatant
rr i�ii .,._u �;•-Tara ,, ...., .ice oa.E;V
MH 101
RAS Return
spa 4hlpe
IBR u
Decant
NMWA
I Return
Filter
Backwash
Disinfection
I RAS 1 WAS I
Pump- Pump-
ing I ing
WAS
Sludge to
V
Disposal
Sampling Points
1 — Influent
2 — Effluent
3 — Oxidation Ditch (Post OD Splitter Box)
4 — Sludize to Disposal
Effective Date: July 1, 2009 Page 5
Printed: January 23, 2014, 10:45 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A. DWQ Model Revision Date: July 29, 2004

� )N ATFhjQ Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
1 G Dee Freeman, Secretary
� r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
January 13, 2009 RECEIVEO --
N.C. Dect of ENR
Misty Conder JAN 1
20. 1
Laboratory Supervisor Winston-Salem
City of Thomasville Regional Office J
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Headworks Analysis
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP (NPDES: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division
of Water Quality has reviewed the Headworks Analysis (HWA) for the Hamby Creek WWTP
submitted by the City of Thomasville. The HWA was received by the Division on October 21,
2008.
The Division concurs with the HWA calculations for all pollutants of concern with corrections
discussed below. The HWA, allocation table, removal rate, and mass balance spreadsheets are
attached for your files, with all the corrections marked. They have also been emailed to you.
1) HWA Corrections: Please feel free to contact PERCS if you have any questions about the
changes outlined below, or if the POTW does not agree with the modifications. None of the
corrections caused any over allocation that were not resolved by another correction. All
corrected spreadsheets were emailed to you for your files, with the changes highlighted.
Please ensure the POTW's paper and electronic HWA, AT, and other supporting documents
contain these corrected documents, especially the Allocation Table. As needed, please
mark any original documents as "replaced" or "voided."
a) NPDES Limits:
i) The NPDES limits for cadmium, chromium, nickel, and selenium are corrected to
mg/I unit on HWA spreadsheet.
ii) The NPDES limit of TP has been converted to 0.39 mg/I using the permitted summer
seasonal load and permitted flow of 6 MGD (3570/182.5 days*8.34*6).
b) Mercury Removal Rate: We chose to use 2006 HWA mercury removal rate of 97.14%.
Since we had mercury over allocation using the literature removal rate of 60% and we
did not have enough mercury sampling data for this time, we chose to use the 2006
HWA removal rate.
c) Deleted the stream standards for copper, zinc, and silver since they are action level
POCs and the POTW is passing whole effluent toxicity.
d) Literature Inhibition criteria for chromium, copper, and zinc were updated to use the NC
2006 Literature values.
Mailing Address Phone [phone] Location NorthCarolina
1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St. ,iVatzanall
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 PERCS Fax [phone] Raleigh, NC 27604
Internet: www.ncwaterguality.org Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
PERCS Unit Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/peres/
An Eoual Oonortunity/Affirmative Action EmDlover— 50% Recvcled/10% Post Consumer Pacer

e) Anaerobic Digester Literature Inhibition: The literature/manufacturer's recommendations
for the cannibal process provided in the anaerobic digester inhibition column have been
deleted since the WWTP does not have anaerobic digester. We instead used activated
sludge/nitrification literature values.
f) Sludge Data: Sludge data have been deleted from HWA spreadsheet since the POTW
did not land apply sludge in the last two years. If the POTW decides to land apply, they
must resubmit the HWA with the appropriate updates, including sludge sampling data.
g) Allocation Table: The allocation table was updated with correct copper and silver
monthly limits for Stroupe Mirror.
2) Submission of LIMP: The POTW needs to submit updated LTMP for the newly upgraded
system by June 1st, 2009. The revised LTMP should have the revised sampling locations
with process/flow diagram.
3) HWA Due Date: The HWA approved today is based on primarily design data. Per
conversation, POTW should start LTMP sampling at the new system as soon as it is out of
start-up mode, currently_ estimated to be July 15t 2009 and continue for the next 19 mnnthc
Your next site specific HWA is due on October 1, 2010, unless conditions at the POTW
change significantly and thus warrant an earlier submittal (see Comprehensive Guide,
Section 8).
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email:[e-mail]]
or Deborah Gore, Acting Unit Supervisor of the PERCS Unit at [phone] [email:
[e-mail]].
Sincerely,
� )�, "�t *lr�
Coleen H. Sullins
mh/Thomasville. HWA.02
Enclosures: HWA.AT
cc: Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS-Unit-VV/ enclosures
Jennifer Carter - WSRO

b
OW A T � qpG � - G_.�-i
0 1ii;�Wwioaw ',c
Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
RECEIVED
N.C. Deft. of ENR
OCT 13 20
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
October 9, 2008
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Enforcement Response Plan
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek (NPDES: NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of Water
Quality has reviewed the Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) for the City of Thomasville. This revised
ERP was received by the Division on August 7, 2008.
The review indicates the ERP revision resolves the Division's concerns expressed in our June 13, 2008,
letter and thus overall the ERP is adequate and meets the requirements of 15A NCAC 02H .0905 and
40 CFR 403.8 (f)(5). Proper implementation of an ERP is also required by Section IV, C, 9, of your
NPDES permit. Please refer to the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina Pretreatment Programs
(Comprehensive Guide) for additional information and examples.
The Division expects you to follow this approved ERP for all enforcement actions. Modifications to this
ERP must be approved by the Division.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: [e-mail]] or Jeff
Poupart, Supervisor of the PERCS Unit at [phone] [email: [e-mail]].
Sincerely,
s..t f Coleen H. Sullins
m h/ th o m asVille.erp. 3
cc: Cen I Files
ti Hassan,,PERCS
ennifer Ca r - WSRO
NOrthCarolina
,Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
NC DWQ Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
PERCS Unit Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/peres/
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Carter, Jenifer
From: Carter, Jenifer
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 11:29 AM
To: 'Beck, Allen'
Subject: RE: thomasville 7-24-10 possible bypass
Sorry for the late response... I just got in from Raleigh.
1) As if you had tried already, figure out why the SCADA system didn't send an alarm.
2) Calculate flow based on the last know time it was working (12:15) to when it was switched to the other channel
(14:00).
3) An email to me like you did is fine in this circumstance. You had already done what needed to be done.
Normally, for SSO's and other emergencies, 24-hour noticed cannot be left as a voicemail message. You need to
contact Emergency Management after hours and on weekends at 800-858-0368.
I will place a copy of your email and document your voicemail in our records. You are good to go.
Thank you,
Jenifer Carter
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen[maiIto: [e-mail]. nc.us]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 8:34 AM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: thomasville 7-24-10 possible bypass
Jennifer,
Just wanted to touch base with you and get some guidance with reporting a
possible bypass.

Saturday afternoon an operator checked the UV system at about 12:15 and it was
working properly. When the operator made another check of the equipment at
14:00 he discovered the UV apparently not working at all. There were no alarms
on the SCADA to indicate a malfunction with the system and there is no trending
of that function to indicate if or when it failed. Because he was unsure of the
status of the UV channel in question the operator opened a different channel @
(app.) 14:00 hrs. and whatever event may have occurred was ended.
My question to you., is this a reportable incident and if so how do I calculate the
duration and/or gallons when I have no solid starting point? I called and left a
message on your phone about 13:00 Sunday 7-25-10 to fall within the 24 hr
reporting period.
Any guidance you can give me in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Allen
Allen Beck
Utility Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]
2

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Beck, Allen [[e-mail]]
Sent:
Monday, July 19, 2010 8:57 AM
To:
Carter, Jenifer
Subject:
Thomasville flow chart OOS
Hi Jennifer,
Just wanted to let you know that we took a direct lightning strike here at the plant Saturday
(7-17-10) and it knocked out our entire SCADA system flow monitoring capabilities. I have
instructed the staff to take flow reading from the meter at the head works at 1 hour intervals
so we can still have a relatively accurate idea of flow totals/averages for the day until we can
get our systems restored to normal .
If there is anything else you would like us to do while our systems are down just let me know.
Thanks,
Allen
Allen Beck
Utility Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
July 8, 2010
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Thomasville WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
A Compliance Evaluation Inspection was performed at the City of Thomasville's Hamby Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) on June 9, 2010 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem Regional Office. Mr. Allen
Beck and Ms. Misty Conder were also present for the inspection. The inspection consisted of two parts: an on -site
inspection of the treatment facility and a file review.
The WWTP was under a Special Order by Consent (SOC), which contained modified limits for Total Phosphorus
and Total Residual Chlorine. Construction and upgrades to the plant were completed in August 2008, and
compliance obtained ahead of schedule in April 2009. There have been no limits violations since the plant came
into compliance under the SOC.
During the last inspection, it was noted that dumpsters containing screenings from the mechanical bar screen and
grit removal drained to the stormwater system. This has since been corrected, and now drains back to the head of
the plant.
Other improvements noted, beyond the upgrades as planned, were the addition of brush systems to each secondary
clarifier and the addition of backflow prevention.
Overall the plant seemed to be well maintained and operated. Issues arising during the startup of the new plant
have been dealt with quickly and effectively. We commend the City for making the transition to the new system a
success. Please review the enclosed inspection form for more detailed information from the inspection. If you
have any questions, please call Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
Steve W Tedder
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
attachment
cc: Mr. Allen Beck (same address)
SWP Central Files
WSRO Files
North Carolina division of Water Quality Winston-Salem Regional Office One
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Vatur'ail//
U
An Equal Opportunity % Afrmaave Action Employer U

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.C. 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 I NI 2 151 31 N00024112 111 121 10/06/09 117 181 Cl 191 SI 20I II
Remarks
21IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating 61 CIA --------------------------- Reserved ------------------ ---
67 I 169 70 14 I 711 NJ 721 NJ 73 W 74 75I I I I I I I 180
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
10:00 AM 10/06/09
09/08/01
Hamby Creek WWTP
110 Optimist Park Rd
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Thomasville NC 27360
12:30 PM 10/06/09
14/04/30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)(fitles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Allen R Beck//336-883-3464 /
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Kelly Craver,PO Box 368 Thomasville NC 273610368/Assistant City Contacted
Manager/336-475-4220/3364754283 No
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Self -Monitoring Program 0 Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Compliance Schedules
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Jenifer Carter WSRO WQ//336-771-5000/
Signature of Manage m t Q AReview r Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page # 1

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
3I NCO024112 I11 12I 10/06/09 1
17 18N
(cont.)
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Mr. Allen Beck (new ORC effective 04/28/2010), and Ms. Misty Conder (pretreatment coordinator and lab
supervisor), were present during the inspection.
Overall, the plant appeared to be well -maintained and operated. Many improvements have been made,
mostly as part of the planned upgrades to the plant. Other improvements included removing exposure of
drainings from the Headorks to stormwater, addition of brush systems to the secondary clarifiers and the
addition of backflow prevention.
Start-up of the new elements of the plant saw a few hiccups, as expected, but all problems have been dealt
with quickly and effectively, be it through warranties, staff education or other adjustments as needed.
The City should be commended for making the transition to the new system a success! The hard work by
all involved has paid off.
Page # 2

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
rl__._:. Yes No NA NE
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new application? fl rl ■
Is the facility as described in the permit? Q ■ o rl
# Are there any special conditions for the permit? fl ■ fl
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? ■ ❑ Q fl
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? ■ fl n
Comment: There are only two final clarifiers. There is a flocculation clarifer
(phosphorus precipitation) that receives effluent from the cannibal system.
The permit was renewed and became effective on August 1, 2009.
There is not a re -aeration lagoon, rather two re -aeration tanks that are considered the
5th stage of the Bardenpho process.
There are four sludge holding tanks (formerly digesters), and a belt press.
Compliance Schedules
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is there a compliance schedule for this facility?
n
■
n
n
Is the facility compliant with the permit and conditions for the review period?
■
n
Cl
Cl
Comment: The plant was under an SOC for major upgrades to the plant. Construction
was completed in August 2008 and compliance obtained In April 2009. All deadlines
were met and the order closed.
Record Keeping
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
■
n
n
n
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
■
n
n
n
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
■
n
n
n
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
■
n
n
n
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
■
n
n
n
Dates, times and location of sampling
IN
Name of individual performing the sampling
■
Results of analysis and calibration
■
Dates of analysis
■
Name of person performing analyses
■
Transported COCs
■
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
■
n
n
n
Page # 3

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Record Keeping
Yes No
NA
NE
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
■ n
n
n
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
■ n
n
n
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
■ n
n
n
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
■ n
n
n
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
■ n
n
n
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
■ n
n
n
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
■ n
n
n
Comment:
Influent Sampling
Yes No
NA
NE
# Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■ n
n
n
Is sample collected above side streams?
■ n
n
n
Is proper volume collected?
■ n
n
n
Is the tubing clean?
■ n
n
n
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
■ n
n
n
Is sampling performed according to the permit?
■ n
n
n
Comment: The tubing was replaced, and is now covered to prevent algal growth.
Effluent Sampling
Yes No
NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
■ n
n
n
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
■ n
n
n
Is proper volume collected?
■ n
n
n
Is the tubing clean?
■ n
n
n
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?
■ n
n
n
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type representative)?
■ n
n
n
Comment:
Flow Measurement - Influent
Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?
■ n 00
Is flow meter calibrated annually?
■ n 00
Is the flow meter operational?
■ n n n
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
n n n ■
Comment:
Page # 4

Permit: NCO024112
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek V WTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Operations & Maintenance
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
■
Q
D
D
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS,
MCRT, Settleable Solids, pH, DO, Sludge ■
D
D
D
Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:
Chemical Feed
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is containment adequate?
■
D
D
D
Is storage adequate?
■
D
D
D
Are backup pumps available?
011
D
■
Is the site free of excessive leaking?
■
D
D
D
Comment:
,.
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
■
b.Mechanical
■'
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
■
D
D
D
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
■
n
D
D
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
■
D
D
D
Is the unit in good condition?
■
D
D
D
Comment: The manual barscreen is used as back-up during high flows and
maintenance. Drainings no longer flow to the storm drain system, and are now routed
back to the headworks.
.....
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
D
b.Mechanical
■
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?
■
D
D
D
Is the grit free of excessive odor?
■
D
D
D
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?
■
D
D
D
Comment: Drainings no longer flow to the storm drain system, and are now routed
back to the headworks.
Oxidation Ditches
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are the aerators operational?
■
D
D
D
Page # 5

Permit: NCO024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWiP Y
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Oxidation Ditches
Are the aerators free of excessive solids build up?
# Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface?
Is the DO level acceptable?
Are settleometer results acceptable (> 30 minutes)?
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/1)
Are settelometer results acceptable?(400 to 800 ml/I in 30 minutes)
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS
Are pumps in place?
Are pumps operational?
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?
Comment:
Nutrient Removal
# Is total nitrogen removal required?
# Is total phosphorous removal required?
Type
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
Is nutrient removal process operating properly?
Comment: Chemical addition is not currently needed to meet phosphorus loading
limits, though it is available if needed.
Secondary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Yes No NA NE
■nnn
■nnn
■nnn
0 ■ 0 0
■nnn
Biological
n■nn
■nnn
Page # 6

Permit: NC0024112 Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WWTP
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Secondary Clarifier
Yes No
NA
NE
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
■
D
D
D
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
■
D
D
D
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately % of the sidewall depth)
■
D
D
D
Comment: A brush system has been added to each clarifier, and appeared to be
effective at reducing algal growth.
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)
Yes
No
NA
NE
Type of operation:
Cross
flow
Is the filter media present?
■.
D
D
D
Is the filter surface free of clogging?
■
D
D
D
Is the filter free of growth?
■
D
D
D
Is the air scour operational?
D
D
■
D
Is the scouring acceptable?
D
❑
■
D
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?
■
D
D
D
Comment:
Disinfection - UV
Yes
No
NA
NE
Are extra UV bulbs available on site?
■
D
D
D
Are UV bulbs clean?
■
D
D
D
Is UV intensity adequate?
■
❑
❑
D
Is transmittance at or above designed level?
■
D
D
D
Is there a backup system on site?
■
D
D
D
Is effluent clear and free of solids?
■
D
D
D
Comment:
Pump Station- Effluent
Yes
No
NA
NE
Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
■
D
D
D
Are all pumps present?
■
D
D
D
Are all pumps operable?
■
D
D
D
Are float controls operable?
■
Cl
❑
D
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
■
D
D
D
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
❑
D
❑
■
Comment:
Page # 7

Permit: NC0024112
Inspection Date: 06/09/2010
Owner - Facility: Hamby Creek WVVTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Solids Handling Equipment
Is the equipment operational?
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
Is storage adequate?
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?
Comment: There is cannibal solids reduction process utilizing two interchange
bioreactors receives some filtered RAS and some sludge from the secondary clarifiers.
There are 4 sludge holding tanks (formerly digesters), and a belt press.
Standby Power
Is automatically activated standby power available?
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source?
Is the generator tested under load?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?
Is the generator fuel level monitored?
Comment: The cannibal system and belt press are shut down by the SCADA system
in the event of a power loss.
Yes No NA NE
■nnn
Page # 8

Carter, Jenifer
From:
Carter, Jenifer
Sent:
Monday, June 28, 2010 12:32 PM
To:
'Beck, Allen'
Subject:
RE: DMR Error
There is no need to send amended DMRs just for that... we know what the expiration dates really are. I will place a copy
of your email, and my response, in your file as proof that we were notified.
Thanks!
Jenifer Carter
Before printing this email, please consider your budget and the environment.
If you must print, please print only what you need and save ink with the free Eco-Font.
NC DENR Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Voice: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Beck, Allen[mailto:[e-mail]. nc.us]
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 12:25 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: DMR Error
Hi Jennifer,
As I was reviewing the DMR this morning I noticed that our permit expiration date on this
month's DMR was listed as April of 2009 when it should be April 30, 2014. After some review
and investigation it seems an incorrect date has been used since August 2009. 1 had the lab
supervisor, Misty Condor, change the date for this month's DMR but I need some guidance as
how to best correct the DMR's already submitted.
Any help you can provide in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Thank you,
Allen Beck
Utility Plants Superintendent
City of Thomasville, NC 2736o
Phone - [phone]

1, Steve
To: Blaisdell, Daniel
Subject: City of Thomasville Request for Emergency Funding
,� ._ 1- /o
Dan
This office has received a request for emergency funding and has provided justification to support this request. Upon
review by thi offic oncur with the need and the justification for use of emergency funds.
Steve
E-mail correspondence to and from this address
may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
Steve Tedder
[e-mail]
NC DENR Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
(336)-771-4950
Fax [phone]
(0)9/,o \/\Q ����

RECEIVE!"
%'.C. Not. o`
i
JUN 0 8 204
CITY OF THOMASVI LE Winston
P.O. Box 368
Regional C.
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
[phone]
Office of City Manager
Mr. Steve Tedder
Regional Office Supervisor
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107-2241
Reference: Emergency Funding Request
Baptist Children's Home Outfall
City of Thomasville, North Carolina
Comm. No. 2009042.00
Subject: Justification for Emergency Funding
Dear Mr. Tedder,
INCORPoRATED 1857
The City of Thomasville wastewater collection system experienced an overflow of raw wastewater in
the vicinity of Baptist Children's Home. This overflow was investigated by the State of North
Carolina and the Environmental Protection Agency in October/November 2009. The exact timeframe
of which the sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) occurred or the duration of the overflow has not yet been
established. The spill was reported by an employee of the Baptist Children's Home to the City of
Thomasville. Upon investigation the City utilities staff uncovered an 18-inch pipe and manhole
failure on Baptist Children's Home property. As reported to the State's Regional Office, the City
secured Coltrane Utilities and removed approximately 110 feet of 18-inch diameter reinforced
concrete pipe from the section downstream of the manhole/spill site and replaced it with 18-inch
diameter SDR 35 PVC pipe. The damaged manhole was also replaced and the disturbed area
restored.
Subsequent to the spill, the City conducted an extensive investigation to determine the extent of
deterioration of the of the Baptist Children's Home outfall from Johnston Road to the Hamby Creek
outfall. It is the opinion of our consultants that the existing Baptist Children's Home outfall will
continue to fail if not replaced immediately.

Based on the severity of the spill and condition of the existing sewer pipe, the City is requesting
funding assistance from the State of North Carolina.
The immediate question of "Why this emergency funding is needed to eliminate future SSO's on this
segment of outfall?" is addressed below.
Relationship to Baptist Children's Home
The outfall begins on Johnsontown Road and ends on the property of Baptist
Children's Home. Depending on were the next break occurs, wastewater has the
potential to affect the property around the children's housing and farmland of the
home. At certain locations, the existing outfall is within 140 feet of buildings on the
Baptist Children's Home property. This will place the Children's Home in a serious
public health hazard.
Effects on the environment
The outfall is located within the High Rock Lake Basin in Davidson and Rowan
Counties. Several years ago a study was performed by the State to relocate the
discharge point of Hamby Creek Wastewater treatment plant further downstream of
the existing WWTP. The study indicated harmful effects on the environment by
creating dissolved oxygen sags along the stream to High Rock Lake. The overflow of
raw sewage from this segment of sewer line would enter into Hamby Creek and create
a condition for catastrophic environmental damage to the ecological system. This has
the potential to not only affect the stream bed but directly affect the headwaters of
High Rock Lake which is used for recreation and water supply. This creates imminent
danger to the community.
Field Investigation
After the initial overflow of this sewer line, an investigation of the line from Baptist
Children's Home to the Hamby Creek Outfall was conducted. Although the entire line
has structural integrity issues, it was the opinion of the investigator that any portion or
all of the existing piping can and will fail. This would cause a stratatrophic
environmental impact to the region.
The City of Thomasville authorized Pease Associates to design a replacement sewer line through this
section. Drawings and specifications were submitted to the state agencies for review and approval on

March 8, 2010. It is anticipated the review and approval process will be completed within the next
two weeks. We are requesting your review of this letter and support that this project requires
immediate attention to avoid any future SSO's and serious public health hazards to Baptist Children's
Home and High Rock Lake.
The City of Thomasville will be processing an emergency loan application based on your response to
this request to the State Loan's and Grant Section in Raleigh. We believe this project qualifies as
imminent danger to the community as a whole and specifically to Baptist Children's Home and High
Rock Lake.
If there are any questions or request for additional information, please do not hesitate to call.
ver
Cc Pease Associates

Carter, Jenifer
4 0 KIIII �-, 6/t&g-
From: Beck, Allen [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 1:56 PM
To: Carter, Jenifer
Subject: composite sampler
Hi Jenifer,
I need a bit of guidance from you. Monday morning we discovered that at some point either
Sunday night or Monday morning our raw influent sampler stopped working. As soon as it was
discovered I sent our maintenance man to see if he could repair it. Monday afternoon he
reported that the problem was beyond our expertise and recommended calling in an outside
technician. The tech arrived on Tuesday and concluded it was an electronics board failure and
a part would have to be ordered. As of this writing we are still waiting on the part and repair.
Since discovering the sampler wasn't working we have been pulling grab samples each round
(app. Every 3 hrs.) to make our composite.
My question to you is that is this sufficient and should any comments or notations be made
on the DMR for the reporting period regarding this issue ?
Thanks,
Allen Beck
Utility Plants Superintendent
Thomasville, NC 27360
Phone — [phone]
64 Y 12to Y"r
JrJA
(� X6,
Le a 1-P l� sQr� k� UP
c .
J�, Dkiii r QAAP kO tea/
C, -le,
/-24/,�
1

X���
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
April 30, 2010
Mr. Morgan Huffman
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Mr. Huffman:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed
the Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2009. This PAR was
received on March 12, 2010. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina
Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at (919)
807-6314 ([e-mail]).
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
SWP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality; Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Uv'aughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterqualily.org
One
NorthCaroiina
An tq:ial Opportunity `. A. firrnative .Action Employer

Regional Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Review
Included?
ADEQUATE?
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO []NA
PPS Form
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
5fi1C
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
IDSF
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Allocation Table
®
YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
Waste Reduction Info
®YES
❑
NO
®
YES
❑
NO
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
❑
YES
❑
NO ® NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
ar a� 1�i offf ` Idn"
®
YES
❑
NO
®YES
❑
NO
Hjcr cal
S G
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
®
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
Regional Office: WSRO
POTW: Thomasville — Hamby Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0024112
Report Period: 01/01/2009 to 12/31/2009
® Full ❑ Modified
For modified programs evaluate shaded items only. A
Narrative is required for a modified program only if
there are SIUs in SNC.
if No, check recommendation below;
1. Have at least 90% of SIU permits been issued within 180
days of expiration? See Allocation Table).
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
2. Were at least 80% of SIUs inspected? (See PPS Form)
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
3. Has effective enforcement been taken against industries in
® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
SNC, including those causing pass -through or interference? (See
Assessment
Narrative and SNCR Form
4. Does public notice cover all SIUs in SNC?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
Note: Exceptions should oe expiainea in the comment secuon ueiow:
PPS form not included. Submitted upon request.
Narrative & SNCR do not show Unilin Flooring to be in SNC for TSS in the is` half of
2009, though the IDSF shows TRC & SNC. Corrected as requested.
Reviewed By: J. Carter Date: 04/30/2010
Regional Pretreatment Annual Report Review
Thomasville 2009.doc
Fill in Values from
PPS Form
(for PCS data entry)
* Alternatively, attach PPS page from PAR

Apr 21 2010 16:12 CITY OF THOMASVILLE 3364754283
p.2
Water Pollution Control System Operator Designation Form
WPCSOCC
NCAC 15A SG .0201
Perntittee 0wner/Officer Name: )a1 1 f►a.n k9
l C a -F TSBfM vi l/e
Mailing Address: 1.0,O . $
City: 'r otState: Ale Zip:.2
D 03 L & Phone #: ( )
Signature: L
Date: gh 0 / o
........tt..................../................,.,..................,,,,..A
...................,,.,.........................................
Fadllty Name: b r
w Permit #: %SIC D 0ZW L2
County: ��v(Ksog
! SUBMIT A SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH TYPE OF SYSTEM!
Facility Type &grade:
Tyne Grad.
Biological WWTP W Im- _ AlSurface
PhysicallChemical
Type Grade
Irrigation N/A
Land Application N/A
Collection System
.....................coo.................coo..................o.coo................o.t.000,............... of0000............. ..... fools .........
Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC)
Print Full Name:
A _
Certificate Type / Grade / Number: O Work Phone #:
Signature:
�Date: 7 �•�% —�©
"[ certify that I agree to my designation as the operator in Responsible Charge for the facility noted. i understand end will abide by tho
rules and regulations percaining to the responsibiliciea of the ORC as set forth in 15A NCAC 08G .0204 and failing to do so can result in
Disciplinary Actions by the Water Pollution Control System Operators Certlficazion Commission."
.... lost ...............fee@$.•••••...........off................foo.................•..,........................................,00..............
Back -Up Operator in Responsible Charge (BU ORC)
Print Full Name:
1
Certificate Type / Grade / Number: „ 2 S` -J O y yW N Work Phone #: (3 ti 1S- ' IL 10
Signature: Date: �y �-
"I certify that l to my de ' nation as a B •up Operator in Responsible Charge for the facility noted. [ understand and will abide by
the rules and re ladons pertaining to the tesponsibilitles of the BU ORC asset forth in 15A NCAC 080.0205 and failing to do so can
result to Disciplinary Actions by the Water POIIUIiOn Control Syatom Operators Crrtifioation Cornmiodion."
,f............. o.fe.............. asset .................. ................. ...........................................f......•..........•..•.......,i
Mall gr Fax to: WPCSOCC
1619 Mail Service Center
Ralelgb, NC 27699.1618
Fax: [phone]
(Boo next page for drlantlon of additional back-up operamr.. Oexignation of more than ona beek•Vg operator iu opreoaof.)
Revised 8-2007

Rpr 21 2010 16:12 CITY OF THOMASVILLE 3364754283 p.1
MANCE DDPtiRTMENT
DA
City of ThomasvHle
P.O. Box 39
ThomarvMe, North Caroalim 27361•0369
PAX NUMBER [phone]
FAX COVER -SHEET
PLEASE DELIVER TO P- I r
COMPANY NAME
SUBJECT Df2 Cyer1,..won (ate �. W
FAX NUMBER CALLED__3'�
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES(including this page) ..
If you did not receive legible Copies of all pages, please cell and let us
know as soon as possible. Thank you.
SPECIAL COMMENTS SS 1,%�G SDCC-- .ep
CITY OF THOMASVILLE
[phone]
aE.n

A=w—
NCDENR
North Cu 'Nina Department 0f Envirncnmc;n a"Ci Naitui ai Ra5sc a(1�5
^
uJ e o;�,,
f
lam ('^
�..0 ��.. v'n i. `L�HIh.Cy
�'�I vCrrJ�
February 10, 2010
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
ea 7reenn,�,i
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed on January 7, 2010 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem
Regional office. Ms. Misty Conder was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection was to determine
the effectiveness of the pretreatment program and included a review of files, POTW plant performance, industry
monitoring data, adherence to the enforcement response plan (ERP), and an industry inspection.
Background and POTW Interview
In last year's inspection report, concern was expressed over Ms. Conder's work load and her need for
sufficient time and/or resources to continue meeting all of the requirements that she was tasked with. As
noted in the File Review Comments of the enclosed Pretreatment Compliance Inspection Report, it
appears that the concerns were founded to some degree. The issues noted are minor ones, as they have
not had any notable adverse effects on the POTW.
That being said, personnel adjustments have been made recently. Ms. Conder has voluntarily
relinquished her Plant Superintendant/Plant ORC responsibilities. Hopefully, this means that Ms. Conder
will again be able to provide the high level of oversight of the pretreatment program that she has
demonstrated in the past.
The City currently has eight (8) significant industrial users (SIUs), four (4) of which fall under categorical
standards.
There was one SIU in significant noncompliance (SNC) for limits violations (McIntyre Metals) and one
for reporting violations (Unilin Flooring) during the 2009 year.
There were no NPDES Permit limits violations in 2009.
Pretreatment Program Elements Review
The LTMP was approved on July 22, 2009, and a new HWA is due on October 1, 2010.
An extension for the next IWS has been granted. It is now due on April 1, 2010.
archna Dmsion o` iVater llhaiity, `',r' inston-Saiern Reg!Onal Office
LCCaaion �3� i%%� aiightc`lin SL iv' i'ston-Sa'lem, Nair. ^,ardo 27 110,
cne T" -771- 0001 r4.X 336J7 -4630 `, CUSTOMer Se'viCe: 1 -8 7 -623-6748
i. terf er
NorthCarolina
Natmullry

The Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO) and the Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) are approved and satisfactory.
Industrial User Permit (IUP) File Review
A file review was performed on McIntyre Metals (#0031). Several deficiencies were noted. Most notable was
missed Oil & Grease monitoring by the POTW, and fines not having been issued as per the City's ERP. In
addition, information requested by PERCS in their permit review letter has not been submitted yet, though no
deadline had was given. Please see the enclose report for more detail.
Industry Inspection
Ms. Conder performed an inspection at ATTL Products (formerly Gresco Manufacturing), a chemical
manufacturing facility. Mr. Randy Ransom was present for the inspection. No problems with the inspection were
noted.
Action Item
Please provide PERCS with the information requested in the IUP review letter dated August 22, 2008.
Assess penalties for McIntyre Metal's 2009 limits violations, as per the ERP.
Submit IWS to PERCS for approval by April 1, 2010.
Submit HWA to PERCS for approval by October 1, 2010.
Please refer to the enclosed inspection report for more information. The City of Thomasville's pretreatment
program is good overall, with a few deficiencies noted. Action has been taken that will hopefully prevent similar
issues from arriving in the future. Should you have any questions, please contact Monti Hassan in Raleigh at (919)
807-6314 (new number), or Jenifer Carter at (336) 7714957.
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: WSRO Files
SWP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit

NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI• Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)]
I. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/Lab Supervisor/Back-up ORC
4. Last Inspection Date: 02 /19 /09 Inspection Type: ® PCI ❑ Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
n I N I C 1 0 10 12 1 4 FFF 1 2 loi I o7—T 10 FP7 EE
Fac. Type
FE
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP)
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)? 8
SIDS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs)?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected By POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
0
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Ex fired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi -Annual Periods (Total Number of SIUs in SNC)
2
PSNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting During Either of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-annual Periods
0
POTW INTERVIEW
17. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations? [:]Yes El No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
18. Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19. Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for Limits: McIntyre Metals
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 SNC for Reporting: Unilin Flooring
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published: To be published soon
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20. Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order,
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division? [N/A
21. Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which ❑ Yes ® No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes El No ❑ N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No Is the Table Adequate? ® Yes ❑ No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations:
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added:
T,ir` r1WO PrPtrentment C'mmnlianrP Tncnertion (PCT) Form Undated T12 /07 Page 1

28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW- Please review POTW files, verify POTW has copy of Program Element in
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter. and dates consistent with Program Info:
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis (HWA)
01/13/2009
® Yes ❑
No
10/01/2010
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
01/30/2004
® Yes ❑
No
04/01/2010
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
06/05/2007
® Yes ❑
No
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
10/09/2008
® Yes ❑
No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
07/22/2009
® Yes ❑
No
/81f2dOt1-
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW(3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION)
29. User Name
1. McIntyre Metals, Inc. —=2.
3.
30. IUP Number
0031
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date 1
01/09/13
33. Categorical Standard Applied (I.E. 40 CFR, Etc.) Or N/A I
j
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
_N/A
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year? I
® Yes ❑ No j
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain aSlug/Spill Control Plan?
a. []Yes ®No
a. [:]YesNo a. ❑Yes (-]No
b. If No, is One Needed? (See Inspection Form from POTW)
b. ®Yes ❑No
o
b. ❑Yes ❑No b. []Yes ON]
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan (TOMP)?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. ®Yes []No
a. ❑Yes ❑No a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.❑YesgNo❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
❑Yes®No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
See notes
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
❑YesZNo❑N/A[❑Yes❑NoDN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
See notes
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑Yes❑NogN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A ❑Yes❑No❑N/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
11
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑NoNN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
11
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Re ortin Non -Compliance from SIU Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.gYes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.gYes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.0Yes❑No❑N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
® Yes ❑ No
�❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Yes El No
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
❑Yes®No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/AIL!YesONoDN/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP (NOVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
See notes
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
I ❑YesZNoDTA
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penaltv Collection?
❑Yes❑No®N/A
11 [:1Yes0No0_N_/Aj
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
❑Yes MNo
Fb
a. []Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
❑Yes MNo
b. ❑Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑
ElYes ElNo
Requested Information For You?
I IF
fl
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

'FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
It was discovered that the flow meter does not read low flows accurately, so tank volumes have been used for reporting. A letter was
sent to McIntyre requiring reliable flow measuring capabilities be installed.
#36: A note requiring a Slug/Spill Control Plan was included in the industry's last inspection report.
#38: Wastewater Pollutant Checklist was not completed as required, though no deadline was given.
#39: Semi -Annual monitoring of Oil & Grease was not performed.
#41: The industries did not include Ni as required in its 41h quarter monitoring report. A letter was sent to them requesting the info,
if available. If not, the letter suggested they contact the lab to see if they still had the original metals sample.
#46: McIntyre Metals was in SNC during the first half of 2009 for Cu, Ni & Mo limits violations. They were also in SNC during the
second half of the year for Cu, Ni and Cyanide limits violations. According to ERP, a minimum fine of $200 should have been issue,
but was not.
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fac. Type
❑N N I C 10 1 0 12 14 1 1 757F2 O1 07 10 I❑ S❑ 2❑
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP) (FACC)
1. Industry Inspected: ATTL Products, Inc (flea Gresco Manufacturing)
2. Industry Address: 216 East Holly Hill Rd, Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Chemical Manufacturing (textile processing, defoamers, car care & flame retardants products)
4. Industry Contact: Randy Ransom
Phone: [phone]/ Cell: 336 406-2885 Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview
® Yes
❑ No
B. Plant Tour
® Yes
❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour
® Yes
❑ No
D. Sampling Review
® Yes
❑ No
E. Exit Interview
® Yes
❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments:
During last year's inspection, concern was expressed over Ms. Conder's work load and her need for sufficient time and/or resources
to continue meeting all of the requirements that she was tasked with. The primary concern was that she would not be able to
maintain the level of organization and oversight of the Industrial Users that we had grown used to seeing from her. It appears that
the concerns were founded to some degree, as noted in the File Review Comments above. Luckily, the issues are minor ones, and
have not had any notable ill-effects on the POTW.
That being said, personnel adjustments have been made recently. Ms. Conder has voluntarily relinquished her Plant
Superintendant/Plant ORC responsibilities. Hopefully, this means that Ms. Conder will once again be able to provide the level of
oversight of the pretreatment program we know she is capable of.
Requirements:
1.) Provide PERCS with the information requested in McIntyre Metals permit review letter, dated August 22, 2008.
2.) Assess penalties for McIntyre's 2009 limits violations, as required by the ERP.
3.) Industrial Waste Survey is due to PERCS by April 1, 2010.
4.) The Headworks Analysis is due to PERCS by October 1, 2010.
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory ® Marginal ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: Jenifer Carter
Unsatisfactory ❑
DATE: February 10, 2010
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form L!pdated 7.125/07 Page 4

Water Pollution Control System Operator Designation Form
WPCSOCC
NCAC 15A 8G .0201
Permittee Owner/Officer Name: l . JN 4 ' �YA6^3 V' l 14
Mailing Address:
City: 4� ���� �`� State: A l Zip: �� - Phone #: ( 33di?�12
Signature:
Date: '2 L�
..................................................................................................................................................
Facility Name: l �,f V, Permit #: /V c oo I-i 1 %�
County: z j � n
SUBMIT A SEPARATE FORM FOR EACH TYPE OF SYSTEM!
Facility Type & Grade:
Biological WWTP
Physical/Chemical
Collection System
Type Grade Type Grade
_ ( Ig Surface Irrigation N/A
—`7— Land Application N/A
Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC)
Print Full Name:
Certificate Type / Grade / Number: rrW11!:' Work Phone #: (3 34) 1 C =1 2 0
s �
Signature: _ / — Date: _D_ , / U
"I certify that I agreed o my designation as the! erator in Responsible Charge for the facility noted. I understand and will abide by the
rules and regulatiots pertaining to the responsibilities of the ORC as set forth in 15A NCAC 08G .0204 and failing to do so can result in
Disciplinary Actions by the Water Pollution Control System Operators Certification Commission."
.................................................................................................................................................
Back -Up Operator in Responsible Charge (BU ORC)
Print Full Name: / p t+ " 111I4,, Ci) ,,NJ t(
Certificate Type / Grade/ Number: LJ tJJ IiE j rl l j i Z Work Phone #: C' 3� ) 4 7 s-w 2-4 (�
Signature: V' 1,J, - Date: -a - Y 10
" I certify that I agree to my designation as a Back-up Operator in Responsible Charge for the facility noted. I understand and will abide by
the rules and regulations pertaining to the responsibilities of the BU ORC as set forth in 15A NCAC 08G .0205 and failing to do so can
result in Disciplinary Actions by the Water Pollution Control System Operators Certification Commission."
...................................................................................................................................................
Mail or Fax to: WPCSOCC
1618 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1618
Fax: [phone]
(See next page for designation of additional back-up operators. Designation of more than one back-up operator is optional.)
Revised 8-2007

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
January 4, 2010
Subject: End of 2009 Pretreatment Mailing
Dear Pretreatment Professionals:
As we draw to the close of another great pretreatment year, I wanted to provide you an update on some
issues, inform you on this year's upcoming workshops and distribute the Pretreatment Program Info
Database sheets.
1) NC Pretreatment Professionals Honor Roll: In case you missed the Annual Pretreatment
Conference held in August 2009, this year's addition to the Honor Roll is Leon Holt formerly with
the Town of Cary.
2) Unit Supervisor: Deborah Gore has accepted the position of Supervisor for PERCS.
3) Rulemaking: The Draft Rules were published on the PERCS website in late August 2009. A few
changes requested during the September and October 2009 Informational Meetings were
incorporated. Most notable are removing collection systems and stormwater permits from list of
POTW permits in the Pass Through and Interference definitions, and removing the Description of
POTW Organization and the Description of Staffing and Funding Levels from the list of
Pretreatment Program Elements that require Division approval to modify. The next step of the
process is to complete the fiscal analysis, and we anticipate Public Hearings to be held in April 2010.
Check the web -site for updates and details.
4) Metal Standards Triennial Review: DWQ is proposing dissolved metals, which represent the portion
of the metal that is bioavailable (toxic) to aquatic life, to replace the existing total metals standards.
The proposed standards and additional information may be found on the Classification and
Standards Unit website: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/csu/trirev_SW.html. Public Hearings are
anticipated for the summer of 2010. PERCS is looking into what these proposed standards will
mean to POTWs.
5) Streamlining and Sewer Use Ordinance: Have you sent in your final adopted SUO? Check your
most recent SUO Letter as well as the "Date Adopted" on your Program Info sheet to verify. If not,
please do so as soon as possible.
6) IUP Workshop: The first IUP Writing workshop was held on June 23, 2009. Additional workshops
are tentatively planned for the second half of 2010.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ PERCS Unit FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Intemet: www.ncwaterguality.org PERCS Unit: http://h20.enr.state.nc.us/PERCS %,��t"y+iy/%/
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer (/ Y LKL a [,bf

End of 2009 Pretreatment Mailing
Page 2 of 2
January 4, 2010
7) Staff Assignments: Staff assignments remain the same. Please note our email addresses have
changed:
Dana Folley, 919-807-6311 [Dana. Folley@ncdenr. gov]:
Catawba, Chowan, Lumber, Roanoke and New
Monti Hassan, 919-807-6314 [Monti. Hassan@ncdenr. gov]:
Hiwassee, Little Tennessee, Neuse and Yadkin
Sarah Morrison, 919-807-6310 [[e-mail]]:
Broad, Cape Fear, French Broad and Tar -Pam
We continue to meet our goals for project review of 30 days for IUPs and 90 days for ERP, HWA,
IWS, LTMP and SUO.
8) Workshops: Three Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) workshops are planned this year for January
26, January 28 and February 2, 2010.
Four Headworks Analysis (HWA) workshops are planned for February 11, February 16, May 6 and
May 11, 2010.
The invitation and directions for these workshops are posted on the Training page of our website:
http://h2o.enr. state.nc.us/peres/Pretreatment/PretreatmentWorkshop.html
Please register early as space is limited at each site.
9) Pretreatment Program Info Database Sheets: Please review your attached program info sheet and
historical SNC sheets and make necessary updates to any of the information presented. Send the
sheets back with your PAR, due March 1, 2010. If all the information was correct, please indicate
that in your PAR. Especially note the due dates. This may be the only reminder you get.
Note the historical SNC sheets now only have current active SIUs.
10) Email Addresses: In the future, PERCS would like to be able to use email to send out mass
mailings. To make this an effective and cost saving tool, we ask that you keep PERCS updated on
your current email address. See the new field on the program information sheet.
As always, please contact your pretreatment staff member (as listed above) or me at 919-807-6383
[email: Deborah. Gore a,ncdenr.gov] with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Deborah Gore, PERCS Unit Supervisor
Dg/j an20 I O_mass_mai ling
Enclosures:
Program Info sheet(s)
Historical SNC sheet(s), if applicable
Cc: PERCS Pretreatment Staff (via email)
All RO Pretreatment Contacts (via email)

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT
Page 1
Facili
Facility Name:
Hamby Creek WWTP
Permitted Flow
(MGD):
6.0
Facility Class:
IV
Facility Status:
Existing
Permit Status:
Major Modification.
Expansion to 6.0 MGD
County: Davidson
Regional Office:
Winston-Salem
USGS Topo
Quad: D 18SE
SUMMARY:
Fact Sheet - NPDES Permit
City of Thomasville
NPDES No. NC0024112
Receivin—a Stream
Receiving
Stream: Hamby Creek
Subbasin: 030707
Index No.:
Stream Class: C
303(d) Listed: Yes
Use Support: Impaired (nutrients, Cu, and
biological integrity)
Drainage Area
(mil) :
13.3
Summer 7Q10
(cfs)
0.43
Winter 7Q10
(cfs):
1.3
30Q2 (cfs):
1.7
Average Flow
(cfs):
12.0
IWC (%):
96
The City of Thomasville owns and operates a 4.0 MGD activated sludge wastewater treatment plant,
it is currently undergoing an expansion to 6.0 MGD. Project also includes major improvements,
including biological nutrient removal, which is needed to meet new TP limit. This facility is a major
municipal treatment plant that serves 20,050 people. City has a separate sewer collection system.
Waste sludge is anaerobically digested and then applied to land under Non -Discharge Permit No.
WQ0006050. The City administers an industrial pretreatment program to control the discharge of
industrial and commercial wastes into its collection system and treatment works. Industrial sources
include 8 Significant Industrial Users. The permit will continue to require the City to implement its
pretreatment program
The Thomasville WWTP discharges treated municipal wastewater to Hamby Creek, a Class C water
in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. General water quality is rated as Poor and Fair in this portion of
the basin, due both to point source dischargers and nonpoint source runoff. Hamby Creek is
impaired due to elevated levels of fecal coliforms. Currently, a TMDL is being developed to address
this issue.

FACT SHEET - NPDES PERMIT
Page 2
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Reasonable potential analysis was conducted for: Ag, Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, CN, Sb, Pb, Hg, Mo, Ni,
Se, and Zn. (please see attached).
TOXICITY TESTING:
Type of Toxicity Test: Chronic P/F
Existing Limit: 001: Chronic P/F @ 90%
Recommended Limit: 001: Chronic P/F @ 90%
Monitoring Schedule: February, May, August, November
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY:
Facility has a negative compliance record with numerous violations of many monitored parameters.
During the last permit cycle the facility has been working on the expansion and improvement of the
plant, which should alleviate existing compliance problems.
INSTREAM MONITORING:
Instream monitoring is required for temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, conductivity,
total phosphorus, TKN, ammonia nitrogen, nitrate + nitrite nitrogen, and chlorophyll -a.
PROPOSED CHANGES:
• Limits.- Based on the Reasonable Potential Analysis both limits for Cd have been removed,
daily maximum limit for Cr was removed, daily maximum limit for Se was removed, limits for
Hg and Pb were added.
• Monitoring Frequencies. Monitoring frequency for Cd has been reduced to 2/Month due to
the removal of the limits. Monitoring frequencies for Hg and Pb were increased to weekly due
to the addition of the limits.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
Draft Permit to Public Notice: April 21, 2009 (est.)
Permit Scheduled to Issue: June 14, 2009 (est.)
STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please contact
Sergei Chernikov at [phone].
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENT:
NAME: DATE:

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Hamby Creek WWTP
NCOO
Time Period 2006-2009
Ow (MGD) 4
WWTP Class IV
7010S (cis) 0.43
IWC (°.6) @ 7010S 93.514
701 oW (cfs) 1.3
@ 7010W 82.667
3002 (cfs) 1.7
@ 3002 78.481
Avg. Stream Flow, QA Ws) 12
@ QA 34.066
Reeving Stream Hamby Creek WWTP
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw=4MGD
STANDARDS &
PARAMETER
TYPE
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC Wos/ %FAV/
Chronic A-ft
n ADrt Ilbx Pmd Cw Allowably Qr
(1)
Acute: N/A
Arsenic
C
50
ug/L
14 0
2.5
_ _ _ _
-
nolimil---_ ----- —_— ----
--- -- — — —
Chronic:
Acute: N/A
no limit
Aluminum
C
8000.0
ug/L
10 7 2036.6
_-
_ __ _
--_—_—_—_—__-' ---------------
Note: n<12
Chronic: 23,484
limited data set
Acute: 15
Cadmium
NC
2 15
uglL
60 0
1.0
I -----------------------------------------
remove the
ov
Chronic: 2
reduce the monitorin to 2/Month
Acute: 1,022
keep the weekly average Omit
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
59 8
209.2
_ __
_ _ _ _ _- _ — — — -----
Chronic: 53
_
remove the daily maximum limit
Acute: 7
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
31 25
1113.0
_
no limit --------------------------
Chronic: 7
action level standard
Acute: 22
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
28 2
5.0
...........
no limit — — ---- — — _---. -----_—
---
li Chronic: 5
-
e:
Acute: N/A
Antimony
NC
640
ug/L
14 0
12.5
— — _ __
nolimit__
_- _---_ _-- — — ----_
Chronic: 684
i
Acute: 34
add the limit
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
ug/L
30 2
36.0
(— — — — --
— -- — _ — _—_ — —_—_ —
— -- —_—_-
Chronic: 27
--
increase the monitoring to weekly
Acute: N/A
Mercury
NC
12
2.0000
ng/L
16 13
141.4800
...........
add the limit
Chronic: 13
increase the monitoring to weekly
Acute: N/A
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
14 0
6.4
j— — — — —
no limit _ _ _-_ ______ ___ — _
Chronic: 4,460
_
Acute: 261
keep the limn
Nickel
NC
88 261
ug/L
59 56
845.8
_ _ _ _ _-
—_—_—_—_—_ _ _—_
-- — — — _--
Chronic: 94
-_—_—
Acute: 56
keep the weekly average limb
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
ug/L
59 2
7.3
_ _
_ _ _ .. _ '_____ _ —
Chronic: 5
_
remove the daily maximum limit
Acute: 1
Silver
NC
0.06 AL 1.23
ug/L
32 1
8.0
______
holimit ___ _ _ ___
Chronic: 0
___
action level standard
Acute: 67
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
31 31
590.5
_ __ __
no limit _ _ _ _____ _ ________
Chronic: 53
__
action level standard
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A =Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
24112-rpa-4 mgd-2009.xis, rpa
4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Hamby Creek WWTP
NC00
Time Period 2006-2009
Ow (MGD) 6
WWTP Class (V
7Q10S (cfs) 0.43
IWC (%) @ 7010S 95.581
7Q10W (cfs) 1.3
@ 701OW 87.736
3002 (cfs) 1.7
@ 3002 84.545
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 12
@ QA 43.662
Rec'ving Stream Hamby Creek
Stream Class C
Outfal 1001
Qw=6MGD
STANDARDS&
PARAMETER
TYPE
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Nc WQs1 '/a FAV/
n ONE Max Prod C. Allomble Cr'
(1)
chronic Amb
Acute: N/A
Arsenic
C
50
ug/L
14 0
2.5
_ __
no limit _-_----_______—_—_—______
Chronic: 115
Acute: N/A
no limit
Aluminum
C
8000.0
ug/L
10 7 2036.E
_
______ _.__________-_____
Note: n<12 1
Chronic: 1Q323
___
Limited data set
Acute: 15
Cadmium
NC
2 15
ug/L
60 0
10
—__
remove-the_limi_t— — — ----_ — — — ___
_ _
Chronic: 2
reduce the monitoring to 2/Month
Acute: 1,022
keep the weekly average limit
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
ug/L
59 8
209.2
_ _ _ _ __
___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __—_—_—_— —
Chronic: 52
remove the daily maximum limit
Acute: 7
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
ug/L
31 25
1113.0
___
no limit _ _ _ ___ — — — —_—_— —__
Chronic: 7
adion level standard
Acute: 22
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
26 2
5.0
_ _ _
nolimit
---_-- - _-_ ---_--_-______
I
Chronic: 5
Acute: N/A
Antimony
NC
640
ug/L
14 0
12.5
-
— — - -
- - -___- -_- -____
- limit — — - -
Chronic: 670
Acute: 34
add the limit
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
ug/L
30 2
36.0
--26 -
_ — _ _ _
--------------------- - -
_ _
1 Chronic:
increase the monitoring to weekly
Acute: N/A
Mercury
NC
12
2.0000
ng/L
16 13
141 4800
_ _ _ _ _
add the limit -
Chronic: 13
increase the monitoring to weekly
Acute: N/A
Molybdenum
A
3,500
ug/L
14 0
6.4
_ _
no limit — _ ___ __—__ _ _-___ _ —
Chronic: 4,140
Acute: 261
keep the limit _
Nickel
NC
88 261
ug/L
59 56
845.8
_ _ -_ _ -
___ _—___—_—_ _—_—_—_
— --- --- —_—
Chronic: 92
Acute: 56
keep the weekly average limit
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
ug/L
59 2
7.3
_ _ ___-
_ _ _ _ _ —__ _____
Chronic: 5
_
remove the daily maximum limit
Acute: 1
Silver
NC
0.06 AL 1.23
ug/L
32 1
8.0
_ _ _
no limit _ _ - - _ _ _ _—- _ - _
Chronic: 0
_
action level standard
Acute: 67
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
31 31
590.5
_ __
no limit
Chronic: 52
action level standard
Legend: " Freshwater Discharge
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
24112-rpa-2009.xis, rpa
4/162009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Arsenic
Aluminum
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
286
286.0
Std Dev.
131.1486
2
5
2.5
Mean
2.5000
2
50
25.0
Mean
133.8000
3
5
2.5
C.V.
0.0000
3
70
70.0
C.V.
0.9802
4
5
2.5
n
14
4
76
76.0
n-
10
5
5
2.5
5
397
397.0
6
5
2.5
Mult Factor =
1.0000
6
50
25.0
Mult Factor =
5.1300
7
5
2.5
Max. Value
2.5 ug/L
7
50
25.0
Max. Value
397.0 ug/L
8
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
2.5 ug/L
8
66
66.0
Max. Pred Cw
2036.6 ug/L
9
5
2.5
9
254
254.0
10
5
2.5
10
114
114.0
11
5
2.5
11
12
5
2.5
12
13
5
2.5
13
14,,
5
2.5
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
W€
18
18k
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
f,
22
23
"'
23
24
24
25
25
26
-
26
27
;.
27
28
'fig
28
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
� 1
44
45
45
46
X
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
Ng
52
52
53
53
54
s
54
55
55
56
56
;
57
57
58
4
58
59
NO
59
60
�
60
199
199
200
Ni4
200
24112-rpa-2009.xis, data
- 1 - 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Cadmium
Chromium
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
r"
2
1.0
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
5
2.5
Std Dev.
12.9360
2
2
1.0
Mean
1.0000
2
5
2.5
Mean
6.1271
3
r
2
1.0
C.V.
0.0000
3
6
6.0
C.V.
2.1113
4
<
2
1.0
n
60
4
5
2.5
n
59
5;
2
1.0
5
5
2.5
6
2
1.0
Mult Factor =
1.0000
6
5
2.5
Mult Factor =
3.1700
7
2
1.0
Max. Value
1.0 ug/L
7
5
2.5
Max. Value
66.0 ug/L
8h
2
1.0
Max. Pred Cw
1.0 ug/L
8
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
209.2 ug/L
9k
2
1.00
9
5
2.5
10
2
1.00
10
5
2.5
11
;t
2
1.00
11
5
2.5
12
2
1.00
12
5
2.5
13
2
1.00
13
e
5
2.5
14
2
1.00
14
5
2.5
15
2
1.00
15
5
2.5
16
2
1.00
16
``
5
2.5
17
b4«
2
1.00
17
"'
S
2.5
18
"<'
2
1.00
18
r.
5
2.5
19
<'
2
1.00
19
3
5
2.5
20
<„
2
1.00
20
5
2.5
21
<
2
1.00
21
5
5.0
22
<;
2
1.00
22
5
2.5
23
<;y
2
1.00
23
<
5
2.5
24
<s
2
1.00
24
5
2.5
25
<:
2
1.00
25
<t
5
2.5
26
<
2
1.00
26
5
2.5
27
<,-
2
1.00
27
r
5
2.5
28
<
2
1.00
28
5
2.5
29
<
2
1.00
29
5
2.5
30
<`
2
1.00
30
5
2.5
31
2
1.00
31
<?
5
2.5
32
<;
2
1.00
32
5
2.5
33
<
2
1.00
33
10.0
10.0
34
<
2
1.00
34
5
2.5
35
<
2
1.00
35
<1
5
2.5
36
2
1.00
36
<
5
2.5
37
c^
2
1.00
37
5
2.5
38
<
2
1.00
38
M5
2.5
39
<`
2
1.00
39
r
-40
5
2.5
40
c
2
1.00
40
<S
5
2.5
41
<`--
2
1.00
41
5
2.5
42
<!
2
1.00
42
5
2.5
43
<e
2
1.00
43
' `
5
2.5
44
r
2
1.00
44
6.0
6.0
45
2
1.00
45
7032.0
32.0
46
2
1.00
46
5
2.5
47
2
1.00
47
48.0
48.0
48
2
1.00
48
5
2.5
49
2
1.00
49
5
2.5
50
4,11
2
1.00
50
5
2.5
51
T40,
2
1.00
51
61.0
61.0
52
2
1.00
52
5
2.5
53
2
1.00
53
5
2.5
54
2
1.00
54
66.0
66.0
55
2
1.00
55
5
2.5
56
2
1.00
56
5
2.5
57
2
1.00
57
r'`
5
2.5
58
2
1.00
58
5
2.5
59v'
2
1.00
59
5
2.5
60
2
1.00
60
199
199
200
200
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
2- 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Copper
Cyanide
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
5
2.5
Std Dev.
43.0119
1
5
5.0
Std Dev.
0.0000
2
r
5
2.5
Mean
19.1613
2
5
5.0
Mean
5.0000
3
10
10.0
C.V.
2.2447
3
5
5.0
C.V.
0.0000
4
8
8.0
n
31
4
5
5.0
n
28
5
<
5
2.5
5
5
5.0
6
10
10.0
Mult Factor =
5.2500
6
5
5.0
Mult Factor =
1.0000
7
7
7.0
Max. Value
212.0 ug/L
7
5
5.0
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
8
'
12
12.0
Max. Pred Cw
1113.0 ug/L
8
5
5.0
Max. Pred Cw
5.0 ug/L
9
7
7.0
9
5
5.000
10
11
11.0
10
5
5.000
11
7
7.0
11
5
5.000
12
15
15.0
12
5
5.000
13
8
8.0
13
5
5.000
14
7
7.0
14
5
5.0
15
5
2.5
15
5
5.0
16
8
8.0
16
5
5.0
17
<'
5
2.5
17
5
5.0
18
11
11.0
18
5
5.0
19
6
6.0
19
5
5.0
20
7
7.0
20
5
5.0
21
7
7.0
21
5
5.0
22
6
6.0
22
9
5.0
23
7
7.0
23
8
5.0
24
36
36.0
24
5
5.0
25
137
137.0
25
5
5.0
26
12
12.0
26
5
5.0
27
7
7.0
27
5
5.0
28
212
212.0
28
5
5.0
29
9
9.0
29
,
30
<
5
2.5
30
31
12
12.0
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
o-�
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45'
46
46;
47
47
48
�.
48
49
49
50
r `'
50
51
`,I
51
52
52
53
53
54_
54
55
,
55
t
56
56
57
57
58
58
59
59
60
60
199
g
;
199
200a
200:
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
-3- 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Antimony
Lead
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=112DL
Results
1
25
12.5
Std Dev.
0.0000
1
5
2.5
Std Dev.
2.4614
2
25
12.5
Mean
12.5000
2
5
2.5
Mean
3.1000
3
25
12.5
C.V.
0.0000
3
5
2.5
C.V.
0.7940
4
25
12.5
n
14
4
5
2.5
n
30
5
#
25
12.5
5
5
2.5
6
25
12.5
Mult Factor =
1.0000
6
5
2.5
Mult Factor
2.4000
7
25
12.5
Max. Value
12.5 ug/L
7
5
2.5
Max. Value
15.0 ug/L
8
25
12.5
Max. Pred Cw
12.5 ug/L
8
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
36.0 ug/L
9
25
12.5
9
5
2.5
10
,{
25
12.5
10;
5
2.5
11
25
12.5
11
5
2.5
12
25
12.5
12
S
2.5
13
<
25
12.5
13
5
2.5
14
„«`
25
12.5
14
5
2.5
15
15
8
8.0
16
16
5
2.5
17
r
17
<
5
2.5
18
18
5
2.5
19
19
<s
5
2.5
20
20
<
5
2.5
21
21
<
5
2.5
22
22
5
2.5
23
23
5
2.5
24
24
15
15.0
25
25
4
5
2.5
26
26
<<
5
2.5
27
27
5
2.5
28
28
5
2.5
29
29
<t
5
2.5
30
30
5
2.5
31
31
32
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
r
51
52
52
g-
53
53
54
54
55
55
;4
56
?
56
57
57u
58
58
59
59
60
60
199
199
200
, "
200
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
-4- 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Mercury
Molybdenum
Date
Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=l/2DL
Results
1
1.57
1.00
Std Dev.
7.5907
1
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.67
2
2.40
2.40
Mean
5.5994
2
10
5.0
Mean
4.82
3
1.18
1.00
C.V.
1.3556
3
10
5.0
C.V.
0.14
4a
1.00
1.00
n
16
4
10
5.0
n
14
5
1.00
1.00
5
10
5.0
6
1.00
1.00
Mult Factor =
5.40
6
10
5.0
Mult Factor =
1.2700
7
2.74
2.74
Max. Value
26.2 ng/L
7
10
5.0
Max. Value
5.0 ug/L
8
2.32
2.32
Max. Pred Cw
141.5 ng/L
8
10
5.0
Max. Pred Cw
6.4 ug/L
9
4.98
4.98
9
10
5.0
10
2.73
2.73
10
10
5.0
11
Mar-2008
16.10
16.10
11
10
5.0
12
Fetr2008
18.00
18.00
12
10
5.0
13
5.85
5.85
13
10
5.0
14
Dec-2007
"
26.20
26.20
14
10
5.0
15
2.27
2.27
15
16
1.89
1.00
16
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24,
25
25
26
26
'
27
27
28
P8
s ,
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
33
33
eN'.
34
34�
35
35
36
36sw
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
V50
51
51
52
52
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
56
57
�
57
58
58
59
�`
59
60
60
199
199
200
200
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
-5- 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Nickel
Selenium
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
14
14.0
Std Dev.
37.6335
1
c
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.5554
2
9
9.0
Mean
19.6017
2
5
2.5
Mean
2.6017
3
10
10.0
C.V.
1.9199
3
5
2.5
C.V.
0.2135
4
Y" "
10
10.0
n
59
4
M,
5
2.5
n
59
5
101
101.0
5
5
2.5
6
16
16.0
Mult Factor =
3.0100
6
5
2.5
Mult Factor =
1.2100
7
�Z?
13
13.0
Max. Value
281.0 ug/L
7
5
2.5
Max. Value
6.0 ug/L
8
16
16.0
Max. Pred Cw
845.8 ug/L
8
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
7.3 ug/L
9
5
5.0
9
5
2.5
10
i
8
8.0
10
5
2.5
11
6
6.0
11
5
2.5
12
4=
5
2.5
12
5
2.5
13
9
9.0
13
5
2.5
14v
6
6.0
14
5
2.5
15
<,
5
2.5
15
5
2.5
16
7
7.0
16
5
2.5
17
8
8.0
17
5
2.5
18
9
9.0
18
5
2.5
19
12
12.0
19
5
2.5
20
9
9.0
20
5
2.5
21
9
9.0
21
6
6.0
22
12
12.0
22
5
2.5
23
12
12.0
23
5
2.5
24
7
7.0
24
4
5
2.5
25
9
9.0
25
t
5
2.5
26
8
8.0
26
5
2.5
27
12
12.0
27
r
5
2.5
28
10
10.0
28
5
2.5
29
12
12.0
29
i
5
2.5
30
13
13.0
30
c
5
2.5
31
11
11.0
31
e
5
2.5
32
13
13.0
32
5
2.5
33
14
14.0
33
<
5
2.5
34
13
13.0
34
21
5
2.5
35
13
13.0
35
4
5
2.5
36
9
9.0
36
¢
5
2.5
37
8
8.0
37
<s
5
2.5
38
18
18.0
38
<
5
2.5
39
16
16.0
39
<
5
2.5
40
19
19.0
40
5
2.5
41
15
15.0
41
5
2.5
42
5
2.5
42
c
5
2.5
43
7
7.0
43
5
2.5
44
15
15.0
44
4
5
2.5
45
20
20.0
45
5
2.5
46
10
10.0
46
<`
5
2.5
47
50
50.0
47
r
5
2.5
48
42
42.0
48
<!
5
2.5
49
25
25.0
49
<
5
2.5
50
14
14.0
50
5
2.5
51
Feb-2008
281
281.0
51
5
2.5
52
20
20.0
52
5
2.5
53
14
14.0
53
5
2.5
54
'w
53
53.0
54
;<
5
2.5
55
20
20.0
55<
5
2.5
56
7
7.0
56
5
2.5
57
�_
19
19.0
57
-47
5
5.0
58
17
17.0
58
5
2.5
59
14
14.0
59
5
2.5
60
60
199
199€
200
200
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
-6- 4/16/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Silver
.
Zinc
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
,
5
2.5
Std Dev.
0.6187
1
40
40.0
Std Dev.
45.5350
2
%
5
2.5
Mean
2.6094
2
45
45.0
Mean
63.3548
3
5
2.5
C.V.
0.2371
3
48
48.0
C.V.
0.7187
4
s
5
2.5
n
32
4
47
47.0
n
31
5
5
2.5
5
72
72.0
6
5
2.5
Mult Factor =
1.3300
6
52
52.0
Mull Factor =
2.2200
7
5
2.5
Max. Value
6.0 ug/L
7
53
53.0
Max. Value
266.0 ug/L
8
4
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
8.0 ug/L
8
105
105.0
Max. Pred Cw
590.5 ug/L
9
_<
5
2.5
9
38
38.0
10
<;
5
2.5
10
46
46.0
11
;<
5
2.5
11
44
44.0
12
<
5
2.5
12
60
60.0
13
is
5
2.5
13
47
47.0
14
' <
5
2.5
14
51
51.0
15
5
2.5
15
50
50.0
16
<
5
2.5
16
82
82.0
17
5
2.5
17
50
50.0
18
<
5
2.5
18
84
84.0
19
<`
5
2.5
19
68
68.0
20
4
5
2.5
20
62
62.0
21
; cs
5
2.5
21
60
60.0
22
5
2.5
22
68
68.0
23
5
2.5
23
32
32.0
24
75
5
2.5
24
84
84.0
25
<;
5
2.5
25
266
266.0
26
6
6.0
26
44
44.0
27
-C
5
2.5
27
17
17.0
28
<
5
2.5
28
27
27.0
29
t;
5
2.5
29
30
30.0
30
5
2.5
30
152
152.0
31
<'
5
2.5
31
40
40.0
32
<
5
2.5
32
33
33
34
34
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
42
=
:n
42
43
43
44
a
44
45
45
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
51
51
52
52
53
53
5
5
56
56
57r
57
58
58
60
60
199
{
199
200
"x
200
24112-rpa-2009.xls, data
- 7 - 4/16/2009

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary April 15, 2009
FACILITY REQUIREMENT
YEAR JAN
FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
JUL
AUG SEP
OCT
NOV DEC "
Thomasville Furniture chr lim: 90%
Ceri7dPF
2005 H
— — H — —
H
— —
H
— —
NC0084816/001 Begin:11/l/2006 Frequency:Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
+ NonComp:Single
2006 H
— — H — —
H
— —
H
— — ,
County: Guilford Region: WSRO Subbasin: CPF09
2007 H
— — H — —
H
— —
H
— — - t
PF: 0.0288 Special
2008 H
— — H — —
H
— —
H
— —
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%) 100 order:
2009 H
—
Thomasville -Hamby Creek WWTP Chr lim: 90%
Ceri7dPF
¥ 2005 •-
Pasa — -• >100(P).Pass Pass
--
Fad >100
>100
Pass —
NCO0241121001 Begin:0/0/0 Frequency: Q Feb May Aug Nov
+ NonComp:SINGLE
2006 —
Pass — -• Pass —
--
>90(P).Pas3 —
—
Pass —
,I
II
County: Davidson Region: WSRO Subbasin: YAD07
2007 —
Pass — — Pass —
—
Fad 67.1
-100
>100,>100(P) Pass
PF: 4.0 Special
2008 —
Pass Paas
Paas
Pess>100(P) —
7Q10:0.43 IWC(%)94 Order.
2009 —
Pass
Three R's MHP chr lim: 20%
Ceri7dPF
2005 Pass
•- — Pass — —
Pass
— —
Pass
— —
NC0051489/001 Begin 6/1/2004 Frequency: Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
+ NonComp:Single -
2006 Pass
— — Pass — —
Pass
— —
Pass
— —
County: Forsyth Region: WSRO Subbasin: YAD04
2007 Pass
— — Pass — —
Pass
— —
Pass
— —
PF: 0,012 Special
2008 Pass
— — Pass — —
Pass
— —
Pass
— —
7Q10: 0.075 IWC(%) 19.8 Order:
2009 H
—
Town or Forest City WTP Chr Monit: 90%
Ceri7dPF
2005
NCO074306 Begin:9/1/2008 Frequency: Q Jan Apr Jul Oct
NonComp:
2006
County: Rutherford Region: ARO Subbasin: BRD02
2007
PF: 0.09 st.—I
2008
7Q10: IWC(%) ceder.
2009
Town of Plymouth WTP Chr Monit: 90%
Ceri7dPF
2006 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0002313/001 Begin 10/1/2007 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
NonComp:
2006 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
County: Washington Region: WARO Subbasin:ROA09
2007 —
— — -- — —
—
— —
—
— H
PF: na Specal
2008 —
— H _- - H
—
— H
—
— H
7Q10: IWC(efo) Order.
2009 —
—
Town of Vanceboro WTP Chr Monit: 90%
Ceri7dPF
2005 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0080071 Begin' 8/1/2008 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
NonComp:
2006 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
County: Craven Region: WARO Subbasin: NEU09
2007 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
PF: 0.016 Specie)
2008 —
— — — _ —
—
— Fail
—
— Pass
7Q10: IWC(%) Order:
2009 —
--
Transmontaigne Charlotte Paw Creek NI 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd
Fthd24Ac
2005 —
— >100 — -• —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0005771/001 Begin:10/1/2005 Frequency: A
NonComp
2006 —
— ——
County: Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34
2007 —
— — >100 — —
—
— —
—
— —
PF: VARIES Special
2008 —
— >100 — — —
—
— —
—
— —
7QI0: 0.0 IWC(%) 100 Order:
2009 —
—
TransMontaigne Terminaling/Selma 24hr LC50 ad monit epis fthd
Fthd24Ac
2005 —
— >100 — — —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0003549/003 Begin: 6/1/2008 Frequency: A
NonComp:
2006 —
— — — — 94.87
—
— —
—
— —
County: Johnston Region: RRO Subbasin: NEU02
2007 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
PF: VAR Special
2008 —
— — >100 — —
—
— —
—
— —
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%) 100 Order:
2009 >100
—
TransMonta(gne Terminaling/Selma 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd
Fthd24Ac
2005 —
— H — — H
—
— —
—
— —
NC0003549/002 Begin:6/1/2008 Frequency: 50WD/A
NonComp:
2006 —
— — — — H
—
— Late
—
>100 —
County: Johnston Region: RRO Subbasin: NEU02
2007 —
— — — H
—
— —
—
— —
PF: VAR Special
2008 —
—. — >100 — —
—
— —
—
— —
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%) 100 Order.
2009 H
—
-
Transmontaigne-Paw Creek N2-BP Ac LC50 Monit: Epis Fthd
Fthd24Ac
2005 —
— >100 — — —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0021971/009 Begin. 10/112005 Frequency: A
NonComp:
2006 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
County: Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34
2007 —
— — — —
—
— —
—
— —
PF: VAR Special
2008 —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
7Q100.0 1WC(%) 100 Order
2009 —
—
TransMontaigne•Piedment Terminal 24hr LC50 ac monit epis fthd
Fthd24Ac
2005 >100
— — -- — —
—
— —
—
— —
NC0069256/001 Begin:9/1/2006 Frequency: A
NonComp:
2006 >100
— — -- — —
—
— —
—
— —
County: Guilford Region: WSRO Subbasin: CPF08
2007 —
>100 — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
PF: NA Special
2008 >100
— — — — —
—
— —
—
— —
7Q10: 0.0 1WC(%) 100 Order:
2009 >100
—
V Pre 2005 Data
LEGEND:
PERM= Permit Requirement LET = Administrative Letter - Target Frequency = Monitoring frequency: Q- Quarterly; M- Monthly; BM- Bimonthly: SA- Semiannually: A- Annually; OWD- Only when discharging; D- Diswntinued monitoring requirement
Begin = First month required 7QI0 = Receiving stream low flow criterion (cfs) += quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months thattesting must occur -ex. Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct NonComp = Current Compliance Requirement
PF = Permitted flow (MGD) IWC%= Instream waste concentration P/F = Pass/Fail test AC = Acute CHR = Chronic
Data Notation: f - Fathead Minnow;' - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my - Mysid shrimp; ChV - Chronic value; P- Mortality of stated percentage at highest concentration: at - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tax Unit; bt - Bad test
Reporting Notation: —= Data not required; NR- Not reported Facility Activity Status: I - Inactive, N - Newly Imued(To construct); H - Active but not discharging; t-More data available for month in question; = ORC signature needed
47

LT 5TA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Colean H. Sullies
Governor
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
SUBJECT: Special Order by Consent
EMC SOC WQ SO4-013
Hamby Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
Director
August 3, 2009
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The City of Thomasville has met all of the requirements and deadlines as per the Special Order by
Consent (SOC), including compliance with final limits. As a result, please be advised that, effective
immediately, Hamby Creek WWTP must comply with the effluent limits as found in its newly renewed
NPDES permit. A copy of the permit's effluent limitations and monitoring requirements are enclosed.
The Division appreciates the City's efforts in fulfilling the requirements of the SOC. Should you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Jenifer Carter at 336-771-4957.
Sincerely,
Steve W Tedder
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
Attachment
cc: Mr. Morgan Huffman (same address)
Ms. Misty Conder (same address)
SWP Central Files
WSRO Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
One
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] t Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www,ncwaterquality.org Naturally

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 22, 2009 Kegi
Ms. Misty ConderLaboratory SupervisorCity of Thomasville
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Long Term Monitoring Plan - Approved
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP (NPDES: NC0024112)
Davidson County
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of Water
Quality has reviewed the Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) submitted by the City of Thomasville for
the Hamby Creek WWTP. The LTMP was initially received by the Division on June 2, 2009, followed by
couple of revisions received on June 26 and July 21, 2009.
The review indicates that with the revisions included in the most recent submission, the LTMP is
adequate and meets the requirements needed to establish a site -specific Headworks Analysis (HWA).
Proper implementation of an LTMP is also required by Part IV (C) of your NPDES permit.
Thank you for your continued cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email: [e-mail]] or
Deborah Gore, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email: Deborah. [e-mail]].
Sincerely.,
Coleen H. Sullins
mh/thomasvil Ie.ltmp.2009
cc: Jennifer Carter - WSRO
Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 00z
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet www.ncwaterquality.org NaturallyAn Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
KELLY CRAVER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF THOMASVILLE
PO BOX 368
THOMASVILLE NC 27361-0368
Dear Mr. Craver:
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
June 11, 2009
RECEIVED
N.C. DeOt. of ENR
JUN 15 2W I
Winston Salem
Natural Resources R"i.nal Cfnce
Dee Freeman
Secretary
SUBJECT: Special Order by Consent Annual Fee
EMC SOC WQ SO4-013 ADl
Permit Number NCO024112
Hamby Creek WWTP
Davidson County
All permittees operating under a Special Order by Consent (SOC) must pay an annual SOC Administration Fee. This
requirement is documented in North Carolina General Statute 143-215.31) (c). For Calendar Year 2009, the SOC annual
fee amount due is $500.00. Please submit payment as indicated below by July 17, 2009.
Please make checks payable to NCDENR, include your NPDES permit number (NC0024112) and SOC number (SO4-
013) on the check. Send the SOC annual fee payment to:
Dina Sprinkle
Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have evidence that this fee has already been paid, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
zz��4o,,7�
Dina Sprinkle
Point Source Branch
Cc: Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
Regional Office Contact
Fran McPherson, Annual Administering and Compliance Fee Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center, Ralegh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service:1-877-623-6748 NOfthCarofin`i
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org /{
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer AaturallI ,

A
L►1
WDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
April 30, 2009
Mr. Morgan Huffman
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Mr. Huffman:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has reviewed
the Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2008. This PAR was
received on March 23, 2009. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies the
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina
Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at (919)
807-6314 (Monti. Hassan @ncmail.net).
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO File
SWP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Location: 585 Waughtown St. Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www,ncwaterquality.org
NorthCarohna
Aahmilly
An Equal Opportunity \ Afirmabve Action Employer

Regional Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Review
Included?
ADEQUATE?
ES
❑
NO ❑ NA
Et-y
S
❑
NO ❑ NA
PPS Form
9-*ES
❑
NO
[]-
❑
NO
[-*ES
❑
NO
D-YffS
❑
NO
IDSF
[-<S
❑
NO
D-YES
❑
NO
Allocation Table
AYES
❑
NO
[i —
ES
❑
NO
Waste Reduction Info
ES
❑
NO
P-qS
❑
NO
60000
YES
❑
NO A
❑
YES
❑
NO ffNA
_
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
a
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
[
-YES
❑
NO
E�-
f S
❑
NO
[DES
❑
NO ❑ NA
[AXES
❑
NO ❑ NA
Reaional Office:
POTW:
NPDES Permit No. NC00 A{//
Report Period: Ili d to / 2/3, A (,
ull ❑ Modified
For modified programs evaluate shaded items only. A
Narrative is required for a modified program only if
there are SIUs in SNC.
Tf Nn_ rhPrk rPrnmmPnflatinn hP/nw-
1. Have at least 90% of SIU permits been issued within 180
❑ Yes ❑ No of req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
days of expiration? See Allocation Table .
Assessment
2. Were at least 80% of SIUs inspected? (See PPS Form)
9 es ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
3. Has effective enforcement been taken against industries in
es ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
SNC, including those causing pass -through or interference? (See
Assessment
Narrative and SNCR Form
4. Does public notice cover all SIUs in SNC?
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
ivote: txceptions snouia De expiamea in the comment section below:
I20lea,
Reviewed By: ro i�6_v Date:
Regional Pretreatment Annual Report Review
PAR review form 2006
Fill in Values from PPS Form
(for PCS data entry)
r
* Alternatively, attach PPS page from PAR

ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION
I, Donald T. Garbrick, as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of
North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/weekly/full time) the
construction of the project(s),
Project Name: Hamby Creek WWTP Upgrade & Expansion
Project Location: Thomasville, North Carolina
Project Number(s): SRF No. CS370619-02
Project Owner: City of Thomasville
Project Description: Upgrade and Expansion of existing 4 MGD to 6 MGD. Upgrades
include new influent filter screening equipment, new solids
classifier grit removal system, new Cannibal® solids reduction
system including interchange tanks, new 5-stage Bardenpho®
oxidation system, renovation of existing aeration basins, new
clarifiers, new effluent filters and new UV disinfection.
hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the
observation of the project construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compli'e and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
Signatur Registration No. 9961
Date: April 6, 200 P.E.Seal:
File Name: N:\2002032-00\CFile\Ph6-9\Review-Approve\Engineers Certification.doc
Rev Date. 03/22/2006

Subject: SNC update
From: "Conder, Misty" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:24:55 -0400
To: "Jenifer Carter" <[e-mail]>
Jenifer,
I've completed a review of all industries for SNC and do have two to add that were missed.
Stroupe Mirror did not report their flows for 2008 and since their bankruptcy, the data is buried in files somewhere.
Technically they did not sample in second quarter but I did not put them in SNC or issue an NOV for this because they
ceased all discharge and declared bankruptcy April 18, 2008, very early in the 2nd quarter. As noted in our audit, the
City did sample their final discharge in August of waters used for cleaning the facility.
Secondly, Unilin Flooring was SNC for TSS in the first half. As you know they struggled to correct the problem, and
have developed a recycling program that allows them to have no discharge. Therefore, no sampling was done in the
last half of the year.
Both SNC's were published in the paper this week. I've got to write the narrative report and make copies of
everything and then should be finished with the PAR by 3/20/09 as promised.
Thanks,
Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
PO Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Phone: [phone]
1 of 1 3/17/2009 3:49 PM

Subject: AMC
From: "Conder, Misty" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:30:06 -0400
To: "Jenifer Carter" <[e-mail]>
Jenifer,
I told you during the pretreatment audit that AMC was in SNC for Copper and possibly nickel. AMC did some extra
sampling in 3rd quarter that just barely managed to keep them out of SNC for the second half (copper37.5% chronic
and 31.3% TRC). One of their copper violations just missed the TRC level so they avoided SNC. They also had enough
sampling in first half to keep them out of SNC. They did have a 3 high nickels in the first half and 1 in the second but
avoided SNC for them. I haven't gotten your audit letter yet, but I wanted to let you know so that you won't be
surprised when I respond with " I had a calculation error." I've sent them their NOV's for both.
Misty Conder
City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
PO Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Phone: [phone]
1 of 1 3/13/2009 3:31 PM

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
March 9, 2009
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed on February 19, 2009 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-
Salem Regional office. Ms. Misty Conder was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection was to
determine the effectiveness of the pretreatment program and included a review of files, POTW plant performance,
industry monitoring data, adherence to the enforcement response plan (ERP) and an industry inspection.
Backgrround
The City currently has eight (8) significant industrial users (SIUs), four (4) of which fall under categorical
standards.
There was one SIU in significant noncompliance (SNC) for limits violations (Advanced Motorsports Coating)
during 2008 year.
Misty Conder was promoted to Plant Superintendent/ORC a year ago, and the City has been unable find a suitable
replacement to perform the lab supervisor/pretreatment coordinator duties she previously had, and still has. This
means that Ms. Conder is now trying to perform the requirements for her old job AND her new job. The City is has
since decided that they will not try to fill the position at this time.
No serious problems have occurred due to Ms. Conder's heavy workload, but the Division is concerned that she
may not have sufficient time and/or resources to continue meeting all of the requirements that she has been tasked
with. It is important that she have not only the time and resources to complete routine tasks required to maintain
compliance, but additional unforeseen tasks that may arise as well.
Ms. Conder has asked for and been granted extensions for various pretreatment related deadlines, yet it is does not
appear that her workload will be any lighter in the foreseeable future. The primary concern is that she may not be
able to maintain the level of organization and oversight of the Industrial Users that we have grown used to seeing
from her.
POTW Interview
There were several NPDES Permit limits violations in February and March 2008, and one limit violation
(Selenium) in November 2008. These violations are most likely due to the process of upgrading the plant, and have
been addressed through the Division's monthly enforcement program.
In January of 2008, and again in January of this year, the plant was hit with flow of high pH coming into the plant
that had a `fishy' smell to it. On both occasions, it lasted for only a short period of time, making it difficult to track
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 585 Waughtown Street; Winston-Salem, NC 27107 Phone [phone]
Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

the source. The most recent occurrence happened at a time when there were problems with the new oxidation
ditches, so it is difficult to know if the problems were caused by or exacerbated by the high pH.
Pretreatment Program Elements Review
The Long -Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) and The Headworks Analysis (HWA) were approved, with new due
dates given. However, due to recent upgrades, for which trouble -shooting is ongoing, Long-term monitoring will
have to be revised, and a new HWA created to account for changes at the plant. A new LIMP is now due on
June 1, 2009, with a new HWA due on October 1, 2010. If further extensions are needed, please contact the
PERCS unit.
The Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) was approved and is satisfactory. An extension for the next IWS has been
granted. It is now due on June 30, 2009.
The Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO) and the Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) are approved and satisfactory.
Industrial User Permit (IUP) File Review
A file review was performed on Gresco Manufacturing (#0012). Files were found to be in good order, and
compliance judgment correctly performed.
Industry Inspection
Ms. Conder performed an inspection at McIntyre Metals, a powder coating facility. Mr. Alan Russells, Material
Manager, was present for the inspection. Until the point of the inspection, this industry had not yet been allowed to
dischafge to the POTW due lack of a proper sampling point. There was one in place during the inspection, so Ms.
Conder agreed that they could begin sending industrial waste to the City. Mr. Russell's stated that he would notify
the City prior to first release.
Action Item
As noted in previous inspection letters, please make sure that the pretreatment coordinator has the time and
resources necessary for completing all required tasks, maintaining compliance for the WWTP and the Industrial
Users, -and for handling any unforeseen events or emergencies as they may arise. Keep in mind that the cost of
doing business cannot be used as an excuse for non-compliance.
Please refer to the enclosed inspection report for more detailed information. The City of Thomasville's pretreatment
program is very good and Ms. Conder should be commended for her continued efforts. Should you have any
questions, please contact Monti Hassan in Raleigh at [phone] (new number), or Jenifer Carter at (336) 771-
4957.
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: WSRO Files
SWP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit

FA
P
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)]
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Plant Superintendent, Pretreatment Coordinator and Lab Supervisor
4. Last Inspection Date: 02 /07 /08 Inspection Type: ❑ PCI M Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? M Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes M No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
ON N CIO 10 12 14 111112 1 102 1191091
® SD
Fac. Type
T]
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP)
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)? 8
SIUS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs)?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
0
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
- Semi -Annual Periods (Total Number of SIUs in SNC)
1
PSNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
0
MSNC
15: Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For BothReporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-annual Periods
0
POTW INTERVIEW
17.
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations?
® Yes [_1 No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
Feb08: BOD,TSS,Amm,Ni,Cr
Mar08: BOD,Amm,Tss,Cr
Addressed previously during monthly enforcement program.
Nov08: Se
18.
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial
® Yes ❑ No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
see Summary and Comment
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19.
Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for
Limits: AMC
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last 2 SNC for
Reporting:
Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published: To be published soon
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20.
Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an Order,
_l
Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division?
N/A
21.
Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which
El M No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ❑ Yes ❑ No M N/A
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ElYes ❑ No M N/A
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? M Yes ❑ No Is the Table Adequate? M Yes [I No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ❑ YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations: Will start collecting new LTMP data when bugs worked out of newly upgraded plant.
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/STMP? El Yes M No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added: Aluminum will be added due to new Cannibal System
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 1

28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW— Please review POTW files, verify POTW has copy of Program Element in %
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter, and dates consistent with Program Info:
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Neat Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis A
01/13/2009
® Yes ❑ No
10/01/2010
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
01/30/2004
® Yes ❑ No
06/30/2009
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
06/05/2007
® Yes ❑ No
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
10/09/2008
® Yes ❑ No
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
02/10/2006
® Yes ❑ No
06/01/2009
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW(3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION)
29. User Name IF
1. Gresco Manufacturing 2.
3.
30. AJP Number
1 0012
IF-
11
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
I ® Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No1
❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date
1 01/03/12
/
33. Categorical Standard Applied (I.E. 40 CFR, Etc.) Or N/A
I N/A
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
® Yes ❑ No
❑Yes ❑ No
F ❑ Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
11 ❑ Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. ®Yes EIN07
a. ❑Yes []No
a. 1--]Yes []No
If No, is One Needed? (See Inspection Form from POTW)
b. ❑Yes ❑No
b. []Yes❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
Organic Management Plan (TOMP)?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. ®Yes ❑No
I
a. []Yes []No
a. ❑Yes []No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.DYes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
b.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
39. - During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
F ®YesDNoDN/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑NoDN/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
❑YesDNo❑N/A
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
11 ®YesDNoDN/A
IF❑YesDNoDN/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑YesDNo®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑YesDNo®N/A1PYes0No0N/A
11
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
Ir
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
DYes❑No®N/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
❑YesDNoDN/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
❑Yes❑No®N/A
DYespNo❑N/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
All Re ortin Non-Com liance from SIU Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
a.❑Yes❑No®N/A
a.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
a.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.❑Yes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑YesDNo❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW reample within 30 days of becoming aware
c.❑Yes❑No®N/A
of SIU limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
c.❑Yes❑NoDN/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No 11
❑ Yes ❑ No
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
❑YesDNo®N/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP (NOVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
47. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?
OYesONo®N/A
pYes❑NoDN/A
DYespNo❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?
❑Yes❑NoDN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑YesDNo❑N/A
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
a. ❑Yes ®No
a. []Yes ❑No
a. [:]Yes ❑No
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
b. ❑Yes ®No
b. QYes ❑No
b. ❑Yes []No
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Requested Information For You?
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
All required information was available for review. Not as organized as during previous inspections, thought everything was that
was asked for was found. See summary and comments below.
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fac. Type
❑N N C 0 0 2 4 1 1 2 02 07 08 I� SD 2❑
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP) (FACC)
1. Industry Inspected: McIntyre Metals, Inc.
2. Industry Address: 310 Kendall Mill Rd; Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Powder Coating
4. Industry Contact: Jeff McIntyre/Alan Russells Title: President/Materials Manager
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? E Yes ❑ No
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview ® Yes ❑ No
B. Plant Tour - ® Yes ❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour ❑ Yes ❑ No
D. Sampling Review ® Yes ❑ No
E. Exit Interview ® Yes ❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
The City has not allowed McIntyre Metals to discharge until a proper sampling point was in place. During the inspection, it was
noted that one is now in place, and McIntyre Metals is ready to start sending waste to the City. Ms. Conder will be notified by the
SIU prior to discharging for the first time.
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments:
1.) In January of 2008, and again in January of this year, the plant was hit with high pH flow coming into the plant that had a `fishy'
smell to it. Both times, it lasted for only a short period of time, making it difficult to track the source. The most recent occurrence
happened at the time when there were problems with the new oxidation ditches, so it is difficult to know if the problems were caused
by or exacerbated by the high pH.
2.) Misty Conder was promoted to Plant Superintendent/ORC a year ago, and the City has been unable find a suitable replacement
to perform the lab supervisor/pretreatment coordinator duties she previously had, and still has. This means that Ms. Conder is now
trying to perform the requirements for her old job AND her new job at one time. The City is has since decided that they will no
longer try to fill the position at this time.
No serious problems have occurred due to Ms. Conder's heavy workload, but the Division is concerned that she may not have
sufficient time and/or resources to continue meeting all of the requirements that she has been tasked with. It is important that she
have not only the time and resources to complete routine tasks required to maintain compliance, but additional unforeseen tasks that
may arise as well.
Ms. Conder has asked for and been granted extensions for various pretreatment related deadlines, yet it is does not appear that her
workload will be any lighter in the foreseeable future. The primary concern is that she may not be able to maintain the level of
organization and oversight of the Industrial Users that we have grown used to seeing from her.
Requirements:
As noted in previous inspection letters, please make sure that the pretreatment coordinator has the time and resources necessary for
completing all required tasks, maintaining compliance of the WWTP and the Industrial Users, and for handling any unforeseen
events or emergencies as they may arise. Please keep in mind that the cost of doing business cannot be used as an excuse for non-
compliance.
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory
Marginal ❑
Unsatisfactory ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: DATE: D
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 4

�0F W A rFRQ
O G
CID 7
O �
Michael ?'.Easlt,ovemor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water (duality
RECEIVED
November 24, 2008 I N.C. Deot of ENR
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager NOV 2 610084Vinston•Salem
City of Thomasville Regional Office
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
SUBJECT: FINAL Inspection
Thomasville, NC ( Davidson County)
Hamby Creek WWTP Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
A Final inspection was conducted on Friday November 21, 2008 on subject project at
the site. Construction which enabled Owner to attain treatment of wastewater from newly
constructed facilities occurred on March 12, 2008 when wastewater was diverted into the new
oxidation ditch. Beneficial use of facilities was consequently achieved near this date. For
purposes of the loan and repayments, this date November 21, 2008 may be deemed to be the
Initiation of Operations -date. `
You should review this report and take any actions as noted. If you have any
questions, please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
v V
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Group
G W H/gh
cc: All Attendees
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
CG&L - Mark Hubbard, PE, Shamim Haeri
SRF
Construction Grants and Loans Section One
1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nccgl.net ��t�ra!!�
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

City of Thomasville
CS370619-02
FINAL INSPECTION
November 21, 2008
Hamby Creek WWTP Upgrade & Expansion Pg 2 of 3
I. Loan amount is $ 27,000,000 on a 20 year, 2.305% note. If the entire amount is used then the
first loan repayment of $337,603.56 (interest only) will be due to State on November 1, 2009.
II. CONTRACT
Project was authorized on Feb. 8, 2006, A to C # 024112A02, NPDES Permit # NC0024112.
Project consisted of constructing the following modifications, upgrades, additions and
enlargement to the existing 4.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant for a new permitted capacity of
6.0 MGD:
o New filter screen
o New solids classifier grit removal
o Two new parallel oxidation ditches with biological nutrient removal
o Two new final clarifiers
o Four new effluent filters
o New parallel UV disinfection systems
o New effluent metering station
o New mechanical static post aerator
o Modification to 1 existing AB for interim rearation (old #6)
o Cannibal solids separation system and building with 2 existing aeration tanks (nos. 1 & 2)
modified to perform as interchange tanks
o New RAS pump station with VFDs
o Flocculator clarifier (converted from existing clarifier #1)
o New submersible return sludge pumping station
o Addition of mixer and decanter to existing digester no. 1
o New emergency power generators (2)
o New and upgraded chemical storage and feed facilities
o Addition to laboratory and administration building, with new laboratory
o New controls, instrumentation and SCADA
o 2 plant water reuse pumps and associated site work, electrical piping and appurtenances
III. CHANGE ORDERS
There were 4 change orders, the last being approved July 7, 2008. The change orders did not
change the original completion date of April 17, 2009. Through change order #4 the final eligible
project construction cost was $24,642.154.00. Change orders included adjusting costs or
additional costs related to: sludge removal & disposal, rock, adjustments in costs lab building
work, and to changes in sludge handling facilities. A fifth change order it was reported, will be
forthcoming but it only adjusts contract conditions, i.e. does not affect time or project costs.
IV. REQUIRED AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ITEMS
Final inspection and discussions indicated system was operational but action items must be
addressed or resolved before final reimbursement and finalizing the loan amount can be made.
Where a response is required by Owner or Engineer, those items may be addressed via a
statement in the cover letter. If CG&L requests an item be sent in, it should be addressed to
Gerald Horton.
1) Engineer shall confirm in writing that record drawings have been provided to City of
Thomasville and Owner shall confirm receipt thereof in writing.

City of Thomasville
• CS370619-02
' Hamby Creek WWTP Upgrade & Expansion
FINAL INSPECTION
November 21, 2008
Pg 3 of 3
2) Engineer shall provide Engineer's Certification. We understand the Certification is pending
successful startup of the Cannibal System that is scheduled for Dec. 1, 2, and 3.
3) Engineer shall provide written confirmation that Owner has received a complete set of all
shop drawings.
4) Engineer shall provide written confirmation that programming and software were provided to
the City of Thomasville for the SCADA system.
5) Provide to CG&L the last written punch list and status of each item.
6) Provide to CG&L the list of warranty date(s) for labor, each process and piece of equipment.
7) Within one year after completion of project, Owner must provide Certification of Completion
(form available at web site www.nccgl.net) if Owner is satisfied with project, otherwise
Owner must provide conditional Certification listing items and/or issues still outstanding.
8) Engineer confirmed and Owner concurred that all spare parts and a spare parts list have been
provided to Owner.
9) It was related at this meeting that Owner is still holding - $400,000+ retainage, pending
finalizing Cannibal system startup, SCADA information and other items mentioned herein.
10) For the record there are items yet to be completed on the project including but not limited to:
❑ Startup of Cannibal System equipment, including placing interchange tank on line
❑ Correction/repairs to influent screening equipment
❑ Resolution of grit pump performance
❑ Completion of SCADA documentation and providing same to Owner and for the O&M
Manual
❑ Corrections/repairs to influent flow chart/equipment
11) For the record it should be mentioned that the City of Thomasville has a significant
Infiltration/Inflow problem that was evidenced during construction upon significant rain
events. Reader is referred to earlier inspection reports.
12) Confirm in writing when contractor(s) have provided release of liens.
13) Confirm in writing when contractors(s) have provided consent of surety.
14) Submit final sales tax report and reimbursement request.
V. FINAL INSPECTION ATTENDEES
❑
Misty Conder
❑
Keith Garbrick, PE
❑
Charles Morgan
❑
Gerald Horton, PE
❑
Anita Reed, PE
❑
Jennifer Haynie
❑
Paul Weeks, PE
❑
Ishwar Devkota, PE
ORC, City of Thomasville
Pease & Assocs. 704 376-6423
State Utility, Project Manager
NC CG&L, Constr. Inspection Group
NC CG&L, Design Mgmt Unit
NC CG&L, Facilities Evaluation Unit
NC CG&L, Facilities Evaluation Unit
NC On Site Water Protection Section
336 475-4246
cell 704 201-5041
704 289-6400
919 715-6219
919 715-6213
919 715-6223
919 715-6208
919 715-7645

0F W p rF9 Michael F. Easley, Go rnor
mot QG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(� Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
November 20, 2008 FNO�V
IVED
N.C. of ENR
KELLY CRAVER 4 2=
CITY MANAGERSalem
CITY OF THOMASVILLE Regional Office
PO BOX 368
THOMASVILLE NC 27361-0368
SUBJECT: Special Order by Consent Annual Fee
EMC SOC WQ SO4-013 NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver:
All permittees operating under a Special Order by Consent (SOC) must pay an SOC
Administrative Fee. This requirement is documented in North Carolina General Statute 143-
215.3D (c). The total amount owed by City of Thomasville is $250.00 for calendar year 2008.
Make checks payable to NC DENR; include your permit number and SOC number [listed above]
on the check. Send the fee payment to:
Fran McPherson
Annual Administering and Compliance Fee Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have evidence that the fee has already been paid, please contact Mrs. McPherson at (919)
807-6321.
Sincerely,
Dina Sprinkle
NPDES Unit
Cc: Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
NPDES File
Mailing Address Phone [phone] Location NorthCarolina
1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St. Naturally
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Raleigh, NC 27604
Internet: www.newaterguality.org Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer —50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

\o�oF warfi9�G
6 r
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Dear Mr. Craver:
Michael 1: Ale�wmor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
June 13, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of F"
,SUN 17 2008
Winston-,Sa,e
Qegional C• --E
SUBJECT: Interim Inspection
Thomasville, Davidson County
Hamby Creek WWTP
Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
The Construction Inspection Group (CIG) of the Construction Grants and Loans Section
performed an interim inspection for the state and federally funded portion of subject project on
June 11, 2008. The inspection was conducted in conjunction with the monthly progress meeting
regularly scheduled for the second Wednesday each month at 1:30 p.m. at the project site. The
project is nearing completion. Should another progress meeting be needed, it will be scheduled for
July 9. It is hoped a Final Inspection will be conducted soon. Please note that our inspection
report covers loan administration and construction.
You should review this report; take actions as indicated and then file for your records. If
you have any questions please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail
[e-mail].
S' cerely,
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Group
cc: Keith Garbrick, PE, Pease Associates
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Mark Stokes, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Barbara Sifford, Mooresville Regional Office
CG&L — Mark Hubbard, PE, Jennifer Kinghorn, Anita Reed, PE, Pam Whitley
SRF
Construction Grants and loans Section One
1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NofthCarolina
Phone: [phone]/ FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nccgl.net Va mmy/h/

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
Page 2 of 3
Interim Inspection
June 11, 2008
LOAN ADMINSTRATION CS370619-02
SRF LOAN — The original loan amount is $27,000,000.
Loan interest payment rate is 2.305 % on a 20-year term.
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS SRF
Date of Last Disbursement /Amount May 19, 2008 / $ 466,863
Total Disbursed $ 26,116,863 ( 97 % of SRF Loan Funds)
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT — State Utility Contractors, Inc. (SU)
4417 Old Charlotte Hwy; PO Box 5019 Monroe, NC 28111-5019
tele: 704 289-6400 FAX [phone]
Superintendent: Wade Woodring
Contract time 1152 calendar days, unchanged
Original & Current Completion Date Friday April 17, 2009
Completion of project mid May is now anticipated in July 2008
Actual completion — 99 + %
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
No change orders since CO#4 was approved July 13, 2007. A final CO#5 will be
prepared, though there is no money left in contingency, CG&L requests a copy CO#5.
Work by State Utility Contractors observed or performed since last interim inspection of
April 9:
1. Finishing rough grading, doing fine grading and has seeded large part of site
2. Finished interchange tanks and blowers, Digester completed
3. Finished flocculating clarifier for Cannibal system (phosphorous removal)
4. Layout completed for drives, placed crusher run and rough graded
5. Plant SCADA tested and "self -healing demonstrated and tested
6. Working on deriving and completing items on punch lists
7. Cannibal system is ready but not yet placed fully in service, ORC is working system
in manual mode, product is not as wet, manufacturer's Rep. will be on site Thursday
June 12 to work on programming and setup
8. Cannibal HMI (hand manual interface or touch screen that had been removed has
now been reinstalled and is working
State Utility's remaining work consists of but is not limited to
1. Complete paving and sitework
2. Continue de -mob
3. Startup solids module
4. Startup interchange tanks, related blowers and flocculating clarifier
5. Startup digester
6. Finish SCADA if progress with Cannibal permits it
7. Work on deriving and completing items on electrical punch lists, perform "project
walkdown" final inspection

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
Page 3 of 3
Interim Inspection
June 11, 2008
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
CONSTRUCTION SITE
Weather since last inspection in April has been generally satisfactory for construction.
Site was in good shape.
ENGINEERINGANSPECTION:
o Resident Inspector On -Site'? Yes, on part time basis and as needed basis now near end
of construction
:) Inspector's records, reports, shop drawings, files, etc., records were reviewed
o Testing reports on concrete strength and soils reviewed? None new.
o As -Built (Record Drawings) being kept up to date? Engineer stated they had received
markups from SU and were in process of making CAD revisions to drawings.
CONTRACTOR (S)
o N.C. OSHA / Labor Laws Posted? YES
o Up to date Construction Schedule (Bar Graph, CPM) posted? YES
o Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed ? YES
o Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) according to
Contractor? None
o Will project be completed on time? Project should be completed in July 2008, well
ahead of contract completion date of April 2009. Contractor commissioned WWTP in
mid March 2008, the Cannibal system should be commissioned in June 2008.
PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Payment Milestone Discussed? NO. Recently the Draft O&M Manual was reviewed
and revisions/comments from the Engineer to CG&L are pending.
2. Does work completed appear acceptable for reimbursement? YES
GENERAL CONCERNS / RECOMMENDATIONS / ACTION ITEMS
UPDATES on Comments and Concerns noted in previous progress meetings (for reference) are italicized.
1. CG&L provided project closeout checklist some time ago. Particular concerns include:
a) Warranty list, please provide copy to CG&L
b) Startup list and training, please provide copy of list to CG&L
c) Spare parts, please provide list and documentation validating that items have been
turned over to Owner
2. Engineer needs to setup final inspection with CG&L
3. Jude UPDATE; SU and Engineer stated they had simulated conditions on the SCADA
system. CG&L asked if there will be a simulation exercise to verify efficacy of the
SCADA and controls system. Specifically, will failures, conditions and alarms be
simulated to validate they do function properly?
4. Problems with the influent screen and the grit collection system are being resolved.
PROGRESS MEETING / PARTICPANTS ( 12 )
Misty Conder
Thomasville, ORC
Morgan Huffman
Thomasville, Public Works Director
Keith Garbrick, PE
Pease & Assocs., Engineer
704 201-3788 Cell.
Bobby Jordan
Pease & Assocs., Constr Obsv.
704 201-5041 Cell
Wade Woodring
State Utitilty, Proj. Mgr.
Terry Gill
State Utitilty\
Jerry Cook
Starr Electric
Gerald Horton, PE
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6219
Pam Whitley
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6204
Anita Reed, PE
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6213
Barbara Sifford
DWQ Mooresville Regional Office
704 235-2196
Marc Stokes
DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office
336 771-4952

Misty Conder
LaboratorySupervisor
City of Thomasville
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
August 22, 2008 RECEIVED
N.C. deot. of ENR
AUG 2 5 2W
Winston-Salem
Reaional Office
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP)
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek (NPDES: NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division
of Water Quality has reviewed revised the Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) submitted
by The City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP was
received on August 1, 2008, as a follow-up to the Division's earlier letter dated January 23,
2008.
IUP #
ISIU Name
0 CFR
0031
1 McIntyre Metals
33
The review indicates that the corrections suggested by the Division in item 1 of the previous
letter dated January 23, 2008, have been incorporated and thus with the observation below,
the IUP is adequate and the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0905 and .0916 and 40
CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met. Please follow-up to PERCS on the item below as soon as the data
is available.
1) Wastewater Pollutant Checklist: In all sections of the checklist except the metals section,
pollutants that are checked as absent at the facility do not provide any indication as to
whether the pollutants are present or absent in the discharge. We assume in fact the POCs
are absent in the discharge. If that's not the case please let us know promptly. For the
metals section, the application states "Baseline data will be submitted within 6 months".
Please address the following as needed:
a) 40 CFR 403.12(d) requires submittal of data confirming compliance with categorical
regulations within 90 days of start-up. The 4/Quarter self monitoring in the IUP will
ensure this deadline is met for all 40 CFR 433 parameters, except TTO. Please ensure
the SIU samples TTO and reports the results to the POTW within the 90 day deadline.
b) For the IUP limited non-433 parameters, the IUP required self monitoring will be
acceptable.
c) For the parameters in the metals section on the checklist that are not limited in the IUP,
please have the SIU complete the checklist for these parameters and submit a copy for
our files.
Nne
orthCarolina
Natimally
NC DWQ/PERCS 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o,enr.state.nc.us/Pretreat/inde.x.htrn1 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX (9t9) 807-6489 1-877-623-6748
An Equal Opportunity/Allirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Misty Corder
Page 2 of 2
08/22/08
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from Sig nificant/Categorical
Industrial Users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are
consistently met.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] [email:
[e-mail]] or Jeff Poupart, Unit Supervisor at [phone] [email:
jeff. poupart@ncmail. net].
Sincerely, c
"'
CoIke en H Sullins
nnh/tho�ille:wp.018
cc�Eentra s
onti Hassan, PERCS
Jennifer Carter, WS

Michael F. Easley, Governor
O�OF W A T �RQG
O Nt� \C
June 13, 2008
Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Enforcement Response Plan
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek (NPDES: NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
. Rit IVRD
N-C, Deot. of ENR
JUN 1.8 2000
Winston-Salem
Regional woe
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division of Water Quality
has reviewed the Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) for the City of Thomasville. This ERP was received by the
Division on March 15, 2008. We regret the delay in providing these review comments.
Overall, the review indicates the ERP revision to increase the maximum penalties to $25,000 itself is adequate.
However, the Division has discovered concerns with the Division's Model ERP, and your ERP includes some or all
of these issues. Please submit a revised ERP addressing the following concerns to the PERCS Unit by August 1,
2008. Also see the new 2008 Model ERP on the "Other Downloads" page of the PERCS web -site, published in
mid June 2008. We regret any inconvenience to the POTW as a result of the delay in our review of this ERP and
also in any deficiencies in our Model ERP.
1) 2008 Model ERP Updates: The Division has revised the Model ERP to address some problems in the previous
1993 Model, and your ERP includes some or all of these issues, including the following:
a) Revision: Remove all "Once in each 6-month period' references in ERP chart and the line "Alternatively,
the violations may be summarized over a period of time not to exceed 6 months" in paragraph 3 of
Section 5. Monthly NOVs are usually more effective in maintaining an effective Pretreatment Program.
b) Revision: The ERP specifies "Within 45 calendar days of the end of each quarter" in ERP chart for self -
monitoring violations. PERCS is concerned that this may result in NOVs being issued more than 30 days
after a report is due.
i) If a report for the Jan -Mar quarter is due on April 30, then your ERP wording means the NOV would
be issued by May 15, well within 30 days of the report due date.
ii) If on the other hand, the SIU samples in January, their report is presumably due by February 28, i.e.,
the last day of the month following the month in which the samples are collected. An NOV by May
15th seems too long a time.
The Model ERP wording may address these types of concerns. Please review this situation, including
your IUP reporting requirements, and advise PERCS as to your interpretation of your ERP and IUP
wording, including any needed ERP revisions.
c) Revision: Revise "...results in NPDES violations" to read "...results in NPDES or other State issued permit
or State General Statute violations" in all applicable sections, and make sure each category has this and
the "Endangerment" one. An example of other State issued permits would be a Non -Discharge permit
issued by the Division for land application of sludge. An example of a General Statue violation would be
a sewer overflow. These violations should be in the same class of severity as NPDES violations, i.e.,
distinguished from other violations that do not cause these types of environmental harm.
2) References to Local SUO Section: We noticed couple of incorrect references to your local SUO sections that
need be corrected. Civil Penalties and Criminal Violations should be referenced to 82-272 and 82-273(a)
respectively. one
NorthCarolina
Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
NC DWQ Internet: www.ncwaterqualitv.or5 Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
PERCS Unit Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/oeres/
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Response to this letter is required by August 1, 2008. Thank you for your continued support of the
Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone]
ext. 371 [email: [e-mail]] or Deborah Gore, Acting Supervisor, at ext 593 [email:
[e-mail]].
Sincerely,
-ti , �
'Coleen H. ullins
mh/thomasville.erp.02C
cc: Central Files
n, PE S
Jennifer Carter - W O

STATE UTILITY CONTRACTORS, INC.
P.O. BOX 5019 - MONROE, N.C. 28111-5019 [phone] FAX [phone]
CONTRACTOR'S 'MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT'
HAM 3Y CREEK - WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE AND EXPANSION
Town of Thomasville
Pease Commission No. 2002032.00
GENERAL CONTRACT DATE: June 11, 2008
WORK % COMPLETE: 99.39% as of 05-25-2008
LAST MONTH % COMPLETE: 98.60% as of 04-25-2008
WORK COMPLETED THROUGH 06-11-08
1.
SITEWORK - rough grading complete, placed valve boxes, completed
sidewalk repairs, initial seeding complete
2.
INTERCHANGE TANKS - complete
3.
INTERCHANGE BLOWERS - complete
4.
DIGESTOR - complete
5.
FLOCC. CLARIFIER - complete
6.
DRIVEWAY - alignment layout complete, awaiting decision on profile,
7.
PLANT SCADA - all RTU's on line, self -healing ring is tested,
7.
PUNCHLIST - in progress
WORK TO BE STARTED/COMPLETED NEXT 30 DAYS:
1.
SITEWORK - complete fine grading, complete seeding & stabilization
2.
SOLIDS MODULE - start-up TBD
2.
INTERCHANGE TANKS - start-up TBD
3.
INTERCHANGE BLOWERS - start-up TBD
4.
FLOCC. CLARIFIER - start-up TBD
5.
DIGESTOR - start-up TBD
6.
DRIVEWAY - complete paving
7.
PLANT SCADA - completion depends on Cannibal start-up date
8.
PROJECT WALKDOWN - site inspection upon completion of paving,
propose Tuesday 6-24-2008, complete punch list items
' If additional space is required, add lines and pages as necessary. Contractor shall submit this report to the
Designer and Expeditor 5 days before the monthly meeting.
\\Serversuc\plant\P-565 Hamby Creek WWTP\CONTRACTORS MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT\MPR\MPR 06-11-08.doe

UNRESOLVED ISSUES AND KEY DATES includes: FO's, CO's, RFI's, etc.):
Open Quotations:
-Rl..ace.....g- @ PiseFm $ 23,426 9_US -20-0-6ae,.l: e-d-
1.
Seut-hside influent $ 31 = 1 17 9007 ae„ l:..ea
Cover- Louvers @ Blower Bldg $ 2-,6ifi- 1-3-07 deelined
A d.l hhrealker for 114nit Hle..ae.. a- 8.8. 1.l.le- $873 12 27_07 deelined
Replace Hdles/Locks @ Lab/Opns Building $1,843 3-5-2007 accepted
Self -healing fiber optic ring $ 2,800 3-20-2007 accepted
Add Convenience outlets @ Cannibal Bldg. $1,965 3-12-08 accepted
Replace fuses @ Panel DPA $ 9,376 5-19-2008 accepted?
2.
Key Submittals:
N/A
3.
Status of O&M's: 98% Nix Purser owes final O&M Submittal,
preliminary has been submitted
Spare Parts Inventory Complete, excluding Siemens equipment. Spare
4.
parts for Cannibal equipment to be turned over as equipment start-up is
completed.
5.
Forecasted ship dates:
N/A
Plant Commissioning: Plant transfer on 3-11-2008, Cannibal System
6.
initial check-out complete ... start-up TBD Need to reschedule emergency
power test.
DESCRIPTION OF DELAY AND SCHEDULE RECOVERY MEASURES:
1. None noted to date 71
\\Serversuc\p1ant\P-565 Hamby Creek WWTP\CONTRACTORS MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT\MPR\MPR 06-11-08.doc

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
April 24, 2008
Mr. Kelly Craver
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
Subject: Pretreatment Annual Report Review
City of Thomasville WWTP (NC0024112)
Dear Mr. Craver:
The Pretreatment staff of the Division of Water Quality's Winston-Salem Regional Office has
reviewed the Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) covering January through December 2007. This
PAR was received on March 3, 2008. Our review indicates that the PAR is adequate and satisfies
the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0908(b) and the Comprehensive Guidance for North Carolina
Pretreatment Programs.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact me at [phone] ([e-mail]) or Monti Hassan at
[phone] ([e-mail]).
Sincerely,
Jenifer Carter
Environmental Specialist
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: PERCS Unit — Monti Hassan
WSRO Files
SWP — Central Files
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 585 Waughtown Street; Winston-Salem, NC 27107 Phone [phone]
Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 . Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Regional Pretreatment Annual Report (PAR) Review
Inc ded?
ADE UATE ?
ES
❑
NO ❑ NA
ES
❑
NO ❑ NA
PPS Form
VYES
❑
NO
aY
S
❑
NO
E�'YES
❑
NO
ES
❑
NO
IDSF
['YES
❑
NO
ES
❑
NO
Allocation Table
YES
❑
NO
YES
❑
NO
Waste Reduction Info
ES
❑
NO
ES
❑
NO
❑
YES
❑
NO NA
❑
YES
❑
NO NA
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
ES
❑
NO ❑ NA
S
❑
NO
ES
❑
NO
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
-
YES
❑
NO ❑ NA
/A
Regional Office:
POTW: 7hoykefSli, ale
NPDES Permit No. NCOO 244//,�;t
Report Period: / i /o 7 to jZ 3% o-
LYrull ❑ Modified
For modified programs evaluate shaded items only. A
Narrative is required for a modified program only if
there are SIUs in SNC.
i Tf Nn_ rhPrk rPrnmmPndatinn halnw-
1. Have at least 90% of SIU permits been issued within 180
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
days of expiration? See Allocation Table).
Assessment
2. Were at least 80% of SIUs inspected? (See PPS Form)
Yes ❑ No ❑ Not req'd
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
3. Has effective enforcement been taken against industries in
Ej Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
SNC, including those causing pass -through or interference? (See
Assessment
Narrative and SNCR Form
4. Does public notice cover all SIUs in SNC?
[' Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NOV
❑ QNCR
❑ NCP
❑ Civil Penalty
Assessment
Note: txceptions snouia oe expiainea in the comment section below:
Reviewed By:"I, Co tW Date:
Regional Pretreatment Annual Report Review
PAR review form 2006
Fill in Values from
PPS Form
(for PCS data entry)
* Alternatively, attach PPS page from PAR

Re: FW: Long Term Monitoring changes imap://cros.ncmai1.net:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3EI 1932?h...
Subject: Re: FW: Long Term Monitoring changes
From: Monti Hassan <Monti. Hassan@ncmail. net>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:42:10 -0400
To: "Conder, Misty" <[e-mail]>
CC: Deborah. [e-mail], Jenifer Carter <Jenifer. Carter@ncmail. net>
Misty, as we just discussed, because you are getting a whole new, different kind of WWTP, as opposed
to just adding more of the same type of units, PERCS agrees that stopping all LTMP monitoring at
WWTP locations seems the thing to do. We discussed maybe keeping up your quarterly effluent just to
keep an eye on things. We established. an August 1, 2008 due date for a new LTMP and a
Design/Literature HWA for the new WWTP. Then once the WWTP is out of start-up mode, including
getting the cannibal system up and running, your would do 12 months of monthly LTMP and submit a
site -specific HWA 3 months after that. We also discussed how to address your sludge in the
Design/Literature HWA by including recent sludge data that shows compliance with the 503 ceiling
standards, and discusses you plans for sludge disposal.
Have fun!
-Monti and Dana
Conder, Misty wrote:
Dear Deborah and Monti,
I haven't had a response back on this and May is rapidly approaching. We have made the Phase I
plant transfer and currently are expecting to bring the remainder of the plant processes on line in
late June or early July. Do you want us to sample only the influent and effluent along with our
normal WET testing for May and then make a determination for LTM monitoring after the final
processes are on line?
Thanks,
Misty Conder
From: Conder, Misty
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 2:52 PM
To: [e-mail]; '[e-mail]'
Subject: Long Term Monitoring changes
Dear Deborah and Monti,
As you know, Thomasville WWTP has been under construction for an upgrade for the past two
years. Construction is not yet complete, but we are soon to begin Phase I of our plant transfer to
the new processes. Currently this is scheduled to begin March 10, 2008. In doing this transfer, all
our old LTM sampling points will no longer be valid, and indeed, until the plant is completed, a
new headworks analysis cannot be started because internally plant processes will continue to
change. However, we need to develop a new plan and make some determinations for the new
sampling points and determine exactly what interim monitoring we need to do, if any. We just
1 of 4/16/2008 2:51 PM

Re: FW: Long Term Monitoring changes
imap://cros.ncmai l.net:993/fetch%3 EU ID%3 E/INBOX%3 E 11932?h...
completed our February testing. However, we will be switched to the new process (Phase I only)
by the time May comes around and we need to sample again. I had asked Jenifer Carter what
would be the best course of action and she directed me to you. I'd like to meet with you so that you
can see the plant processes and layout and see if we can develop a new plan. Please let me know
how we need to proceed.
Thanks,
Misty Conder
Plant Superintendent
Hamby Creek WWTP
PO Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Phone: [phone]
IMPORTANT NOTICE
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of
the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error,
please notify your system manager or email: metcalfirci.thomasville.nc.us for instructions.
Please note that any views or opinions expressed in this email are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Thomasville City Government. This email and any
file attached to it have been scanned for viruses by Norton Corporate Version 10.1 However,
the recipient is strongly urged to make sure this email and attachments has also been scanned
at the recipient's location as well. The City of Thomasville accepts no responsibility or liabilty
for any damages or costs caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
City of Thomasville MIS Department
10 Salem Street, Thomasville, NC 27360 USA www.ci.thomasville.nc.us
Monti Hassan
Environmental Engineer
NC Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Voice 919-733-5083 EXT. 371
Fax [phone]
2 of 2 4/16/2008 2:51 PM

Ve�
Michael F. Easley. Gover ,
\oF W A T F9QG
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Dear Mr. Craver:
William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
April 24, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins. Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVED-
N.C. Dept, of ENR
APR 2 8 2008
Winston-Salem
Regional office
SUBJECT: Interim Inspection
Thomasville, Davidson County
Hamby Creek WWTP
Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
The Construction Inspection Group (CIG) of the Construction Grants and Loans Section
performed an interim inspection for the state and federally funded portion of subject project on
April 9, 2008. The inspection was conducted in conjunction with the monthly progress meeting
regularly scheduled for the second Wednesday each month at 1:30 p.m. at the project site. The
next progress meeting is scheduled for May 9. Please note that our inspection report covers loan
administration and construction.
You should review this report; take actions as indicated and then file for your records. If
you have any questions please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail
[e-mail].
S' erely, /
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Unit
r 11
cc: Keith Garbrick, PE, Pease Associates
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Barbara Sifford, Mooresville Regional Office
SRF
CIG — Mark Hubbard, PE, Jennifer Kinghorn
FASHAREtProject Management Bran&Group - Construction
Construction Grants and Loans Section One
1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NofthCarohna
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nccgl.net Naturalip, An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
INSPECTION REPORT
LOAN ADMINSTRATION CS370619-02
SRF LOAN — The original loan amount is $27,000,000.
Loan interest payment rate is 2.305 % on a 20-year term.
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS SRF
Date of Last Disbursement /Amount April 18, 2008 / $ 525,097
Total Disbursed $ 25,650,000 ( 95 % of SRF Loan Funds )
Page 2 of 5
Interim Inspection
April 9, 2008
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT — State Utility Contractors, Inc. (SU)
4417 Old Charlotte Hwy; PO Box 5019 Monroe, NC 28111-5019
tele: 704 289-6400 FAX [phone]
Superintendent: Wade Woodring replaced Jimmy Coore as Jimmy was starting another
project.
Contract time 1152 calendar days, unchanged
Original & Current Completion Date Friday April 17, 2009
Completion of project mid May is now anticipated.
Actual completion — 98 + %
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Description of work,: project consists of constructing the following modifications, upgrades
and enlargement to the existing 4.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant for new permitted
capacity of 6.0 MGD:
o New filter screen
o New solids classifier grit removal
o Two new parallel oxidation ditches with biological nutrient removal
o Two new final clarifiers
o Four new effluent filters
o Parallel UV disinfection systems
o New effluent metering station
o New mechanical static post aeration and modify 1 existing AB for interim rearation (old #6)
o Cannibal solids separation system and building with 2 existing aeration tanks (nos. 1 & 2)
modified to perform as interchange tanks
o RAS pump station with VFDs
o Flocculator clarifier (converted from existing clarifier #1)
o New submersible return sludge pumping station
o Addition of mixer and decanter to existing digester no. 1
o New emergency power generators (2)
o Upgraded chemical storage and feed facilities
o Addition to laboratory and administration building, with new laboratory
o New controls, instrumentation and SCADA
o 2 plant water reuse pump and
o associated site work, electrical piping and appurtenances

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
Page 3 of 5
Interim Inspection
April 9, 2008
No change orders since CO#4 was approved July 13, 2007. A final CO#5 will be
prepared, though there is no money left in contingency, CG&L requests a copy of that
Change order #5.
RFPs Status
None outstanding
RFIs Status
None outstanding
SUBMITTALS
None outstanding
Work by State Utility Contractors observed or performed since last interim inspection of
March 12:
1. Completed all plant pipe tie-ins, some are lacking backfilling
2. Demolished equipment in interchange tank and cored holes (2) through concrete
3. Cored holes through concrete at digester
4. Demolished equipment in 3 existing clarifiers and began preparations for converting
one clarifier to flocculating tank for Cannibal system
5. Completed installation of air pipe and diffusers in Interchange tank
6. Completed installation of mixer in digester
7. Conducted start-up of drum screen at the Cannibal building, it is being operated in
"Manual" mode and ORC noted it works very well
8. Starr Electric is running connections to blowers at interchange tank and other plant
wiring and conduit
9. For the record, wastewater was diverted into the new oxidation ditch train #2 on Wed.
March 12 around 4:00 a.m. The oxidation ditch train #1 is dormant and filled with
water.
10. Continued on grading and site work
11. Continuing with set up of SCADA and controls
State Utility's Work scheduled for next 30 days :
1. Complete site storm drainage, grading, and then do layout & grade drive
2. Continue with set up of SCADA and controls
3. Set sluice gates, complete decanters, and install mixers and field instruments at
interchange tanks
4. Starr Electric will continue with electrical installation related to Cannibal system and
SU stated interchange tank would be available to Starr Electric on or before April 25
5. SU stated flocculating clarifier will be available to Starr Electric on or before May 9
6. Set equipment in flocculating clarifier
7. It should be noted that the interchange tank and the flocculating clarifier must be done
in order to finish the process startup
8. Continue de -mob

City of Thomasville Page 4 of 5
Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 April 9, 2008
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
CONSTRUCTION SITE
Weather since last inspection has included one substantial rain event. Site was in
good shape however.
Storage/Protection — materials stored satisfactorily? YES
ENGINEERINGANSPECTION:
o Resident Inspector On -Site? Yes
o Inspector's records, reports, shop drawings, files, etc., records were reviewed
o Testing reports on concrete strength and soils reviewed? None new.
o As -Built (Record Drawings) being kept up to date? YES, most changes have
now been annotated.
o Comments or Recommendations: none
CONTRACTOR (S)
o N.C. OSHA / Labor Laws Posted? YES
o Up to date Construction Schedule (Bar Graph, CPM) posted? YES
o Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed ? YES
o Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) according
to Contractor? None
If it appears construction will not be completed on time, what additional time may
be needed for completion? Contractor commissioned WWTP in mid March
2008 and anticipating starting up the Cannibal system now in April or May.
PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Payment Milestone Discussed? NO. Recently the Draft O&M Manual was
reviewed and revisions/comments from the Engineer to CG&L are pending.
2. Does work completed appear acceptable for reimbursement? YES
GENERAL CONCERNS / RECOMMENDATIONS / ACTION ITEMS
UPDATES on Comments and Concerns noted in previous progress meetings (for reference) are italicized.
A. SU provided Owner with narrative on Seimans (Cannibal system manufacturer) needs
for ORC to address in preparation of startup and for coordination with EIMCO the
oxidation ditch manufacturer.
B. A high influent flow was received due to 1.5+ inch rain event week of April 11. It was
noted the bar screen did not function properly.
C. Heyward, the bar screen rep., will be returning to trouble shoot bar screen controls
problems.
D. Engineer provided ORC the parameters for operating post aeration tank to reduce the
significant foaming problem encountered since startup.
E. Cannibal / Seimans will be on site the end of May for startup, training, (3 weeks).
F. CG&L asked if there will be a simulation exercise to verify efficacy of the SCADA and
controls system. Specifically, will failures, conditions and alarms be simulated to
validate they do function properly?
G. CG&L advised Engineer, Owner and Contractor to begin preparations for project
closeout. A copy of the closeout check list is attached. Warranties, spare parts,
equipment checkout reports should all be in place prior to project closeout.

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
Page 5 of 5
Interim Inspection
April 9, 2008
H. CG&L previously reminded Engineer that CG&L will be looking for manufacturer's
certifications prior to project closeout.
I. Mar. Update: yes, SU and Engineer are still working on this. CG&L asked, has there
or will there be, an overall list of warranties prepared with specific dates for each
process or piece of equipment or part of the work? Answer yes.
PROGRESS MEETING / PARTICPANTS ( 9 )
Ll
❑
Misty Conder
Thomasville, ORC
❑
Keith Garbrick
Pease & Assocs., Engineer
704 376-6423
[e-mail]
704 201-3788 Cell
❑
Bobby Jordan
Pease & Assocs., Constr Obsv.
704 201-5041 Cell
❑
Wade Woodring
State Utitilty, Proj. Mgr.
❑
Roger Kinzer
Starr Electric, Proj. Mgr.
336 275-0241
❑
Gerald Horton, P.E.
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6219
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday May 14, 2008

CLOSEOUT CHECKLIST for SRF (CS370... Projects)
OWNER / NAME:
DESCRIPTION:
PROJECT NO.:
DATE:
CONTRACTOR(s): ENGINEER:
ENGINEER'S RESPONSIBILITIES:
❑ 1. Confirm approved Plans and Specifications are in Owners possession
❑ 2. Confirm As-Built/Record Drawings (certified/sealed) provided to Owner
❑ 3. Submit Engineer's Certification
❑ 4. For Final CG&L inspection make available at job site all test reports and records for pipe/pressure tests,
tanks, concrete, soils reports/results, equipment checkouts and other similar records.
❑ 5. For Final CG&L inspection make available at job site the Inspector's Daily Logs
❑ 6. Engineer shall confirm approved shop drawings and submittals have been provided to Owner
❑ 7. Submit and obtain approval of Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manuals, if required (SRF Only).
O&Ms must be submitted and approved prior to 90% disbursement
❑ 8. Confirm Warranty Information has been provided to Owner and provide list to CG&L if requested
❑ 9. Confirm all specified spare parts and an inventory list have been provided to Owner
❑ 10. Provide list of all specified Training, that training sessions were done - by whom, when, what subject
❑ 11. Release/Approval from NC -DOT and/or Rail Roads (if Applicable)
FOR EACH CONTRACT:
❑ 12. Release of Liens & Consent of Surety to final payment
❑ 13. Final Sales Tax Report
❑ 14. Final adjusting Change Order (must match Final Reimbursement Request)
OWNER (Prepare, sign, submit or confirm, as applicable, the following):
❑ 15. Owners Certification of Completion, acceptance of the completed project
❑ 16. Initiation of Operation Letter or Form, (SRF Only). Owner's Performance Certification is due one year
from this date.
❑ 17. Final Reimbursement Request and supporting invoices. All costs, including engineering amendments
must be approved by CG&L.
❑ 18. Clear Site/Easement Certification (a) by Owner & (b) by Owner's Counsel
Done during design & prior to construction, IF easements are added or changed this must be redone
❑ 19. Miscellaneous items; clean up, punch list, removal of erosion control measures, stored materials and
debris
❑ 20. STAG project closeout forms are in lieu of items 15, 16 and 17 and can be found at www.nccgl.net.
These include the final MBE/WBE report, FSR, Final Reimbursement Request form, and Lobbying
Certification.
Item numbers that must be submitted or confirmed to Construction Grants & Loans:
CG&L Inspector: 3, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18
Valerie Lancaster: 3, 13, 15, 17
Steve Tsadwa (SRF) or Don Evans (E-SRF, E-SRG, other State & STAG): 3, 7, 15, 16, 18, 20
(919)-733-6900; FAX [phone] Internet: www.nccgl.net
Division of Water Quality, Construction Grants & Loans Section
1633 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1633

Michael F. Easley. Governor
William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environtnent and Natural Resources
March 24, 2008
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Coleen H. Sullitts, Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEI EV D
N.C. Debt. of ENR
MAR 2 6 2008
Wmston.Salem
Re_rional pfr,ce
SUBJECT: Interim Inspection
Thomasville, Davidson County
Hamby Creek WWTP
Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
Dear Mr. Craver:
The Construction Inspection Group (CIG) of the Construction Grants and Loans Section
performed an interim inspection for the state and federally funded portion of subject project on
March 12, 2008. The inspection was conducted in conjunction with the monthly progress meeting
regularly scheduled for the second Wednesday each month at 1:30 p.m. at the project site. The
next progress meeting is scheduled for April 9. Please note that our inspection report covers loan
administration and construction.
You should review this report; take actions as indicated and then file for your records. If
you have any questions please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail
[e-mail].
Si erely,
�_.
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Unit
cc: Keith Garbrick, PE, Pease Associates
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Barbara Sifford, Mooresville Regional Office
SRF
CIG — Mark Hubbard, PE, Jennifer Kinghorn
Construction Grants and Loans Section One
1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NofthCarohna
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nccgl.net Aaturally
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/100,6 Post Consumer Paper

City of Thomasville Page 2 of 5
0 Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 March 12, 2008
INSPECTION REPORT
LOAN ADMINSTRATION CS370619-02
SRF LOAN — The original loan amount is $27,000,000.
Loan interest payment rate is 2.305 % on a 20-year term.
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS SRF
Date of Last Disbursement /Amount Mar. 14, 2008 / $ 168,489
Total Disbursed $ 25,124,903 ( 93 % of SRF Loan Funds ), CG&L can pay up to 95%,
until outstanding O&M manual issues are settled.
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT — State Utility Contractors, Inc. (SU)
4417 Old Charlotte Hwy; PO Box 5019 Monroe, NC 28111-5019
tele: 704 289-6400 FAX [phone]
Superintendent: Wade Woodring replacing Jimmy Coore
It should be noted that this is Jimmy Coore's last progress meeting as he will be leaving
to begin work in Beaufort, NC. Mr. Coore did a very commendable job. Wade
Woodring will provide continuity in supervising the project through completion.
Contract time 1152 calendar days, unchanged
Original & Current Completion Date Friday April 17, 2009
Completion of project mid May is now anticipated.
Actual completion (days remaining) — 97 + %
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Description of work,: project consists of constructing the following modifications, upgrades
and enlargement to the existing 4.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant for new permitted
capacity of 6.0 MGD:
o New filter screen
o New solids classifier grit removal
o Two new parallel oxidation ditches with biological nutrient removal
o Two new final clarifiers
o Four new effluent filters
o Parallel UV disinfection systems
o New effluent metering station
o New mechanical static post aeration and modify 1 existing AB for interim rearation (old #6)
o Cannibal solids separation system and building with 2 existing aeration tanks (nos. 1 & 2)
modified to perform as interchange tanks
o RAS pump station with VFDs
o Flocculator clarifier (converted from existing clarifier #1)
o New submersible return sludge pumping station
o Addition of mixer and decanter to existing digester no. 1
o New emergency power generators (2)
o Upgraded chemical storage and feed facilities
o Addition to laboratory and administration building, with new laboratory
o New controls, instrumentation and SCADA
0 2 plant water reuse pump and
o associated site work, electrical piping and appurtenances

S City of Thomasville Page 3 of 5
« Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 March 12, 2008
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
No change orders since CO#4 was approved July 13, 2007.
RFPs Status
None outstanding
RFIs Status
None outstanding
SUBMITTALS
None outstanding
Work by State Utility Contractors observed or performed since last interim inspection of
February 13:
1. Wastewater was diverted into the new oxidation ditch train #2 on Wed. March 12 by
4:00 a.m. The oxidation ditch train #1 is dormant and filled with water. Regional
DWQ personnel were notified and invited to attend but did not show
2. Most of Cannibal system is ready for operation but the process manufacturer,
Siemens, needs the EIMCO oxidation ditch system to be operational bout 45 days
before starting the Cannibal system
3. Influent screen, grit collector, both clarifiers, re -aeration basin, ultraviolet disinfection
units (4), Hydrotech disc filters (4) and post aerator were placed in service. Having
control problems with disc filter unit #1
4. Continued on grading and site work
5. Installed insulation and heat tracing on all exterior water and chemical pipes
6. Demolished interior pipe in digester building
7. Completed touch up painting around site
8. Installed 12" line from interchange tank to PS, line from WAS PS to digester line and
4" CISP from PS to lab/Op Bldg drain
9. Continuing with set up of SCADA and controls
10.Owner repaired re -circulation pump
State Utility's Work scheduled for next 30 days
1. Continue site grading
2. Continue with set up of SCADA and controls
3. Continue testing pipe and structures
4. Test field instrumentation
5. Repair disc filter #1
6. Startup the Siemens drum screen on or about March 20, this is part of the Cannibal
system
7. Work on installation of digester decant line to degrit facility
8. Continue de -mob
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
CONSTRUCTION SITE
Weather since last inspection has included one substantial rain event. Site was in
good shape however.
Storage/Protection — materials stored satisfactorily? YES

City of Thomasville Page 4 of 5
' Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 March 12, 2008
ENGINEERINGANSPECTION:
o Resident Inspector On -Site? Yes
o Inspector's records, reports, shop drawings, files, etc., records were reviewed
o Testing reports on concrete strength and soils reviewed? None new.
o As -Built (Record Drawings) being kept up to date? YES, Supt. Jimmy Coore
has kept up with record drawings.
o Comments or Recommendations: none
CONTRACTOR (S)
o N.C. OSHA / Labor Laws Posted? YES
o Up to date Construction Schedule (Bar Graph, CPM) posted? YES
o Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed ? YES
o Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) according
to Contractor? None
If it appears construction will not be completed on time, what additional time may
be needed for completion? Contractor commissioned WWTP in mid March
2008 and anticipating starting up the Cannibal system now in April or May.
PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Payment Milestone Discussed? NO. Recently the Draft O&M Manual was
reviewed and revisions/comments from the Engineer to CG&L are pending.
2. Does work completed appear acceptable for reimbursement? YES
GENERAL CONCERNS / RECOMMENDATIONS / ACTION ITEMS
UPDATES on Comments and Concerns noted in previous progress meetings (for reference) are italicized.
A. Superintendent Jimmy Coore is moving onto another job. He did a commendable job
on the project and it should be noted there were no serious injuries.
B. ORC, Misty Conder concerned to see if event logs and trending on the SCADA is done
and functional. There is still much checking to do on the controls system and these
concerns may be 2 to 3 weeks premature.
C. Larry Uti with Nix Persor Co. stated they are about 95% done with the SCADA,
excluding that related to the Cannibal system.
D. Owner decided to do the louver covers at the Blower Building.
E. Cannibal reps can be scheduled — 30 days after startup of March 11.
F. SCADA system personnel (Nix Perser) wants all wiring completed before activating
the SCADA so as not to damage the RTUs.
G. Mar. UPDATE: Intent is to run new plant facilities 30 days and then have Cannibal
system reps in April 14 for training and startup of that process. Compatibility of the
EfN4CO AB process and Cannibal system were discussed. Engineer is to research the
matter so as to determine optimum conditions/time/phasing in order to bring the
Cannibal system online with the AB process as efficiently as possible. Further
discussion on this is needed. ORC's input is critical.
H. CG&L previously reminded Engineer that CG&L will be looking for manufacturer's
certifications prior to project closeout.
I. Previously - SU and Engineer are working on a spare parts list and turnover
documentation.

City of Thomasville Page 5 of 5
Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 March 12, 2008
J. Mar. Update: yes, SU and Engineer are still working on this. CG&L asked, has there
or will there be, an overall list of warranties prepared with specific dates for each
process or piece of equipment or part of the work? Answer yes.
PROGRESS MEETING / PARTICPANTS ( 9 )
❑ Morgan Huffman Thomasville, Utilities Director, formerly ORC
❑ Misty Conder
Thomasville, ORC
❑ Keith Garbrick
Pease & Assocs., Engineer
704 376-6423
[e-mail]
704 201-3788 Cell
❑ Bobby Jordan
Pease & Assocs., Constr Obsv.
704 201-5041 Cell
❑ Wade Woodring
State Utitilty, Proj. Mgr.
❑ Jimmy Coore
State Utility Contrs, Inc., Supt.
❑ Roger Kinzer
Starr Electric, Proj. Mgr.
336 275-0241
❑ Larry Uti
Nix Persor Assocs.
❑ Gerald Horton, P.E.
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6219
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday April 9, 2008

CITY OF THOMASVILLE
North
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Mr. Steve W Tedder
NCDWQ
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
Subject: WTP Alum Sludge Lagoon
City of Thomasville WTP
NPIDES Pert(14 Nu. NCOOSS200
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Tedder:
RECEIVED
N.C, Dept. of E�""
Winston- ';
INCORPORATED 1857
Regional Ci".cc
1 /�
19 March 2008f'X
cx�f
0 �'
In response to your letter received 25 February 2008, the City of Thomasville has investigated four
options regarding the future of the subject lagoon.
1) Initiate a long-term program for sludge reduction management at the lagoon, which would bring
the level down an average of two feet per year until the lagoon was completely empty. Per your
suggestion, at that time the lagoon would be divided into two parallel lagoons with some re -
piping involved of the influent and effluent valves, such that one lagoon could be used while the
other was dried allowed to dry and be cleaned out. While it was not mentioned we feel certain
that lining of the lagoon system would be required at the time of retrofit and re -piping. We feel
that this option is cost prohibitive.
2) Initiate a long-term program for sludge reduction management at the lagoon, which would bring
the level down an average of two feet per year until the lagoon was at a level at which sludge
removal could be rariurpd to maintain a mnrp or Ipss conct?nt slodpre love.l in the lagoon. Again,
this option appears cost prohibitive based upon the pricing wo have received.
3) Contract land application of the alum sludge. Again, with our limited funds, this option appears
cost prohibitive.
Immediately cease discharge of alum sludge to the lagoon system, allow the lagoon solids to
slowly settle and decant as much as possible, clean out the lagoon over an extended period of
time, and shut it down. New alum sludge produced at the WTP would be sent directly to the
WWTP via an existing pump station and sanitary sewer connection.
City Hall • OTO Salem Street • P.O. Box 368 • Thomasville, N.C. 27361-0368
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]

CITY OF THOMASVILLE
North Carolina
UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
INCORPORAT 185�
The city has chosen option number 4 as it is the most cost effective and will provide the most
immediate relief to the Alum Lagoon. On 28 February 2008 the City began pumping the alum
sludge to the WWTP and allowing the alum lagoon to settle and decant as much as possible.
The City's intent is to ascertain what impact if any, whether negative or positive, the alum
sludge has upon the WWTP operation and proceed from that point. Ultimate intent is to close
55�--er he alum lagoon for good after cleaning it out over a number of years. In the mean time, Misty
Conder, ORC, has spoken with DWQ staff and will continue with testing of discharged waters in
the months that a discharge actually occurs. DMRs will be filed as usual until such time as the
lagoon can be closed and the NPDES permit rescinded.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 336-475-4220.
Sincerely,
Mor...gan Huffma4
Public Services Director
City of Thomasville
Cc: Misty Conder, Alum Lagoon ORC
Randy Hammitt, WTP ORC
Kelly Craver, City Manager
City Hall • 10 Salem Street • P.O! Box 368 • Thomasville, N.C. 27361-0368
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]

o�oF wATP Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
C0 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H Sullins, Director
RECEILEi) Division of Water Quality
N.C. Deot. of ENR
February 22, 2008
Misty Conder FEB 2 5 2008
Laboratory Supervisor Winston -sale -
City of Thomasville RQs'°
PO BOX 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP)
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek (NPDES: NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
The Pretreatment, Emergency Response, and Collection Systems (PERCS) Unit of the Division
of Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Permit (IUP) submitted by The City of
Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial User (SIU). The IUP was received by the
Division on February 15, 2008.
IUP # ISIU Name 40 CFR Part
0008 1 Brass Craft - Thomasville 433
The review indicates that with the observation below, the IUP is adequate and the minimum
requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0905 and .0916 and 40 CFR 403.8(f)(1)(iii) are met.
Please update the followings next time the permit is modified or renewed.
1. IUP Part I Section B, IUP History: We notice the last entry in the IUP History table is
incorrect. It should read February 12, 2008.
2. IUP Part I. Section F:
a.) Flow Frequency: This parameter must be monitored by the POTW at least
"every sample" and sample collection method should be Metered.
b.) Oil & Grease: This parameter must be monitored by the Industry as well as the
POTW at a frequency of at least 1/6 months per 15A NCAC 2H .0908(d).
c.) TTO: Review Will Plateit Example IUP — Limits page on PERCS website. Add
Annually* in the POTW monitoring frequency.
3. Wastewater Pollutant Checklist: We notice in the permit application that for pollutants that
are checked as absent at the facility do not provide any indication as to whether the
pollutants are present or absent in the discharge. We assume in fact the POCs are absent
in the discharge. Please insure all future permit applications have this wastewater Pollutant
checklist section filled out completely and any POCs indicated to be present at the facility or
in the discharge are addressed.
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from Significant/Categorical
Industrial Users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are
consistently met.
NorthCarolina
Aalurally
NC DWQ/PERCS 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.ne.us/Pretreat/index.html 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Misty Conder
Page 2 of 2
02/22/08
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] ext.371 [email:
[e-mail]] or Deborah Gore, Acting Unit Supervisor at ext. 593 [email:
deborah.gore@ncmail. net].
Sincerely,
) tc�4���
14, Coleen H Sullins
mh/thomasville.iup.017
cc: Central Files
Monti Hassan, PERCS
Jenifer Carter - WSRO

e �0 W ATF,�Q
�O v
>
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
P.O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27360
SUBJECT: Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Thomasville
NPDES Permit #NC0024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Craver,
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
February 20, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
A Pretreatment Compliance Inspection was performed on February 7, 2008 by Jenifer Carter of the Winston-Salem
Regional office. Ms. Misty Conder was present for the inspection. The purpose of this inspection was to determine
the effectiveness of the pretreatment program and included a review of files, POTW plant performance, industry
monitoring data, adherence to the enforcement response plan (ERP) and an industry inspection.
Background
The City currently has seven (7) significant industrial users (SIUs), four (4) of which fall under categorical
standards.
There was one SIU in significant noncompliance (SNC) for reporting (Stroupe Mirror Company) and one SIU in
SNC for limits violations (Unilin Flooring) during the last semi-annual period in 2007.
Ms. Conder has been promoted to Plant Superintendent, and the City will be hiring a new Pretreatment Coordinator
in the near future. It will be important for new pretreatment staff to be allowed sufficient time and resources for
training, completion of routine activities, as well as additional sampling or investigative activities as needed. We
look forward to working with any new staff that is hired.
POTW Interview
There were numerous NPDES Permit limits violations, most of which are not pretreatment related, but rather due to
an ongoing major upgrade to the plant. Nickel limit violations seemed to have ceased, and sludge ceiling
concentrations of nickel are no longer being exceeded.
Pretreatment Program Elements Review
The Long -Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) and The Headworks Analysis (HWA) were approved, with new due
dates given. However, due to ongoing upgrades, which are nearing completion, Long-term monitoring will have to
be revised, and a new HWA created to account for changes at the plant. Please contact Monti Hassan or Dana
Folley of the PERCS unit for guidance on how and when to proceed with changes to the LTMP and HWA.
The Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) was approved and is satisfactory. The next IWS is due this year, on
December 1, 2008.
A draft of Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO) updates was approved by PERCS on June 5, 2007. If you have not
already done so, please submit proof of City Approval/Adoption of the changes to PERCS.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 585 Waughtown Street; Winston-Salem, NC 27107 Phone [phone]
Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/1 0% Post Consumer Paper

A revised Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) was submitted along with the draft SUO, but has not been reviewed.
Please contact PERCS immediately to have the new, in -effect, ERP reviewed for approval.
Industrial User Permit (IUP) File Review
A file review was performed on Unilin Flooring (#0030)). Files were found to be in good order, and compliance
judgment correctly performed.
Industry Inspection
Ms. Conder performed an inspection at Unilin Flooring. Jennifer Teague, Unilin's Environmental, Safety & Health
Coordinator was present for the inspection. The purpose of the inspection was to investigate Total Suspended
Solids violations at the facility. Settling tank capacity issues and possible solutions were discussed. Ms. Conder
and Ms. Teague have been and will continue to work together to find a permanent fix.
Please refer to the enclosed inspection report for more detailed information. The City of Thomasville's pretreatment
program is very good and Ms. Conder should be commended for her efforts. She learned all aspects of the
pretreatment program very quickly and has proven to be an asset to the City, as well as local Industry. We're sure
she will continue to be an asset in her new position as well. Should you have any questions, please contact Monti
Hassan in Raleigh at [phone] ext. 371, or Jenifer Carter at [phone].
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder
Surface Water Regional Supervisor
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Division of Water Quality
cc: WSRO Files
SWP Central Files
Monti Hassan — PERCS Unit

' NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)]
1. Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Thomasville
2. Control Authority Representative(s): Misty Conder
3. Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator/ Lab Supervisor, and new Plant Superintendent
4. Last Inspection Date: 01 /29 /07 Inspection Type: ❑ PCI ® Audit
5. Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection or Program Info Sheet(s)? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Order Type, Number, Parameters: Are Milestone Dates Being Met? ❑ Yes ❑ No
PCS CODING
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector
n N C 0 0 2 4 1 1 21021077081[P] S❑
Fac. Type
El
(FACC)
(DTIA) (TYPI (INSP)
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)? 7
SIUS
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users CIUs)?
4
CIUS
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0 11
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled B POTW in the Last Calendar Year?
0
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10
0
NOIN
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP
0
NOCM
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi -Annual Periods Total Number of SIUs in SNC
2
PSNC
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
MSNC
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations DuringEither of the Last 2 Semi -Annual Periods
1
SNPS
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
0
Semi-annual Periods
POTW INTERVIEW
17.
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any POTW Permit Limits Violations?
® Yes ❑ No
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
TNTC: addressed previously
duringMonthlyEnL Pro rare
18.
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial
® Yes El No
Discharge (Interference, Pass -Through, Blockage, Citizens' Complaints, Increased
see Industrial Inspection
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
Comments
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
19.
Which Industries have been in SNC during either of the Last 2 Semi- SNC for Limits: Unilin — BOD & TSS
Annual Periods? Have any Industries in SNC (During Either of the Last SNC for Reporting: Stroupe Mirror Co.
2 Semi -Annual Periods) Not Been Published for Public Notice? Not Published:
To be published soon
(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
20.
Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs on an
Order, Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division?
N/A
21.
Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which
❑ Yes ® No
Ones?
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22. Is the LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? ® Yes El No
23. Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? ® Yes ❑ No
24. Is the LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No Is the Table Adequate? ® Yes ❑ No
25. All LTMP/STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? ® YES ❑ NO DWQ Inspector, please verify!
26. If NO to 23 - 26, list violations
27. Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to the LTMP/ STMP? El Yes ® No
If yes, which ones? Eliminated: Added: Aluminum was added due to new Cannibal System
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page I

28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMENTS REVIEW - Please review POTW files, verify POTW has copy of Program Element in
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter and dates consistent with Pro ram Info•
Program Element
Last Approval
Date In file
Date Next Due, If Applicable
Headworks Analysis (HWA)
02/16/2006
® Yes ❑ No
0Z4V2014 When upgrades com lete*
Industrial Waste Survey IWS
01/30/2004
® Yes ❑ No
12/01/2008
Sewer Use Ordinance SUO
06/05/2007 DRAFT
® Yes ❑ No
Confirm City Approval submission to PERCS
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
08/17/1994
® Yes ❑ No
New ERP submitted with SUO
updates, but not reviewed. Contact
PERCS
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
02/10/2006
®Yes ❑ No
will need to be revised due to upgrades
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT IUP FILE REVIEW 3 IUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION
29. User Name
1. Unilin Flooring 2.
IF 3.
30. IUP Number
0030
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?
® Yes ❑ No
11 ❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ❑ No
32. Permit Expiration Date
06/30/12
1
/ /
33. Categorical Standard Applied I.E. 40 CFR, Etc. Or N/A
N/A
F—�
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
®Yes ® No
Yes ❑ No
F
❑Yes ❑ No
to Permit Issue Date?
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
I ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
a. ❑Yes ®No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. If No, is One Needed? See Inspection Form from POTW)
b. ❑Yes ®No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
b. ❑Yes ❑No
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certifiers, Does File Contain a Toxic
7esoNoZN/A
❑Yes.❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Organic Management Plan TOMP ?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
a. ®Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
a. ❑Yes ❑No
b. All Issues Resolved?
b.❑Yes❑No®N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
39. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
its Sampling as Required b IUP, includingflow?
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain -Of -Custodies?
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
41. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?
41b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑NIA
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
on time?
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
file includeprocess/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Limits Non -Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
❑Yes❑No®N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
All Re ortin Non-Com liance from SIU Sampling?
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self-
Monitoring Violations?
a.®Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
a.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
b.®Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
b.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
of SILT limit violations in the POTW's sampling of the SIU?
c.®Yes❑No❑N/A
c.❑Yes❑NopN/A
c.❑Yes❑No❑N/A
45. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
® Yes ❑ No IF
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
46. During the Most Recent Semi -Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
®Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
as Specified in the POTWs ERP NOVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
11
47. Does the File Contain Penaltv Assessment Notices?
®Yes❑NopN/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
48. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection? was not due yet
❑Yes❑NoON/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
❑Yes❑No❑N/A
49. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
a. ❑Yes ®No
a. ❑Yes ❑No 1Fb
[:]Yes❑No
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?
b. ❑Yes ®No
b. []Yes❑No
❑Yes []No
50. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Yes ❑ No
Requested Information For You?
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2

FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
35. The inspection form could not be located, however proof that it was conducted was found in a follow-up letter in the files.
Overall, files were found to be in good order and compliance judgment to performed correctly.
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code Main Program Permit Number MM/DD/YY Inspec.Type Inspector Fac. Type
❑ N c o 0 2 4 1 I 2 02 07 08 ❑ 0 2❑
(DTIA) (TYPI) (INSP) (FACC)
1. Industry Inspected: Unilin Flooring
2. Industry Address: 550 Cloniger Drive; Thomasville, NC 27360
3. Type of Industry/Product: Laminate Flooring
4. Industry Contact: Jennifer Teague Title: Environmental, Safety & Health Coordinator
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? ® Yes ❑ No
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
Comments:
A. Initial Interview ® Yes ❑ No
B. Plant Tour ® Yes ❑ No
C. Pretreatment Tour ® Yes ❑ No Settling Tank
D. Sampling Review ® Yes ❑ No
E. Exit Interview ® Yes ❑ No
Industrial Inspection Comments:
Waste sludge flows to a baffled (one baffle) settling tank, but does not have enough retention time between doses. This has caused
POTW permit limits violations. The baffled tank is dosed at irregular intervals, when there is a product/process change. After
sludge is allowed to settle on the first side of the baffle, the addition of new batches causes re -mixing. If/when capacity is reached,
this remixing causes unsettled sludge to pour over the baffle into the second side, where it is pumped manually from close to the
bottom of the tank to the POTW.
Ms. Conder suggested that they try using a sump pump to pump supernatant, between batches, from one side to the other, to allow
for more capacity, and to prevent disturbing what has already settled. Plant staff agreed to try this, but if there is not enough time
between batches to allow for settling, this may prove to be unsuccessful, and other solutions will need to be discussed.
Note: the addition of one or two manufacturing lines is being discussed. If this happens, process changes will occur less frequently,
allowing more time for settling in between dosing, though each dose could be larger. The current tank may or may not be adequate
under such conditions; so alternative disposal/treatment methods should be discussed prior to such changes.
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments: Pretreatment files well -organized. Misty Conder has been promoted recently, and there will be a new pretreatment
coordinator soon. Make sure that the new Pretreatment Coordinator is provided sufficient time and resources for training,
completion of routine activities, as well as additional sampling or investigations as the need arises.
Requirements: *0.) Contact PERCS Unit to discuss submittal of new LTMP and new HWA requirements due to plant upgrades.
(2.) Submit proof of City approval of SUO to PERCS. ( 3.) Submit new ERP (again) for approval by PERCS. (4.) IWS is due on
12/01/2008.
Recommendations:
NOD: ❑ Yes ® No
NOV: ❑ Yes ® No
QNCR: ❑ Yes ® No
POTW Rating:
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory ❑
PCI COMPLETED BY: DATE:?c3 D
Marginal ❑
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3

W ATERQG
65
O Nii� -,�
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Dear Mr. Craver:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
February 19, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of ENR
FEB 2 2 2008
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
SUBJECT: Interim Inspection
Thomasville, Davidson County
Hamby Creek WWTP
Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
The Construction Inspection Group (CIG) of the Construction Grants and Loans Section
performed an interim inspection for the state and federally funded portion of subject project on
February 13, 2008. The inspection was conducted in conjunction with the monthly progress meeting
regularly scheduled for the second Wednesday each month at 1:30 p.m. at the project site. The next
progress meeting is scheduled for March 12. Please note that our inspection report covers loan
administration and construction.
You should review this report; take actions as indicated and then file for your records. If
you have any questions please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail [e-mail].
Sincerely,
VV C
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Unit
G W I t/ogrh
cc: Keith Garbrick, PE, Pease Associates
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
SRF
CIG — Mark Hubbard, PE, Gerald Horton
F-ASHARETroject Management BranchlGroup - Ccnstructb,r homasville SRF gwhllnt Insp 09-02-13d.d
Construction Grants and Loans Section Ori0
1633 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nccgi.net
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper Natitrally

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
INSPECTION REPORT
LOAN ADMINSTRATION CS370619-02
Page 2 of 5
Interim Inspection
February 13, 2008
SRF LOAN — The original loan amount is $27,000,000 with Total Revised/Corrected Eligible
amount of $24,186,131. Loan interest payment rate is 2.305 % on a 20-year term.
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS SRF
Disbursements are on hold until O&Ms are reviewed and until Sales tax amounts are resolved
Date of Last Disbursement /Amount Feb. 11, 2008 / $ 329,014
Total Disbursed $ 24,956,414 (92 % of SRF Loan Funds )
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT — State Utility Contractors, Inc. (SU)
4417 Old Charlotte Hwy; PO Box 5019 Monroe, NC 28111-5019
tele: 704 289-6400 FAX [phone]
Superintendent:
Contract time
Original & Current Completion Date
Scheduled completion
Actual completion (days remaining)
Liquidated damages -
Jimmy Coore
1152 calendar days, unchanged
Friday April 17, 2009
63 % Complete, (422 days remain)
— 90 + %
$1,000/day
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Description of work,: project consists of constructing the following modifications, upgrades
and enlargement to the existing 4.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Plant for new permitted
capacity of 6.0 MGD:
o New filter screen
o New solids classifier grit removal
o Two new parallel oxidation ditches with biological nutrient removal
o Two new final clarifiers
o Four new effluent filters
o Parallel UV disinfection systems
o New effluent metering station
o New post aeration
o Cannibal solids separation system and building with 2 existing aeration tanks modified to
perform as interchange tanks with aeration equipment
o RAS pump station with VFDs
o Flocculator clarifier
o New submersible return sludge pumping station
o Addition of mixer and decanter to existing digester no. 1
o New emergency power generators (2)
o Upgraded chemical storage and feed facilities
o Addition to laboratory and administration building, with new laboratory
o New controls, instrumentation and SCADA
o 2 plant water reuse pump and
o associated site work, electrical piping and appurtenances

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
No change orders since CO#4 was approved July 13, 2007.
RFPs Status
None outstanding
RFIs Status
None outstanding
SUBMITTALs
Recently submitted -
Recently submitted -
Insulation of chemical pipe
vacuum valve at mag-meter
Page 3 of 5
Interim Inspection
February 13, 2008
Work by State Utility Contractors observed or performed since last interim inspection of
January 9:
1. Installed platforms at disc filters
2. STARTED and checked out — vertical turbine pumps, submersible pumps, disc filters,
vertical turbine pumps, UV, and bar screen
3. Due to weather SU worked on "fill in" work
4. Installed control floats in Waste Drain PS and in Backwash PS
5. Continued grading site and placing sidewalks
6. Tested pipe and structures, (incomplete)
7. Fiber optics installed
8. Place concrete pavement at metering & screening (Influent) facility
9. Installed waste sludge line from PS to upgraded WAS PS.
10. Set (the Owner) repaired re -circulation pump and piping but pump still needs repairs
State Utility's Work scheduled for next 30 days
1. Continue site grading
2. Continue testing pipe and structures
3. Complete field instrumentation installation
4. Continue grading
5. Repair disc filter #2 bearing alignment
6. label chemical piping and install heat tape
7. Install waste sludge pipe from WAS PS to digester
8. Begin installation of digester decant line to degrit facility
9. partial startup of WWT facilities
10. Begin de -mob

City of Thomasville Page 4 of 5
Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 February 13, 2008
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
CONSTRUCTION SITE
Weather since last inspection has included some substantial rain events. Today site
was wet and there was very little activity on site.
Storage/Protection — materials stored satisfactorily? YES
ENGINEERINGANSPECTION:
o Resident Inspector On -Site? Yes
o Inspector's records, reports, shop drawings, files, etc., records were reviewed
o Testing reports on concrete strength and soils reviewed? No
o As -Built (Record Drawings) being kept up to date? YES, Supt. Jimmy Coore is
responsible for maintaining record drawings.
o Comments or Recommendations: none
CONTRACTOR(S)
o N.C. OSHA / Labor Laws Posted? YES
o Up to date Construction Schedule (Bar Graph, CPM) posted? YES
o Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed ? YES
o Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) according to
Contractor? None
If it appears construction will not be completed on time, what additional time may
be needed for completion? Contractor still anticipating commissioning WWTP in
early March 2008 and starting up the Cannibal system by May 2008.
PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
Payment Milestone Discussed? YES, CG&L previously informed Engineer and
Owner that project loan reimbursements have exceeded 90%. Recently the Draft
O&M Manual was reviewed and revisions/comments from the Engineer to CG&L
are pending.
2. Does work completed appear acceptable for reimbursement? YES
GENERAL CONCERNS / RECOMMENDATIONS / ACTION ITEMS
UPDATES on Comments and Concerns noted in previous progress meetings (for reference) are italicized.
A. State Utilities installed the platforms for the disc filters GRATIS. These were not called
for in the job specifications or drawings.
B. EIMCo is scheduled to do process training 30 to 60 days after startup, after which the
Cannibal reps can be scheduled.
C. SCADA system personnel (Nix Purser) wants all wiring completed before activating the
SCADA so as not to damage the RTUs. Pursor is to be on site Feb 25 to verify
terminations.
D. Feb UPDATE: Work was done. SU asked that Starr Electric have VFDs and MCC ready
for setup and checkout Jan 23.
E. Jan. UPDATE: Intent is to run new plant facilities 30 to 45 days and have Cannibal system
reps in April 14 for training and startup of that process. Compatibility of the EIMCO AB
process and Cannibal system were discussed. Engineer is to research the matter so as to
determine optimum conditions/time/phasing in order to bring the Cannibal system online

City of Thomasville Page 5 of 5
Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 February 13, 2008
with the AB process as efficiently as possible. Further discussion on this is needed.
ORC's input is critical.
F. Operational challenge for Owner will be to obtain MLSS of > 4000 mg/l.
G. Jan. UPDATE: SU handed out 4 page schedule and calendar indicating starting and
testing of equipment to occur beginning Jan 10 through February prior to commissioning
WWTP in early February. Startup & testing sequence was discussed. Start date for 7
day sequencing is January 25, 2008 and SU provided 1 page handout for startup
discussion. Plant commissioning anticipated in late February 2008. It is intended to start
planned diversion of WW utilizing 2- —1500 GPM (8") pumps. Use of treated vs. raw
WW discussed. Which water source and how provided is to be resolved prior to that date.
Processes that are critical or of special concern were: RAS, WAS, Eff., BW, & WD
submersible pumps; static aerator; disc filters; and UV units.
H. Feb. UPDATE: CG&L again advised Owner and Engineer to notify the DWQ regional
office prior to initiating startup of the new WW system.
I. CG&L previously reminded Engineer that CG&L will be looking for manufacturer's
certifications prior to project closeout.
J. Previously - SU and Engineer are working on a spare parts list and turnover
documentation.
K. Oct. Update: yes, SU and Engineer are still working on this. CG&L asked, has there or
will there be, an overall list of warranties prepared with specific dates for each process or
piece of equipment or part of the work? Answer yes.
PROGRESS MEETING / PARTICPANTS (9 )
❑ Morgan Huffman Thomasville, Utilities Director, formerly ORC
❑ Misty Calder Thomasville, ORC
❑ Keith Garbrick Pease & Assocs., Engineer 704 376-6423
[e-mail] 704 201-3788 Cell
❑ Bobby Jordan Pease & Assocs., Constr Obsv. 704 201-5041 Cell
❑ Wade Woodring State Utitilty, Proj. Mgr.
❑ Jimmy Coore State Utility Contrs, Inc., Supt.Shawn Randall State Utitilty
n
❑ Jake Morgan
❑ Roger Kinzer
❑ Gerald Horton, P.E.
State Utitilty
Starr Electric, Proj. Mgr
NC DWQ-CG&L
336 275-0241
919 715-6219
❑ Mark Hubbard, P.E. NC DWQ-CG&L 919 715-6224
❑ Ken Pohlig, P.E. NC DWQ-CG&L 919 715-6221
❑ Anita Reed NC DWQ-CG&L 919 715-6213
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday March 12, 2008

• r� 7,AN
CEIVED
eof- of ENR ase Associates - Main Office
' 925 East Independence Blvd.
2 3 200� st Office Box 18725
e a s e hariotte, NC 28218
Architects -En ineers! +'t,,y,.V 76-6423
hx704-3one 36177
9 a�$ac � . _____fax [phone]
January 16, 2008
%Mr StzR
au.
NC
inston Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem, NC 27104
Reference: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP Upgrade and Expansion
Thomasville, North Carolina
EMC SOC WQ 04-013
NPDES Permit No. NCO024112
Pease Associates' Commission No. 2002032.00
Subject: Status Report for 4th Quarter 2007
Dear Mr. Mauney:
Pease Associates - Ashe County
One North Jefferson Avenue
Suite E
West Jefferson, NC 25694
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
The following is a summary of progress for the construction of the Hamby Creek WWTP in
Thomasville, North Carolina. This report has been submitted to fulfill the requirements of the Special
Order by Consent (SOC).
Work Completed through 12/12/2007 includes the following:
Clarifier #1- completed equipment installation; completed installation of
current density baffle; completed grout placement, installed butterfly valves;
installed aluminum baffle at sludge draw off box.
Clarifier #2 - completed equipment installation; completed installation of
current density baffle; completed grout placement; installed butterfly valves;
installed aluminum baffle at sludge draw off box.
Oxidation Ditch - completed handrail and toe board; completed sidewalks on
East end; painted pressure relief valves;
Over 65 years of architectural and engineering design excellence

Mr. Steve Mauney
Page 2 of 3
January 16, 2008
Lab Building - No additional work has been completed. Building has been
turned over to the owner.
Static Aerator - No additional work has been completed. Structure is complete.
Effluent Filter Building - completed painting of flange piping; placed
equipment pads; set UV control panels; installed all locks and door hardware;
placed sidewalks and pavement at roll up door; rub and patched walls.
Manhole 104 - No additional work has been completed. Structure is complete.
Waste Drain Pump Station - formed sidewalk around MH and valve vault;
installed pump hoists.
Manhole 101- painted flange piping.
Interchange Tanks - formed, reinforced and placed blower pad and sidewalks
around blower pad; set blowers and install pipe and supports.
New Pump Station & Manhole 103 - placed stairs, installed aluminum
handrail, installed 6" & 8" flange piping and magnetic flow meter; completed
painting all flange piping; installed CISP to return sludge pump station.
Solids Separation Building - installed all locks and door hardware; fine graded
around building; placed equipment pad for VFD's; poured sidewalks and
pavement at roll up door; rub and patch walls; installed flange piping; installed
platform around drum screen.
Filter Backwash Pump Station - No additional work has been completed.
Structure is complete.
Field Piping - completed installation of 30" DIP outfall line; completed
installation of 30" DIP influent line; set doghouse MH #1 at influent; installed
12" DIP from flocculation clarifier to pump station; installed 6" filter backwash
and waste drain pump station discharge to new pump station; Install 2" plastic
Pease Associates Architects - Engineers

Mr. Steve Mauney
Page 3 of 3
January 16, 2008
chemical piping as well as 8" & 6" DIP for the re -use water line; installed waste
sludge line from pump station to upgraded WAS pump station; installed storm
drain and catch basins; installed re -use water piping and yard hydrants.
According to the time schedule indicated by the Special Order by Consent Amendment, the next
report is due April 15, 2008. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
eith Garbrick, EI
Project Representative
KRG:krg
cc: Mr. Kelly Craver — Interim City Manager of Thomasville
Mr. Morgan Huffman — City of Thomasville
N: \ 2002032-00\ Uile \ Ph6-9\ Report -Study\ 2002032007048MauneyStatRept011608krg.doc
Pease Associates Architects - Engineers

Michael F. Easley, Governor
`O�CF WATFRpG
t7 itawrY
Mr. Kelly Craver, City Manager
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Dear Mr. Craver:
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
January 16, 2008
Coleen H. Sullins. Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVED
N.C. Deot of ENR
JAN 18 2008
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
SUBJECT: Interim Inspection
Thomasville, Davidson County
Hamby Creek WWTP
Upgrade & Expansion
SRF Project No. CS370619-02
The Construction Inspection Group (CIG) of the Construction Grants and Loans Section
performed an interim inspection for the state and federally funded portion of subject project on
January 9, 2008. The inspection was conducted in conjunction with the monthly progress meeting
regularly scheduled for the second Wednesday each month at 1:30 p.m. at the project site. The next
progress meeting is scheduled for February 13. Please note that our inspection report covers loan
administration and construction.
Please advise Steve Tedder, 336 771-5000, Surface Water Protection Supervisor, Winston
Salem Regional Office of your impending startup plans.
You should review this report; take actions as indicated and then file for your records. If
you have any questions please contact me at [phone] or via e-mail [e-mail].
Si cerely, r �L/
Gerald W. Horton, PE
Environmental Engineer
Construction Inspection Unit
GHVttr<wh
cc: Keith Garbrick, PE, Pease Associates
Steve Tedder, Winston-Salem Regional Office
SRF
CIG - Mark Hubbard, PE, Gerald Horton
R. SHARE\Project Management Bran&Group - Construction InspectiomProjects IActi ,H
Construction Grants and Loans Section One
Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1633 NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] / Internet: www.nocgi.net
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper Natzmally

1 City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek W WTP
CS370619-02
INSPECTION REPORT
LOAN ADMINSTRATION CS370619-02
Page 2 of 4
Interim Inspection
January 9, 2008
SRF LOAN — The original loan amount is $27,000,000 with Total Revised/Corrected Eligible
amount of $24,186,131. Loan interest payment rate is 2.305 % on a 20-year term.
LOAN DISBURSEMENTS SRF
Date of Last Disbursement /Amount Jan. 2, 2008 / $ 46,080
Total Disbursed $ 24,627,400 ( 91 % of SRF Loan Funds )
CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT — State Utility Contractors, Inc. (SU)
CHANGE ORDER UPDATE
No change orders since CO#4 approved July 13, 2007.
RFPs Status
Proposal (from Starr Electric) for adding 115 V receptacle/outlets and a 30A breaker for heater
in Cannibal building is pending Owner decision.
RFIs Status
None
SUBMITTALS
None
Work by State Utility Contractors observed or performed since last interim inspection of
November 14:
1. Started installation of field instruments
2. Continue site grading
3. Set all submersible pumps in pump station and in waste drain PS
4. Installed diffusers in Rearation tank
5. Installed water and chute to bar screen
6. Oxidation ditch — test aerators and submersible mixers (2nd week Jan.)
7. Test pipe and structures
8. Finish field instrumentation installation
9. Finished platform, equipment and pipe in Cannibal (solids separation) building
10. Install water to grit separator
11. Near completing re -use water line, chemical lines and yard hydrants, ready to test this
week
12. Fiber optics began installation
13. Screens (programmed) representative will be here this week with computer for Owner to
review

' City of Thomasville Page 3 of 4
Hamby Creek WWTP Interim Inspection
CS370619-02 January 9, 2008
State Utility's Work scheduled for next 30 days :
1. For fill in work - continue grading site and placing sidewalks
2. Test pipe and structures
3. Finish field instrumentation, should complete within 10 days
4. For fill in work — install valves and pipe and water line in Solids Separation Bldg
5. Continue grading
6. Place concrete pavement at metering & screening (Influent) facility
7. Install temporary platforms at disc filters
8. Install waste sludge line from PS to upgraded WAS PS
9. Begin digester decant line to degrit facility
10. Set repaired re -circulation pump and piping when Owner deliver refurbished pump
11. STARTUP — vertical turbine pumps 1/10, disc filters 1/15, submersible pumps 1/22,
UV 1/29, bar screen 2/12
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION CHECKLIST
CONSTRUCTION SITE
Weather has been very dry since June as NC is experiencing extreme drought
conditions. Construction site was in good shape on day of inspection though site
received 2 significant rain events in December.
Storage/Protection — materials stored satisfactorily? YES
ENGINEERINGANSPECTION:
o Resident Inspector On -Site'? Yes, records were reviewed
o Inspector's records, reports, shop drawings, files, etc. reviewed? No as nothing
new
o Testing reports on concrete strength and soils reviewed? No
o As -Built (Record Drawings) being kept up to date? YES, Supt. Jimmy Coore is
responsible for maintaining record drawings.
o Comments or Recommendations: none
CONTRACTOR (S)
o N.C. OSHA / Labor Laws Posted? YES
o Up to date Construction Schedule (Bar Graph, CPM) posted? YES
o Contractor(s) Coordination of Work Observed ? YES
o Comment on Any Known Delays/Impacts in Completing Contract(s) according to
Contractor? None
o If it appears construction will not be completed on time, what additional time may
be needed for completion? Contractor now anticipating commissioning WWTP in
early March 2008 and starting up the Cannibal system by May 2008.
PROJECT PROGRESS/PAYMENTS
1. Payment Milestone Discussed? YES, CG&L previously informed Engineer and
Owner that project loan reimbursements have reached 90%. Draft O&M Manual
was received December 17 and is under review.
2. Does work completed appear acceptable for reimbursement? YES

City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTP
CS370619-02
Page 4 of 4
Interim Inspection
January 9, 2008
GENERAL CONCERNS / RECOMMENDATIONS / ACTION ITEMS
UPDATES on Comments and Concerns noted in previous progress meetings (for reference) are italicized.
A. SU asked that Starr Electric have VFDs and MCC ready for setup and checkout Jan 23
B. Owner should review SCADA screens Jan 23
C. It will require — 30 hours to transfer WW to the new AB with 1500 gpm pump, this is
targeted for Jan 30
D. Jan. UPDATE: Intent is to run new plant facilities 30 to 45 days and have Cannibal
system reps in April 14 for training and startup of that process. Compatibility of the
EIMCO AB process and Cannibal system were discussed. Engineer is to research the
matter so as to determine optimum conditions/time/phasing in order to bring the Cannibal
system online with the AB process as efficiently as possible. Further discussion on this is
needed. ORC's input is critical.
E. Jan. UPDATE: SU handed out 4 page schedule and calender indicating starting and
testing of equipment to occur beginning Jan 10 through February prior to commissioning
WWTP in early February. Startup & testing sequence was discussed. Start date for 7
day sequencing is January 25, 2008 and SU provided 1 page handout for startup
discussion. Plant commissioning anticipated in late February 2008. It is intended to start
planned diversion of WW utilizing 2- 1500 GPM (8") pumps. Use of treated vs. raw
WW discussed. Which water source and how provided is to be resolved prior to that date.
Processes that are critical or of special concern were: RAS, WAS, Eff., BW, & WD
submersible pumps; static aerator; disc filters; and UV units.
F. CG&L again advised Owner and Engineer to notify the DWQ regional office prior to
initiating startup of the new WW system.
G. Jan. UPDATE: ABs only have been hydrostatically tested to 2 ft., Clarifiers were
hydrostatically tested. CG&L asked if tanks had been hydrostatically tested or if this is a
project specified requirement. CG&L hereby asks appropriate documentation be provided
regarding this matter.
H. Jan UPDATE: Owner has still not provided rebuilt pump for SU to install, SU noted
several weeks ago this may cause a delay. Owner is having caustic pumps rebuilt (5
weeks), SU asked owner to stay on top of the repairs as it may cause delays in project
startup.
Nov. UPDATE: load monitoring capability is not r equired. In order to achieve it however
more hardware can be added. IQs and generator will not be on the SCACA system.
Engineer asked if generator has load -monitoring capability.
PROGRESS MEETING / PARTICPANTS
❑ Morgan Huffman Thomasville, ORC
❑ Keith Garbrick
Pease & Assocs., Engineer
704 376-6423
[e-mail]
704 201-3788 Cell
❑ Bobby Jordan
Pease & Assocs., Constr Obsv.
704 201-5041 Cell
❑ Wade Woodring
State Utitilty, Proj. Mgr.
❑ Jimmy Coore
State Utility Contrs, Inc., Supt.
❑ Jake Morgan
State Utitilty
❑ Roger Kinzer
Starr Electric, Proj. Mgr.
336 275-0241
❑ Gerald Horton, P.E.
NC DWQ-CG&L
919 715-6219
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday February 13, 2008

W A
c
January 14, 2008
Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
City of Thomasville
Po Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Subject: Pretreatment Review of Industrial User Pretreatment Permit (IUP) Drop
Program: City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek (NPDES : NC0024112)
Dear Ms. Conder:
The PERCS Unit of the Division of Water Quality has reviewed the Industrial User Permit (IUP)
drop submitted by The City of Thomasville for the following Significant Industrial Users (SIU).
The IUP was received by the Division on January 11, 2008.
IUP # SIU Name
0011 Hill Hosiery Mill
The review indicates that the IUP is adequate and meets the minimum requirements of 15A
NCAC 2H .0907 and 40 CFR. A copy of the Allocation Table maintained in the Division's
computer has been updated accordingly.
Federal and State pretreatment regulations require the local delegated pretreatment program to
effectively control and document the discharge of wastewater from Sig nificant/Categorical
Industrial Users to the POTW. It is the POTW's responsibility to ensure that these objectives are
consistently met.
Thank you for your continued support of the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions
or comments, please contact Monti Hassan at [phone] ext.371 [email:
[e-mail]] or Deborah Gore, Acting Unit Supervisor at ext. 593 [email:
[e-mail]].
Sincerely,
oleen H Sullins
mh/thomasvi �Files
cc: Central
Jennifer Carte(- WSRO
NorthCarolina
,Naturally
NC DWQ/PERCS 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us/Pretreat/index.html 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

City of Thomasville, Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
1. Introduction
It is the responsibility of City of Thomasville Hamby Creek WWTP, (NPDES NC0024112)
to enforce all applicable Federal, State, and local pretreatment regulations. These
regulations are outlined in Federal regulation 40 CFR 403 and State regulation 15A NCAC
2H .0900, and the local SUO. This Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) has been established
as an element of the POTW's pretreatment program. The purpose of the ERP is to provide
for fair and equitable treatment of all Users for any anticipated enforcement situations. In
general, enforcement actions will be taken in accordance with this Enforcement Response
Plan. However, the enforcement actions available are not exclusive as discussed in SUO
Section 82-274. Therefore, any combination of the enforcement actions can be taken
against a non -compliant user.
2. Enforcement Actions Available to the City
The Utilities Director is empowered through North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) 143-
215.6A and the local Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO) to take a wide variety of enforcement
actions. The following is a list of those actions and the corresponding section of the local
SUO that describes each.
Local SUO Section
Notice of Violation
82-271(a)
Consent Orders
82-271(b)
Show Cause Hearing
82-271(c)
Administrative Orders
82-271(d)
Emergency Suspensions
82-271(e)
Termination of Permit
82-271(f)
Civil Penalties
82-272(a)
Criminal Violations
82-272(a)
Injunctive Relief
82-273(b)
Water Supply Severance
82-273(c)
Public Nuisances
82-273(d)
In addition to the actions listed above, a User who violates the provisions of NCGS 143-
215.613 may be referred by the Director to the District Attorney for possible criminal
prosecution.
In determining the amount of civil penalties for a particular violation the Director shall
consider the following factors I SUO Section 82-272(b)) :
1. The degree and extent of the harm to the natural resources, to the public
health, or to public or private property resulting from the violation;
City of T
Effective
Page: 1

2. The duration and gravity of the violation;
3. The effect on ground or surface water quantity or quality or on air
quality;
4. The cost of rectifying the damage;
5. The amount of money saved by non-compliance;
6. Whether the violation was committed willfully or intentionally;
7. The prior record of the violator in complying or failing to comply;
8. The costs of enforcement to the POTW.
Adjudicatory hearing procedures regarding permit decisions, civil penalties, and
administrative orders may be found in the SUO Section 82-177(h).
3. Investigation of Noncompliance
The Staff of the POTW will generally investigate User compliance with permits or the
provisions of the SUO in three ways:
1. on -site inspections of the User to include scheduled
and unscheduled visits;
2. scheduled and unscheduled sampling of the Users effluent;
3. review of self -monitoring data, if required, from the User.
The compliance status of Significant Industrial Users will be evaluated at a minimum once
every 6 months.
4. Types of Violation
The following is a list of different types of violations, by category. This list is not
inclusive, but serves as a general list of anticipated types of noncompliance. The User's
permit, local SUO, and State and Federal regulations serve as additional references for
pretreatment requirements.
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 2
Effective Date: 9-15-07

Unpermitted Discharges. Users are responsible for obtaining and renewing permits, if
required.
Permit Limits. Users are responsible for maintaining compliance with all effluent limits.
The POTW will evaluate the extent of the limits violation(s). In determining the extent of
violation(s), Significant Non -Compliance (SNC) as defined by State and EPA regulations
will be determined.
Self -Monitoring Violations. A User who fails to adequately conduct all the monitoring
required in the permit, including monitoring frequencies, flow data reporting and sampling
methods specified, is in violation. This includes a User who does not resample per their
permit when a limit violation occurs.
Reporting Violations. A User who fails to provide information (e.g.. self monitoring
reports) required in their Permit or the SUO in the required time frame is in violation. Late
or incomplete reports will also be considered violations. A SIU who submits a report more
than 45 days late is considered in SNC.
Permit Conditions. Failure to apply or reapply for a permit is considered a violation. Users
who violate the general or other conditions (e.g.. slug loading, dilution prohibition) outlined
in their permits or the SUO shall be considered to be in violation.
Enforcement Orders. Failure to meet the requirements of an order (e.g.. interim limits,
milestone dates), whether the order was entered into voluntarily or mandated by the
POTW, shall be considered a violation. Missing a scheduled compliance milestone by
more than 90 days is considered SNC.
Sanitary Sewer Overflows. Any action, blockage, or discharge of any substance or material
into the sewer system including the collection system piping and lift stations, resulting in a
Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) shall be considered a violation.
5. Responses: Timeframes, Responsible Officials, Escalated Actions.
The attached chart further outlines types of violations and specifies POTW actions (initial
and escalated), timeframes, and the officials responsible for completing the actions. This
chart shall be considered a part of the Enforcement Response Plan.
Responses to violations affecting the operation of the POTW, resulting in POTW NPDES
violations, or resulting in environmental harm or endangerment to human health will be
taken immediately or as soon as possible following discovery.
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 3
Effective Date: 9-15-07

A User may be sent a Notice of Violation (NOV) or Notice of Noncompliance (NNC) for
each individual violation. Alternatively, the violations may be summarized over a period of
time not to exceed 6 months. In general, NOV's in response to violations of permit limits
will be taken within 30 days of discovery of the violations. Repeat violations are any
violation that occurs in less than 12 months of a previous identical violation. Users found to
be in SNC for two (2) consecutive 6 month periods will be issued an enforceable order to
return to compliance. In all cases, escalated or continuing enforcement action will be taken
against Users who do not return to compliance in a timely manner.
Cases of falsifying reports, tampering with monitoring or sampling equipment, or otherwise
preventing the collection of representative data may be referred to the District Attorney for
possible criminal investigation.
Show cause hearings may be held at the Director's discretion prior to taking enforcement
actions.
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 4
Effective Date: 9-15-07

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Unpermitted
Discharges
Unpermitted
1. Notice of Violation
Within 14 Days Of
WWTP Lab
File Permit
Suspend Service
Discharge
Discovery Of
Supervisor
Application
Until Permit Is
Unaware Of
Discharge
Issued
Requirement
Unpermitted
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 30 Days Of
Director
File Permit
Suspend Service
Discharge
2. Penalty Assessed
Discovery Of
Application
Until Permit Is
Aware Of
Minimum of $500/day
Discharge
Issued
Requirement
Unpermitted
1. Order to Cease Process
Order to Cease
Director
File Permit
Suspend Service
Discharge
causing Violation and,
Immediately;
Application;
Until Permit Is
results in NPDES
2. Notice of Violation and,
Notice of Violation
Steps Taken to
Issued
violation
3. Penalty Assessed
within 7 days
Avoid Further
Minimum of $1000 and up
Violation
to $25,000/day when
unaware of Requirements;
Minimum of $2000/day and
up to $25,000/day per
violation when aware of
Requirements
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 5
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Unpermitted
1. Suspend Service
Suspend Service
Director
File Permit
Discharge results
2. Notice of Violation and,
Immediately;
Application;
in Endangerment
3. Penalty Assessed
Notice of Violation
Steps Taken to
Minimum of $1000 and up
within 7 days
avoid future
to $25,000/day when
endangerment
unaware of Requirements;
Minimum of $2000/day and
up to $25,000/day per
violation when aware of
Requirements
Permit Limits
Holations
Permit Limits
1. Notice of Non-
Within 14 days of
WWTP Lab
Investigate Cause,
Notice of
Violation
Compliance or Violation
receiving data
Supervisor
Pursue Corrective
Violation with
Single Event and
and,
(Once in each
Action if needed,
Penalty
No Previous
2. Penalty Assessed
6-month period)
Conduct Additional
Double previous
Violation for Same
$0 - $50 — pH, temp
Monitoring within
penalty
Minor
$0 - $100 — compatible
30 days and Return
$100-$500 - noncom atible
to Compliance
Permit Limits
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 14 days of
WWTP Lab
Investigate Cause,
Second Notice of
Violation
2. Penalty Assessed
receiving data
Supervisor
Pursue Corrective
Violation with
Technical Review
$100-$500 — compatible
(Once in each
Action, Conduct
Penalty
Criteria(TRC)
$200-$600 - noncompatible
6-month period)
Additional
Double previous
Monitoring within
penalty
30 days and Return
to Compliance
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 6
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Permit Limits
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 30 days of
WWTP Lab
Investigate Cause,
Second Notice of
Violation
2. Penalty Assessed
Receiving all the Data
Supervisor
Pursue Corrective
Violation with
Significant non-
$100-$500 — compatible
Action, Conduct
Penalty - Double
Compliance
$200-$600 - noncompatible
Additional
previous penalty
Monitoring within
for each repeat
30 days and Return
Enforceable
to Compliance and
Schedule (AO) if
Report steps taken
not resolved by
to prevent future
the end of 2nd 6-
violation
month period
Permit Limits
1. Order to Cease Process
Order to Cease
Director
Investigate Cause,
Suspend Service
Violation causes
causing Violation and,
Immediately
Pursue Corrective
Until resolved
NPDES violation
2. Notice of Violation and,
Notice of Violation
Action, and Report
Enforceable
3. Penalty Assessed
Within 7 days of
cause of Non-
Schedule (AO) if
Minimum of $1000 and up
Discovering
compliance and
not resolved by
to $25,000/day/violation
Violation; Penalty
steps taken to
the end of 2nd 6-
Assessment within 1
prevent future
month period
Year of NOV
violation
(Once in each
6-monthperiod)
Permit Limits
1. Suspend Service
Suspend Service
Director
File for Reissuance
Violation
2. Notice of Violation and,
Immediately
of Permit
Causes
3. Penalty Assessed
Notice of Violation
Endangerment
Minimum of $1000 and up
within 7 days
to $25,000/da
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 7
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Other Violations
Failure to Perform
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 45 calendar
WWTP Lab
Conduct Missed
Second Notice of
Self Monitoring
2. Penalty Assessed
days of the end of
Supervisor
Sampling
Violation with
Minimum of $200/sampling
each quarter
Penalty double the
day or Penalty equal to cost
(Once in each
previous penalty
of missed testing,
6-month period)
whichever is greater
Reporting
1. Notice of Non-
Within 45 calendar
WWTP Lab
Submit Report
Notice of
Violations
Compliance
days of the end of
Supervisor
Violation with
Late Report
each quarter
Penalty assessed
(Once in each
Up to $100/
6-month period)
parameter,
doubles for repeat
violations
SNC if over 30
days
Reporting
1. Notice of Non-
Within 30 days of
WWTP Lab
Submit Revised
Notice of
Violations
Compliance
Report Submission
Supervisor
Report
Violation
Incomplete or
(Once in each
Penalty Assessed
Inaccurate Reports
6-monthperiod)
Reporting
Referred to District
As soon as suspected
Director
Violations
Attorney
Intentional
Falsification
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 8
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Violation of Permit
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 30 days of
WWTP Lab
Varies to obtain
Second Notice of
Conditions
2. Penalty Assessed
Discovery
Supervisor
100% Compliance
Violation
Up to $25,000/day
(Once in each
or
with Increased
6-month period)
Director
Penalty
Violation of Permit
1. Suspend Service
Suspend Service
Director
Steps taken to
Conditions
2. Notice of Violation and,
Immediately
Avoid
(Endangerment)
3. Penalty Assessed up to
Notice of Violation
Reoccurrence
$25,000/day per violation
Within 7 days
Violations of
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within Time frame
WWTP Lab
Additional
Same as Escalated
Enforcement Order
2. Assess Stipulated
listed in Enforcement
Supervisor
Monitoring and
Action for Same
Conditions or
Penalty and Actions listed
Order or For the Same
or
Steps taken to
Type of Violation
Limits
for same violation type in
Type of Violation in
Director
avoid recurrence
Possible
ERP
ERP
Revocation of
Order
Failure to Meet a
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 14 days of
WWTP Lab
Submit a schedule
Show Cause
Milestone Date in
2. Assess Stipulated
Discovery
Supervisor
to complete the
Hearing
an Enforcement
Penalty set in Order
Requirement
Order
(Does not Affect
Other Dates
Failure to Meet a
1. Show Cause Hearing and,
Within 30 days of
Director
Negotiate new
Possible
Milestone Date in
2 Assess Stipulated
Discovery
Order and Abide by
Termination of
an Enforcement
Penalties
New Conditions
Service
Order
(Affects Other
Dates
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 9
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

City of Thomasville Enforcement Response Plan
Type of Violation POTW Action Timeframe Responsible Expected Action Escalated Action
Official from User if Needed
Failure to Meet
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 14 days of
Director
Document
Possible
Final Compliance
2. Assess Stipulated
Discovery
Compliance
Termination of
Date
Penalty set in Order
Service
SSO Violations
Failure to maintain
1. Notice of Non-
Within 14 Days Of
WWTP Lab
Maintain adequate
Second Notice of
Grease Traps
Compliance or Violation
Discovery Of
Supervisor
pumping schedule
Violation with
(commercial food
and,
Discharge; Penalty
for all grease traps
Penalty Double
preparation)
2. Penalty Assessed
Assessed within 1
and maintain a log
the Previous
resulting in SSO or
$300 or pump out fee,
Year of NOV
of service records
Penalty; Plus Fine
blockage
which ever is greater
Assessed by State
for SSO
Discharge of any
1. Notice of Violation and,
Within 14 Days Of
Director
Ensure proper
Possible
material into the
2. Penalty Assessed to
Discovery Of
training of all
Termination of
sewer system
include any or all of the
Discharge; Penalty
personnel or
Service
which causes
following:
Assessed within 1
contractors;
blockage or
$300 or pump out fee,
Year of NOV
Maintain adequate
damage to
which ever is greater; repair
site housekeeping;
equipment
or replacement costs to
Install any physical
resulting in an SSO
equipment; environmental
controls or
(including but not
cleanup costs; Fine
processes changes
limited to grease,
Assessed by State for SSO
needed to prevent
debris, sand and
recurrence
gravel, rags and
towels
City of Thomasville, ERP Page: 10
Effective Date: 9-15-2007

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
June 5, 2007
Misty Conder
Laboratory Supervisor
PO Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
Subject: Pretreatment Receipt of Sewer Use Ordinance
City of Thomasville
Davidson County
NPDES #: NCO024112
Dear Ms. Conder:
Coleen H. Sullins Director
Division of Water Quality
RECFIVE0
N.C. D'- 4... of ENR
JUN 0 6 ?w
Winston-Saalem
Regional office
The PERCS Unit of the Division of Water Quality has received the Sewer Use Ordinance
(SUO)draft by the City of Thomasville as part of a Pretreatment Program. This SUO draft was
received on June 1,2007. Required changes were made. The review indicates that the SUO draft
is adequate and meets the minimum requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0900 and 40 CFR 403.
An adoption date will be recorded in the Divisions Database upon receipt of a signed SUO.
Thank you for your cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Thomas Ascenzo at [phone], ext 526 [email:
[e-mail]] or Jeff Poupart, Unit Supervisor at [phone], ext. 527
[email: [e-mail]].
Sincerely,
;3�// 1��4 41---
Coleen H. Sullins
ta/thomasville_SUO_01
Cc: Central Files
Jen Carter WSRO
Thomas Ascenzo, PERCS
WlbrthCarolina
iurally
NC DWQ/PERCS 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us/PERCS/ 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

,f
DU)a--i
lag -
The Honorable Joe G. Bennett, Mayor
City of Thomasville
Post Office Box 368
Thomasville, North Carolina 27361-0368
Dear Mayor Bennett:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
December 21, 2006
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of ENR
DEC 2 7 20M
Winstoe S,
Regicnz
SUBJECT: Authorization to Construct
A to C No. 024112A03
City of Thomasville
Hamby Creek WWTF Improvements
Davidson County
Project No. CS370619-02
A letter of request for Authorization to Construct was received on December 15, 2006, by
the Division, and final plans and specifications per negotiations with contractor for the subject
project have been reviewed and found to be satisfactory. Authorization is hereby granted for the
construction of modifications to the existing 4 MGD Hamby Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant,
with discharge of treated wastewater into Hamby Creek in the Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.
This authorization results in an increase in design and permitted capacity to 6 MGD, and
is awarded for the construction of the following specific modifications:
New influent filter screenin.Z equipment; new solids classifier grit removal system; new
oxidation ditch waste treatment system for biological nutrient removal; new fina
clarifiers; new effluent filters; new UV disinfection system; new effluent metering
station; new post aeration system; a solids separation system consisting of a new metal
building (1,800 sq. foot) with all solids separation system equipment, two existing
aeration tanks modified to perform as interchange tanks (57,600 cft. each with aeration
and mixing equipment, provision of two - 3 MGD-RAS pumps; addition of a 15
H mixer an eca r to digester number 1; a flocculation clarifer; new submersible
pump return sludge pumping stations; new emergency power generating system; new
medium voltage distribution system; upgraded chemical storage and feed facilities; a new
laboratory and administration building addition (960 sq. foot); new controls;
instrumentation and SCADA system; two 350 gpm plant water reuse pumps and
associated waterline; an all associated site work, piping and appurtenances pursuant to
the application received on December 15, 2006, and in conformity with the project plan,
specifications, and other supporting data subsequently filed and approved by the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
av, P hCarolma
_ )atura!!y
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh. NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/109/6 Post Consumer Paper

NS
The Honorable Joe G. Bennett, Mayor
December 21, 2006
Page 2
This Authorization to Construct is issued in accordance with Part III, Paragraph A of
NPDES Permit No. NC0024112 issued June 27, 2005 and shall be subject to revocation unless
the wastewater treatment facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions and
limitations specified in Permit No. NC00241 12.
The sludge generated from these treatment facilities must be disposed of in accordance
with G.S. 143-215.1 and in a manner approved by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action, including those as may
be required by this Division, such as the construction of additional or replacement wastewater
treatment or disposal facilities.
The Winston-Salem Regional Office, telephone number [phone], shall be notified
at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance of operation of the installed facilities so that an on site
inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during the
normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State
Holidays.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted facility
has been installed in accordance with the NPDES Permit, this Authorization to Construct and the
approved plans and specifications. Mail the Certification to Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.,
Construction Grants & Loans, DWQ / DENR, 1633 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1633.
Upon classification of the wastewater treatment facilities by the Water Pollution Control
System Operators Certification Commission (WPCSOCC), the Permittee shall designate and
employ a certified operator to be in responsible charge (ORC) and one or more certified
operator(s) to be back-up ORC(s) of the facilities in accordance with 15A NCAC 8G .0201. The
ORC shall visit the facilities in accordance with 15A NCAC 8G .0204 or as specified in this
permit and shall comply with all other conditions specified in these rules.
A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by the
Permittee for the life of the facility.
During the construction of the proposed additions/modifications, the permittee shall
continue to properly maintain and operate the existing wastewater treatment facilities at all times,
and in such a manner, as necessary to comply with the effluent limits specified in the NPDES
Permit.
You are reminded that it is mandatory for the project to be constructed in accordance
with the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, and, when applicable, the North
Carolina Dam Safety Act. In addition, the specifications must clearly state what the contractor's
responsibilities shall be in complying with these Acts.

rA
The Honorable Joe G. Bennett, Mayor
December 21, 2006
Page 3
Failure to abide by the requirements contained in this Authorization to Construct may
subject the Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality in accordance
with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
The issuance of this Authorization to Construct does not preclude the Permittee from
complying with any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
One (1) set of approved plans and specifications is being forwarded to you. If you have
any questions or need additional information, please contact Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E. at
telephone number [phone].
Sincerely
lan W. Klimek, P.E./
f
ID:cgm
cc: Mr. Don Garbrick, P.E., Pease Associates, Charlotte
Davidson County Health Department
DWQ Winston-Salem Regional Office, Surface Water Protection
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Point Source Branch, NPDES Program
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.
Ishwar Devkota, P.E.
SRF

ZPIWA
�Aaj7j
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
March 17, 2006
Mr. Roger Bryant
City of Thomasville
P. O. Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
I fiECEiVED
N.C. Dept of ENR
LIAR 2 3 �
i
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
Subject: Special Order by Consent
EMC SOC WQ SO4-013, Amendment 1
Hamby Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NCO024112
Davidson County
Dear Mr. Bryant:
Attached for your records is your copy of the signed Special Order by Consent (SOC) Amendment approved
by the Environmental Management Commission.
The terms and conditions of the Order are in full effect, and you are reminded that all final permit limits
contained in the NPDES permit must be met except those modified by the conditions of the Order.
Additionally, as specified in paragraph 2(e) of the Order, a written notice of compliance or noncompliance
with any schedule date must be submitted to this office.
Pursuant to amended North Carolina General Statute 143-215.31), effective January 1, 1999, water quality
fees have been revised to include an annual fee for any permit covered under a Special Order by consent, in
addition to the standard annual fee for the permit. The City of Thomasville will be subject to an annual
SOC administration fee of $500.00, in addition to its annual permit administration fee. You will be billed
for this at a later date. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact Charles Weaver at (919)
733-5083, extension 511.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Central Files
Whgao), akm Rq#m*,Q%0J S Tedder, ;
SOC Files
Yvonne Martin, EPA Region 4
Jeanne Phillips
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 One
512 N. Salisbury St., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 NofthCarohna
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] /Internet:: h2o.enr.state.nc.us ;Uzarally
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
COUNTY OF DAVIDSON
IN THE MATTER OF
NPDES PERMIT NUMBER
NCO024112
HELD BY THE CITY OF
THOMASVILLE
SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT
EMC SOC WQ SO4-013, Amendment I
Pursuant to provisions of North Carolina General Statutes (G.S.) 143-215.2 and 143-215.67, this Special Order by
Consent is entered into by the City of Thomasville, hereinafter referred to as the City, and the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission, an agency of the State of North Carolina created by G.S. 14313-282, and
hereinafter referred to as the Commission:
1. The City and the Commission hereby stipulate the following:
(a) The City holds NDPES Permit Number NCO024112 for operation of an existing wastewater treatment works
and for making an outlet therefrom for treated wastewater into Hamby Creek, Class C waters of this State in the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin, but is unable to consistently comply with the Total Phosphorus seasonal limits and
the Total Residual Chlorine limits as set forth in NPDES Permit Number NC0024112. Compliance will require
preparation of plans and specifications for construction and operation of additional treatment works.
(b) Noncompliance with final effluent limitations constitutes causing and contributing to pollution of the waters of
this State named above, and the City is within the jurisdiction of the Commission as set forth in G.S. Chapter
143, Article 21.
(c) The City desires to cause or allow the discharge of 0_8 MGD of additional wastewater to the treatment works,
and the discharge of such additional wastewater will not result in any significant degradation to the quality of
any waters. The flow is reserved as listed here:
I. Sewer projects for the Trinity area will total 550,000 gallons per day (GPD). (The actual anticipated flow
in only expected to be 156,500 GPD by September 2007)
II. New residential and commercial connections in Thomasville will total 250,000 GPD.
(d) The City has secured a grant or has otherwise secured financing for planning, design, or construction of a new or
improved wastewater collection system which, once constructed and operated, will be sufficient to adequately
collect wastewater presently being made tributary to the system, to the extent the City will be able to comply
with final permit conditions.
(e) Since this Special Order is by Consent, neither party will file a petition for a contested case or for judicial
review concerning its terms.
2. The City desiring to comply with the Permit identified in paragraph 1(a) above, hereby agrees to do the
following:
(a) Provide the Winston-Salem Regional Office of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ), located at
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107, with a list of all additions of flow under the City's Special
Order by Consent, and update this list quarterly.
(b) Undertake the following activities in accordance with the indicated time schedule:

Volation Description
Stipulated Penalty
Failure to meet a schedule date
$100/day for the first 7 days; $500.00/day thereafter
Failure to maintain compliance with any modified
limit contained in the SOC
$1,000/violation
Failure to achieve compliance with final effluent
limitations at final compliance deadline
$1,000
Failure to submit progress reports
$50.00/day for the first seven (7) days;
$250.00/day thereafter
4. The City and the Commission agree stipulated penalties are not due if the City satisfies the Division of Water
Quality noncompliance was caused solely by:
a. An act of God;
b. An act of war;
c. An intentional act or omission of a third party, but this defense shall not be available if the act or omission is
that of an employee or agent of the defendant or if the act or omission occurs in connection with a contractual
relationship with the City;
d. An extraordinary event beyond the City's control. Contractor delays or failure to obtain funding will not be
considered as events beyond the City's control; or
e. Any combination of the above causes.
Failure within thirty (30) days of receipt of written demand to pay the penalties, or challenge them by a contested
case petition pursuant to G.S. 150B-23, will be grounds for a collection action, which the Attorney General is
hereby authorized to initiate. The only issue in such an action will be whether the thirty (30) days has elapsed.
5. In accordance with provisions of G.S. 143-215.67(b) the Commission allows the City to accept the additional
wastewater specified below to its waste disposal system:
0.8 MGD of additional wastewater: The nature of the additional flows is such that waste characteristics
do not exceed those generally associated with domestic waste or are pretreated to domestic strengths.
Waste of greater than normal domestic strength may be accepted if the parameter(s) that exceed normal
domestic strength wastewater are not those for which interim limits have been developed and it can be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director that the additional waste will not adversely affect the
treatment efficiency of the treatment system for any modified parameter or result in violation of any other
permit limitation. All new and proposed industrial waste tributary to the system must be controlled using
all needed mechanisms including but not limited to adoption and implementation of industrial waste
control and pretreatment ordinances. No wastewater can be accepted which will allow toxic pollutants in
quantities not associated with domestic wastewater characteristics, unless the acceptance of the additional
wastewater can be supported through appropriate analyses acceptable to the Director.
6. This Special Order by Consent and any terms and conditions contained herein, hereby supersede any and all
previous Special Orders, Enforcement Compliance Schedule Letters, terms and conditions contained therein
issued in connection with NPDES Permit No. NC0024112. In the event of a Permit modification or renewal,
requirements contained therein shall supersede those contained in this Special Order by Consent, except as
modified and contained herein.

Scheduled Activity
Due Date
Plans submitted to DWQ Construction Grants and Loans
(Initial plans previously submitted)
December 17, 2004
MET
Submit the NPDES Permit application to DWQ
February 28, 2005
MET
Receive the new NPDES Permit for the 6 MGD Facility
July 31, 2005
MET
Submit the application for new loan
12 --p 57
December 31, 2005
Submit the revised plans
I — ( 3 — D 6
January 20, 2006
Receive the Authorization to Construct the revised system
't- � ^ 0&
February 28, 2006
Authorization to Award Contract
_ o —* (o
March 31, 2006
Begin construction on the WWTP upgrade
.2 _ 06
April J 5, 2006
Submit status report
—�� - p y-L
January 31, 2007
Submit status report
October 31, 2007
Submit Status report
July 31, 2008
Complete construction of the WWTP upgrade
April 15, 2009
Comply with final limits
July 31, 2009
(c) The City shall comply with all terms and conditions of the permit except those conditions identified in paragraph
1(a) above. See Attachment A for all monitoring requirements and effluent limitations. The City may also be
required to perform other additional activities as deemed necessary by the Director in future permits or
administrative letters.
(d) During the time in which this Special Order by Consent is effective, the City shall comply with interim effluent
limitations as contained in Attachment A
Under this Special Order by Consent, ONLY the parameters listed below have been modified from the most
current NPDES Permit currently in effect.
Parameter SOC Limit
Total Phosphorus n/a
Total Residual Chlorine 500ug/1
(e) No later than thirty (30) calendar days after any date identified for accomplishment of any activity listed in 2(b)
above, submit to the Director of DWQ written notice of compliance or noncompliance therewith. In the case of
noncompliance, the notice shall include a statement of the reason(s) for noncompliance, remedial action(s)
taken, and a statement identifying the extent to which subsequent dates or times for accomplishment of listed
activities may be affected.
3. The City agrees that unless excused under paragraph four (4), the City will pay the Director of DWQ, by check
payable to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, stipulated penalties according
to the following schedule for failure to meet deadlines set out in paragraphs 2(b) and 2(d), or failure to attain
compliance with the effluent limitations and/or monitoring requirements contained in Attachment A.

r
SOC WQ SO4-013
ATTACHMENT A, (p. 1) Effluent limitations and monitoring requirements
Beginning on the effective date of this SOC and lasting until the final compliance date in the SOC, the Permittee is authorized to
_L_--- .-A--,....e..,.- 4r.-- -,rF it nni r., r),P F Iln«rino PfflnPnt limitgtinns and mnnitntinv requirements:
E
s
�
nt;seilyTarTi�IISrn_OR
x�
Aue%agtiiti
tttenc�Y
Samp1 ,
1-12 i
c pbn i -
Plow
4.0 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5-day, 20°C (Apr I - Oct 31)
(Nov 1- Mar 31)
5.0 mg/L
10.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
15.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
NH3-N, mg/L (Apr 1 - Oct 31)
(Nov I- Mar 31)
2.0 mg/L
3.0 mg/L
6.0 mg/L
9.0 m g/ L
Daily
Composite
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 mL
400/100 mL
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily average shall not be less than
6.0 mg/L
Daily
Grab
E
P H
Shall be within the range of
6.0 to 9.0 standard units at all times
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature, °C
Daily
Grab
E
Conductivity, umhos/cm2
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine (ug/L)
500
Daily
Grab
E
Total Phosphorus 3 (Apr 1 - Oct 31)
(Nov 1- Mar 31)
N/A (mg/L)
N/A (mg/L)
Weekly
Seasonally
Weekly
Seasonally
Composite
Calculated (3)
Composite
Calculated (3)
E
E
Total Cadmium (ug/L)
2.1
15.0
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Lead (ug/L)
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Nickel (ug/L)
94.1
261.0
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Cyanide4 (ug/L)
2/Month
Grab
E
Total Chromium (ug/L)
53.5
1022.0
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Copper (ug/L)
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Silver (ug/L)
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Zinc (ug/L)
2/Month
Composite
E
Total Selenium (ug/L)
5.3
56.0
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Mercury (ng/L)
Monthly
Grab
E
Total Nitrogen
Monthly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity6
Ceriodaphnia, P/F @ 90% (4)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Pollutant Scan
Annually
Footnote 7
E
Footnotes:
1. Sample locations: I - Influent, E- Effluent.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15 % of the respective influent
values.
3. Monitoring for total phosphorus shall be conducted and calculated as prescribed above and in Condition A.(3.) of NPDES permit
NC0024112.
4. The quantitation level for cyanide (CN) shall be 10 µg/L. CN levels reported as less than 10 µg/L shall be considered zero for
compliance purposes.
5. Ceriodaphnia P/F @ 90%; February, May, August, November; see Condition A. (4.) of NPDES permit NC0024112.
6. See Condition A. (6.) of NPDES permit NC0024112.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Only those parameters noted in bold have limits changed from those found in the NPDES permit.
u

7. Any Violation of terms of this Special Order by Consent including paragraphs 2(b) and 2(d) above shall
terminate Qaragraph five (5) of this Order and any authorized additional waste not previously connected to the
system shall not thereafter be connected until the necessary sewerage system improvements have been
completed and placed in operation.
8. Noncompliance with the terms of this Special Order by Consent are subject to enforcement action in addition to
the above stipulated penalties, including injunctive relief pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6.(C).
9. The City, upon signature of this Special Order by Consent, will be expected to comply with all schedule dates,
terms, and conditions of this document.
10. This Special Order by Consent shall expire October 31, 2009.
FOR THE CITY OF THOMASVILLE:
Print Na and Title of Signing Official
u Date
Signatu a of Si ping Official
J-Z,-ok
FOR THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION:
/ V'6' ret;A
Chairman of the Commission
Date zj /b/04

SOC WQ SO4-013
ATTACHMENT A, (p. 2) Instream monitoring requirements
(a) Beginning on the effective date of this SOC and lasting until the final compliance date in the SOC, the
Permittee shall perform instream sampling as specified below, unless exempted per paragraph (b) below:
TIT`QRING'FREi�U,Ei�t�''
Temperature
Surface
3/week
Weekly
U, D
Dissolved Oxygen
Surface
3/week
Weekly
U, D
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean
Surface
31week
Weekly
U, D
Conductivity
Surface
3/week
Weekly
U, D
Total Phosphorus
Surface
Monthly
Monthly
U, D
TKN
Surface
Monthly
Monthly
U, D
NH3-N, as N
Surface
Monthly
Monthly
U, D
NO2-N + NO3-N
Surface
Monthly
Monthly
U, D
Chlorophyll -a
Surface
Monthly
Monthly
D
(t) U: Upstream of outfall 001 at Baptist Children's Home Road. D: Downstream at NCSR 2017 and on
Abbotts Creek at Center Street below the confluence with Leonard Creek.
(b) Coordinated Instream Monitoring Program, Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin Association. The Permittee shall
be provisionally exempted from the instream monitoring requirements specified in paragraph (a) above, so
long as the Permittee remains a party in good standing in an active instream monitoring Memorandum of
Agreement signed with the Division. If the Permittee's participation in the MCA is terminated, the
requirements in paragraph (a) shall be reinstated immediately and automatically.
(c) Notification of Terminated Membership. If the Permittee's participation in the MCA is terminated for any
reason, the Permittee shall notify the Division in writing within five (5) working days, unless the
termination is initiated by the Division.

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Mr. Kelly Craver, Manager
City of Thomasville
PO Box 368
Thomasville, NC 27361-0368
A. Sign re
n Agent
C� -❑ Addressee
B. eived by fPrin me) C. Date of Deliver
nat4
D. Is delivery addre is different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Se e Type
Vertified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
7011 1570 0001 8546 0602
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 4L �`�+� ��L� 102595-02-M-154

UNITED STATES i , V. f _RVICE
,_... 4
PM _r t
First -Class Mail
Postage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
N
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
Water Quality Regional Operations NgTON
450 West Hanes Mill Road, Suite 300 �tpNP�
Winston-Salem, NC 27105