NC0029980_Permit (Issuance)_19970210

NPDES DOCYNENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0029980
Miller Coors plant WWTP
Document Type: (Permit
Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
February 10, 1997
This document is printed on reuse paper - igiiore any
content on the resrerse aide

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources A"v?WvA
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary E H N --
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
February 10, 1997
Mr. Dan Foster
Miller Brewing Company
P.O. Box 3327
Eden, North Carolina 27289-3327
Dear Mr. Foster:
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NC0029980
Miller Brewing Eden Facility
Rockingham County
In accordance with the application for discharge permit received on August 26, 1996, the Division is
forwarding herewith the subject state - NPDES permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency dated December 6,1983.
In response to the comments on the draft permit, the Division offers the following explanations:
• Miller Brewing was informed by the Division via letter dated August 16, 1993 that at the time of next
renewal instream monitoring may be reinstalled. The Division encourages the formation of a
consortium including dischargers in the Dan River and will entertain any requests for the evaluation of
instream monitoring frequencies should the permittee wish to engage in such a consortium. Until that
time however, instream monitoring will remain in place for dissolved oxygen and temperature on a
weekly basis during the summer only. The monitoring requirement for conductivity has been
eliminated.
• As arsenic and selenium are pollutants of concern, and because they have a potential to exist in the
effluent, monitoring for these parameters will remain in place unchanged. Miller Brewing may request
after one year of monitoring that these parameters be reduced in the permit. Note, however, that
the Division retains the authority to install limitations for these parameters at such time as they are
deemed necessary. Similarly, monitoring for MBAS will remain in place for one year. At that time,
Miller Brewing may request that monitoring for this parameter be reduced.
• As you know, there are no federal guidelines for the brewing industry. The Division must therefore use
best professional judgement in determining permit strategies. The only information available to the
Division was an EPA memorandum from 1979 indicating what BAT limitations would likely be upon
completion of the development document for the brewing industry. The decision was made to phase in
BAT limitations at the time of next renewal. EPA central headquarters was consulted on this matter
and was in agreement with our approach.
• The change in the Instream Waste Concentration from 2.5% to 2.1% is based on new 7Q10 flow data
provided by USGS. The reduction does not reduce the acceptable ceriodaphnia mortality rate as
indicated in the comment letter but rather decreases the percentage of effluent from Miller's discharge
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

used in the toxicity test. A toxicity test at a lower IWC is typically easier to pass than one at a higher
IWC. As far as removing the toxicity test from Miller's permit, the test will remain in place as a
quarterly requirement. Miller Brewing is a major industrial discharge which has the potential to exert
toxic effects on the receiving stream. The toxicity test is used in place of monitoring for a vast array
of parameters in the effluent.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable to
you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of
this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, Post Office Drawer 27447, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27611-7447. Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. Part II, E.4. addresses the requirements to be
followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge.
This permit does- not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the
Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act, or
any other Federal or Local governmental permits may be required.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Mr. Mark McIntire, telephone
number [phone], extension 553.
Sincerely,
Original Signed ay
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Central Files
Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Winston-Salem Regional Office, Water Quality
Permits and Engineering Unit a
Facility Assessment Unit
Aquatic Survey and Toxicology Unit

Permit No. NC0029980
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina
Environmental Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended,
Miller Brewing Company
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Miller Brewing Company
on Meadow Road
near Eden
Rockingham County
to receiving waters designated as the Dan River and an unnamed tributary to Dry Creek in the
Roanoke River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective March 1, 1997
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on February 28, 2002
Signed this day February 10, 1997
Original Signed By
David A Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0029980
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Miller Brewing Company
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate 5.2 MGD industrial wastewater treatment facility (outfall 001)
consisting of influent pumps, bar screen, grit chamber, chemical addition, flow
equalization, aeration basins, clarifiers, aerobic digester, sludge thickener, filter
press, flow measurement, polishing pond and effluent pumps and continue to
discharge filter backwash water (outfall 002) from a facility located at Miller
Brewing Company, Meadow Road, near Eden, Rockingham County (See Part III
of this Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached maps
into the Dan River (outfall 001) and an unnamed tributary to Dry Creek (outfall
002) which are classified Class C waters, respectively, in the Roanoke River Basin.

9 °45'
)m N.
'038
- Sewage
Disposal
'037
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
PRIMARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE
SECONDARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE 1
LIGHT•DUTY ROAD. HARD OR
IMPROVED SURFACE
UNIMPROVED ROAD = = _
Latitude; 36°31'02"
Map # B20NW
Stream Class
Longitude; 79°42'38"
Sub -basin 03-02-03
C
Discharge Class 27 68
Receiving Stream Dan River
Permit expires: 2/28/02
Qw 5.2 MGD
614,,'n, E.
Golf Course
615
•
Q Inc
42'30"
ao
•Wat
Discharge point•
.I 1779
f•
• SP7
•
is
•
-
•
44-
1Cem :'t ; �• i
_ too
L
0 ,:
0
SCALE 1:24 000
0 1 MILE
7000 FEET
usaaysam:w+y;
. r��snaxxs;
1
0
1 KILOMETER
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET
QUAD LOCATION
Miller Brewing
NC0029980
Rockingham County
Outfall 001 - WWTP

h
Substa
FDC
64
1. .
it -T fi� ..
•
.•
; UP Moe ui f�,
#
10 ':' bo--` IL ; Central •: •
N --,. _,•cam .•;, �/ 0 1
• ,ter. :* '— '//— Mea ow Greens �,l
1� Coun Club i'
J. •�1 .1ill 'II t.-,
s 1 N
'15
. • ' Substatio
:4 REIDS VILLE 10 Mr. 1 640 000 FEET (VA.) I
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
PRIMARY HIGHWAY LIGHT -DUTY ROAD• HARD OR
IMPROVED SURFACE
HARD SURFACE
SECONDARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE ii=in.= UNIMPROVED ROAD = =
Longitude: 79°42'55"
Sub -basin 03-02-03
C
Discharge Class
Receiving Stream
Permit expires: 2/28/02
16 14
Dry Creek
Qw Variable
Tri•City Air
42'30"
616
0
1 0 1 KILOMETER
SCALE 1:24 000
0
1 MILE
7000 FEET
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET
Miller Brewing
NC0029980
Rockingham County
Outfall 002 - Filter Backwash

A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Permit No. NC0029980
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number
001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample
Location'
Flow (MGD)
5.2
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD52
2042 Lbs/day
5107 Lbs/day
Daily
Composite
E
Total Suspended Solids2
2845 Lbs/day
7076 Lbs/day
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen5
Daily
Grab
E, U, D
pH3
Daily
Grab
E
NH3-N
Daily
Composite
E
Total Residual Chlorine4
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C5
Daily
Grab
E, U, D
Total Arsenic (Jt..t,C 6(1(1
Monthly
Composite
E
. Total Selenium ' ` ' '
Monthly
Composite
E
—
----------
Monthly
Grab
E
--
Zinc 0-4--t-tiL 461
Monthly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity6
Quarterly
Composite
E
Notes:
2
3
4
5
6
Sample Locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at the Highway 14 crossing, D - Downstream at Highway 700 crossing.
See BOD and TSS Limitations section of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
Monitoring requirement applys only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
Instream monitoring for temperature and dissolved oxygen shall be conducted weekly during the months of June, July, August and September .
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F @ 2.1%; February, May, August, November; See Chronic Toxicity section of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - FINAL
Permit No. NC0029980
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number
002. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT, CHARACTERISTICS:;:
Flow (MGD)
Monthly
Average
Weekly
=:Average `
Daily
aximum
Meosuromer
Frequency:;
Sample
.ocation1
Weekly
Estimate
E
Total Suspended Solids
Settleable Solids
30.0 mg/L
0.1 ml/L
45.0 mg/L
2/Month
Grab
0.2 ml/L
Weekly
Grab
Turbidity2
Weekly
Grab
Iron
I Total Residual Chlorine
Notes:
Sample Locations: E - Effluent
2 The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural background conditions, the
discharge level cannot cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored during discharge events at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
I
Weekly
Weekly
Grab
Grab

Permit No. NC0029980
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
BOD5 and TSS Limitations
Based on a memorandum from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water Enforcement to the
Director of Enforcement in EPA's Region III dated September 26, 1979, at the time of next
renewal, mass limits for BOD and TSS equivalent to 25 mg/L and 35 mg/L respectively will be
installed.
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent coDccntration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is 2.1% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document).
The permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance
with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date
of this permit during the months of February, May, August and November. Effluent sampling for
this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment
processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.

Permit No. NC0029980
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CONTINUED
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality.indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate ret:esting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.

Facility:
Permit Number:
County:
Flow:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Class:
Permit Renewal
Comments and Summary
NC Division of Water Quality
Permits and Engineering Unit
December 5, 1996
Miller Brewing Company
NC0029980
Rockingham
5.2 MGD
Dan River, and an unnamed tributary of Dry Creek
C
GENERAL COMMENTS: This facility operates two discharges. Outfall 001 is from the treatment
system. This system treat] wastewaters associated with wasted beer and tank cleaning. No domestic waste is
treated. The facility has plenty of tankage to handle all potential flows and has been operated very well since startup.
Outfall 002 is the discharge of carbon filter backwash associated with the treatment of the municipal water supply for
use in the industrial process. The existing permit has mass limits for BOD and TSS which are based on production
and recommended loadings from an EPA memo dated 1979. Because the treatment system has been well operated and
compliant over its history, and because it has the ability to meet more stringent limitations for these two
parameters, it is recommended that at next renewal, mass limits equivalent to a 25 mg/L BOD limit and 35 mg/L
TSS limit be installed. Also in the existing permit were metals montioring requirements. Most of these
requirements have been removed. This facility has a coal pile for use in power generation. All coal pile runoff is
sent to the treatment system. Because of the potential for pollutants of concern to be in the discharge, monitoring
has been installed for total arsenic and total selenium. Also, because of the discharge of detergent laden waters
associated with tank cleaning events, MBAS monitoring has also been installed. Instream monitoring for DO, pH,
conductivity and temperature has been reinstalled.
In order to recei' t .:k:PA feedback on The permitting strategy discussed :-above, Mr. Don Anderson, responsible for
EPA's miscelaneous food and beverage group, and Mr. Joseph Vitalis, EAD Regional Coordinator were consulted.
They concurred.with tin, strategy and indieetud that no other information kother than the 1979 menu.,) wa:; available
(see attached facsimile).
This permit has therefore been drafted in accordance with the wasteload allocation performed by Farrell Keough. A
special condition has been added to reflect the intent to change the BOD and TSS limits at next renewal. A comment
will be included to this affect in the permit cover leter.
Prepared by_ .%

NOV-26-1996 14:50 US EPA/EAD Washington DC
202 260 7185 P.01/06
facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
111111111111111111111F-
to:
fax #:
re:
date:
pages:
Mark McIntire, Permit Writer
[phone]
Breweries & Related References
November 26, 1996
6, including this cover sheet.
Dear Mark:
Don Anderson and I have reviewed our respective conversations with you and have mutually
concluded that you have just about everything that we could deliver to you. As you know we are
a bit thin on references for this industry because the project was only carried through to the draft
Development Document stage. So with that document and the 1979 draft loading letter adjusted
for the production level expected from the new Miller Brewery scheduled to go on line in North
Carolina, you should have reasonable numbers for the NPDES permit. Sounds like you have a
workable strategy. Good luck and give us a call if you run into some unforeseen difficulties_ I
have enclosed, as part of this fax , a current listing of "Industrial Wastewater Contacts in the
Effluent Guidelines Program" to help you resolve future problem areas with the project officer
who should be the best position to interpret applicability of proposed & final categorical
regulations.
Sincerely,
Joseph S. Vitaiis
cc: Sheila Frace
Debra Nicoll
Bill Telliard
Don Anderson
From the deck of...
Joe Vttalis
EAD Reolenal Coordinator
USEPA/oW/OST/EAD
401 M Street SW
Washington, DC 2046D
202-260-7172
Fax [phone]

1—
'47:' ot.7.;
rya/6 ��,c�y„�,,,-%,,�'e�_..� f(z-oszt,,C f
UQGet!
och)011,
64-6A 126„.c.
Nunf-647 tifsv,
iplb% c_a_4101
2 frdocci-
Vc,9 A;11,4
it/i7 .
4,1,1A ',iv 10-Afix--
sue- �--i__
,f7fk fry__
P7a

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
FACT SHEET
APPLICATION FOR
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
PERMIT TO DISCHARGE TREATED WASTEWATER
Application No. NC0029980 Date 12/5/96
1. SYNOPSIS OF APPLICATION
Applicant's Name
Miller Brewing Company
Applicant's Address
863 East Meadow .Road
Eden, NC 27288
Facility Address
a site on Meadow Road
near Eden
Type of Operation
The Applicant operates a brewer. No domestic waste is discharged to the treatment facility. All
wastewater to outfall 001 is wasted beer, and soap laden wastewaters associated with tank
cleanings. Outfall 002 discharges filter backwash water associated with treating the municipal
water source for plant use.
Design Capacity of Facility
5.2 MGD
Applicant's Receiving Waters
Receiving Stream: the Dan River
Classification: C
Sub -Basin: 03-02-03

See Attachment A for a map showing the discharge location (s).
Description of Wastewater Treatment Facilities
The existing on -site wastewater treatment facilities consist of influent pumps, bar screen, grit
chamber, chemical addition, flow equalization, aeration basins, clarifiers, aerobic digester, sludge
thickener, filter press, flow measurement, polishing pond and effluent pumps.
Summary of Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation
See Attachment B (for operating facilities).
Type of Wastewater (as reported by applicant)
0 % Domestic
100 % Industrial
2. PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
.Sew attached copy of Effluent Page (s) from Draft Pe_*mi i.
3 . MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
The applicant will be required to monitor regularly for flow and those parameters limited in
Section 2 above with sufficient frequency to ensure compliance with the permit conditions.
Frequency, methods of sampling, and report dates will be specified in the final permit.
4. EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITS
(AND COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE IF APPLICABLE)
The limits become effective on the date of permit issuance.
5. PROPOSED SPECIAL CONDITIONS WHICH WILL HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE DISCHARGE
1) BOD and TSS limit changes at next renewal.
2) Chronic toxicity testing.
6. BASIS FOR PROPOSED EFFLUENT LIMITS

Limits are based on production figures supplied by Miller Brewing and BCT values found
in a 1979 memo from EPA Region III.
7. REQUESTED VARIANCES OR ALTERNATIVES TO REQUIRED STANDARDS
8. DISCUSSION OF PREVIOUS NPDES PERMIT CONDITIONS
The previous NPDES permit contained the following limitations (expressed as monthly
averages):
Previous permit conditions had extensive metals monitoring requirements. These
requirements have since been eliminated based on the results of the 1995 Priority Pollutant
Analysis. As this facility has a coal pile for power generation, monitoring requirements for total
arsenic and selenium have been installed. MBAS has also been installed based on detergent use for
cleaning the tanks.
The NPDES Permit expires on: Y-7 I ;'2202"
9. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
The administrative record, including application, draft permit, fact sheet, public notice,
comments received, and additional information is available by writing the Division of
Environmental Management, Water Quality Section, P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27626-0535. The above documents are available for review and copying at the
Archdale Building, 9th Floor, Water Quality Section, Permits and Engineering Unit, 512
North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Copies will be provided at a charge of 10 cents per
page.
10. STATE CONTACT
Additional information concerning the perrmit application may be obtained at the above
address during the hours stated in item No. 9 by contacting: Mark McIntire at (919)
733-5083.

11. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice - 12/18/96
Permit Scheduled to Issue - 2/3/97
12. PROCEDURES FOR THE FORMULATION OF FINAL DETERMINATIONS
a. Comment Period
The Division of Environmental Management proposed to issue an NPDES Permit to this
applicant subject to the effluent limitations and special conditions outlined above. These
determinations are tentative and are open to comment from the public.
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on the permit application or on
the Division of Environmental Management's proposed determinations to the following
address:
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
POST O1110E BOX 24535
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-05 3 5
All comments received within thirty days following the date of public notice will be
considered in the formulation of final determinations with regard to this application.
b . Public Hearing
The director of the Division of Environmental Management may hold a public hearing if
there is a significant degree of public interest in a proposed permit or group of permits.
Public notice of such a hearing will be circulated in newspapers in the geographical area of
the discharge and to those on the Division of Environmental Management's mailing list at
least thirty days prior to the hearing.
c. Appeal Hearings
An applicant whose permit is denied, or is granted subject to conditions he deems
unacceptable, shall have the right to a hearing before the Commision upon making written
demand to the Director within 30 days following issuance or denial of the permit.

d. Issuance of the permit when no hearing is held
If no public hearing or appeal hearing is held, and after review of the comments received,
the Division of Environmental Management's determinations are substantially unchanged,
the permit will be issued and become effective immediately. This will be the final action of
the Division of Environmental Management.
If a hearing is not held, but there have been substantial changes, public notice of the
Division of Environmental Management's revised determinations will be made. Following
a 30-day comment period, the permit will be issued and will become effective immediately.
This will be the final action of the Division of Environmental Management unless a public
or appeal hearing is granted.

cc: Permits and Engineering
Technical Support Branch
County Health Dept.
Central Files
WSRO
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No X
If Yes, SOC No.
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Mark McIntire
Date: September 12, 1996
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County Rockingham
Permit No. NC0029980
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Miller Brewing Company
863 East Meadow Road
Eden, N.C. 27288
2. Date of Investigation: 960911
3. Report Prepared by: David Russell, WSRO
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Wayne Harrenstein,
Facilities Engineer/Sanitation; Ron Purgason, ORC
5. Directions to Site: Take Hwy. 770 East from Eden. The
Miller Brewing Company will be located on the left just past
Summit Road (SR 1733).
6. Discharge Points(s), List for all discharge points:
Outfall 001 Latitude: 36° 29' 31" Longitude: 79° 42' 39"
Outfall 002 Latitude: 36° 30' 57" Longitude: 79° 43' 00"
Outfall 001
U.S.G.S. Quad No. B20NW U.S.G.S. Quad Name Northeast Eden
Outfall 002
U.S.G.S. Quad No. A20SW U.S.G.S. Quad Name Southeast Eden
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain: Miller owns approximately
1700 acres.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): The
Miller facility is located above any flood plain.

9. Location of nearest dwelling: None within 1000 feet.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
Dan River - Outfall 001
UT to Dry Creek - Outfall 002
a. Classification Both are "C"
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.:
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent
downstream uses: The 5.2 MGD WWTP (Outfall #001)
Mebane Bridge WWTP and the Duke Power Dan River Steam
Station discharge upstream of Miller Brewing.
Fieldcrest Mills and Eden's Dry Creek WWTP discharge
into the Dan River below Miller's discharge. The
filter backwash water (outfall #002) discharges into a
dry ditch in front of the facility.
030203
Part II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: 5.2 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Waste
Water Treatment facility? 5.2 mgd
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility
(current design capacity)? 5.2 mgd
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two
years. None
e. Please provide a description of existing or
substantially constructed wastewater treatment
facilities; Influent pumps, bar screen, grit chamber,
chemical add., flow equalization, aeration basins,
clarifiers, aerobic digester, sludge thickener, filter`
press, flow measurement, polishing pond, effluent pumps
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater
treatment facilities.
g•
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: None known.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
in development approved
should be required not needed
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
Page 2

i.
r.
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a.
If residuals are being land applied, please specify
Permit No. W00001347.
Residuals
Telephone
b. Residuals
Contractor Johnson Nursery.
No.
stabilization: PSRP
Other
c. Landfill:
d.
PFRP
Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating
sheet). Class IV
4. SIC Code(s): 2082
Primary 27
Secondary
Main Treatment Unit Code: 0 2 5 - 3
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
DWQ
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant
Funds or are any public monies involved. (municipals only)?
2. Special monitoring
requests:
3. Important SOC, JOC
indicate)
or limitations (including toxicity)
or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
Date
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated
all of the non -discharge options available. Please provide
regional perspective for each option evaluated. NA
Spray Irrigation:
Connection to Regional Sewer System:
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
Page 3

Subsurface:
Other disposal options:
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This 5.2 mgd plant receives an average flow of 2.3 mgd. The
system provides excellent treatment and consistently meets
limits. Recommend that the permit be reissued. Mr. Wayne
Harrenstein, Facilities Engineer, verbally expressed a desire to
modify or eliminate some of the existing monitoring requirements.
If a written request is received, WSRO would like to comment on
the request.
q; (eil
Signature of report preparer
/%1/
Water Quality Regional upervisor
Date
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
Page 4

NPDES WASTE LOA;:i ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0029980
PERMITI'EE NAME:
FACILITY NAME:
Facility Status: Existing
Miller Brewing Company
Permit Status: Renewal with Modification
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 5.20 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 0 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 100 To
Comments:
Outfall 001 discharges contact process water. There is no guideline yet
in place covering beer brewing. Per Don Anderson of EPA, beer
brewing falls under misc. food and beverage category.
RECEIVING STREAM: the Dan River
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-02-03
Reference USGS Quad: B 20 NW (please attach)
County: Rockingham
Regional Office: Winston-Salem Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 2/28/97 Treatment Plant Class: IV
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by: Mari McIntire Date: 8/27/96
Prepared by-
Reviewed by:
Tt� 11_114.1a.
Date:1-5
Date: 11
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
F IL
S. zi k , ,
Fs- 1 z_
Drainage Area (mi2): 1,735 Average Streamflow (cfs): 1,648
s7Q10 (cfs): 369
w7Q10 (cfs): 608 30Q2 (cfs): 738
Toxicity Limits: Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P / F 2.1 %
February, May, August, and November
Upstream Location:
Downstream Location:
Parameters:
Highway 14
Highway 700
temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (#/d):
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I):
TSS (#/d):
pH (SU):
NH3-N (mg/I):
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature (°C):
Arsenic (µg/I):
MBAS (µg/I):
Selenium (µg/I):
Zinc (µg/I):
(µg/I):
Daily
Maximum
5,107
monitor
7,076
6-9
monitor
monitor *
monitor
Monthly
Average
5.2
2,042
2,845
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
Refer Fact Sheet for Cover Letter information about proposed limits
changes at next renewal.
* If chlorine added for disinfection.
Comments:

FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
Miller Brewing Company
NC0029980 - 001
Industrial - 100% Dom
Existing
Renewal
Dan River
C
03-02-03
Rockingham
Winston - Salem
McIntire
9 I 27 I 96
B 20 NW
Request #
estic - 0%
RECEIVED
8t 1 . Dept. of
NOV 7 `I 6
Stream CharacteristicFleg'O` Eal Office
USGS #
Date: 1996 update
Drainage Area (mi2): 1,735
Summer 7Q10 (cfs): 369
Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 608
Average Flow (cfs): 1,648
30Q2 (cfs): 738
IWC (%): 2.1 %
Wasteload Allocation Summary
Facility has coal storage on site, therefore arsenic and selenium monitoring is recommended.CT
Facility also uses detergents for tank cleaning, therefore MBAS monitoring will also be
recommended.
Facility received annual effluent monitoring for various metals in 1989 review. Other than zinc,
none of these metals have shown up in levels which would require monitoring. As this facility --
has no process which would involve metals, this is not surprising. Therefore, continued annual
monitoring for these parameters will not be recommended. :'
A 1993 letter dropped the instream monitoring requirement for this facility, but noted that it may be 4
required during this review. This area of the Dan River is ideal for the formation of an association of
dischargers to perform instream monitoring. Request Region comment as to whether this and other
facilities in area would be interested in forming such an association.
There are no current CFR guidelines covering beer brewing. A 1979 letter from EPA outlined a
meeting between EPA and Miller Brewing staff and recommended limits based upon 25 mg/1
B OD5 and 35 mg/1 TSS, (attached). The origin of the current limits is unknown. IAU
recommends that time limits Impetriofigd at the next renewel, (year 20025ased upon these 1979
correspondence. After review of the DMR's, the facility should be able to meet these proposed
limits and utilizing them would provide a known basis for the requirements of this effluent.
Request. Region and P & E response. a- etthedaheei. ohotel)oposed_ G;wa12 /fyEPA6
S ecial Schedule Req irements and additional comments from Reviewers:
rector tntenda.�iors•
600
ZAIni it, bel thh- giofirmdi /f,•,27 Khgryt re.4.5474
- 5 a pp/ea4 i h '!✓L M yG _ /7c /iri 14/7(/ t-in &J&f`
94 1Vrac 4e7W'; ( cry f y.
Recommended by:
Insraeam Assessment: Regional Supervisor,) . C pp Date: , --q -9
Permits & Engineering: � i —,vt4.._—' Date: ///(t/
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY: !:`-' C 4 1996
Date: as oeanex, etiG
,�
Farrell (eough
,aft% /5/Y1
Date:
D e 6.1520

Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit:
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
TOXICITY TEST
Chronic Toxicty (Ceriodaphnia) P/F
2.5%
2.1%
February, May. August, and November
TOXICS/METALS/CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Existing Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (#/d):
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (#/d):
pH (SU):
NH3-N (mg/1):
Total Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Temperature (°C):
Cadmium (µg/1):
Chromium (4/1):
Copper (41):
Cyanide (µg/1):
Lead (14/1):
Nickel (41):
Mercury (µg/1):
Silver (µg/1):
Zinc (µg/1):
Recommended Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (#/d):
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (#/d):
pH (SU):
NH3-N (mg/1):
Total Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Temperature (°C):
/Arsenic (µg/1):
Selenium (µg/1):
'MBAS WA):
Cadmium (14/1):
Chromium (4/1):
Copper (14/1):
Cyanide (µg/1):
Lead (14/1):
Nickel (4/1):
Mercury (µg/1):
Silver (µg/1):
Zinc (µg/1):
Daily Maximum
5,107
monitor
7,076
6-9
monitor
monitor
monitor
Daily Maximum
5,107 *
monitor
7,076 *
6-9
monitor
monitor
monitor
Monthly Average
5.20
2,042
2,845
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
Monthly Average
5.20
2,042 *
2,845 *
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
not required
not required
not required
not required
not required
not required
not required
not required
monitor
(Continuous)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(daily)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Annual)
(Continuous)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(Daily)
(if chlorine added for disinfection)
(Daily)
(Monthly)
(Monthly)
(Monthly)
(Monthly)
* Request Region contact, facility during next site visit of proposed changes in limits, (refer cover
page and attached correspondence). Also request Engineer note in cover letter of these proposed
changes in limits.

INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: Highway 14
Downstream Location: Highway 700
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity
This area of the Dan River is ideal for the formation of an association of dischargers to perform instream
monitoring. Request Region comment as to whether this and other facilities in area would be interested in
forming such an association.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing
treatment facilities? Yes No
If no, which parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the
regional office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach schematic, toxics spreadsheet, copy of model, or, if not modeled,
then old assumptions that were made, and description of how it fits into basinwide
plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

Facility Name Miller Brewing
Permit # NC0029980 Pipe # 001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is 2.1 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure
document). The permit holder shall perform quarterry monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from the
effective date of this permit during the months of Feb., May, Aug., and Nov. Effluent
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below
all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10
Permitted Flow
IWC
Basin & Sub -basin
Receiving Stream
County
369 cfs
5.20 MGD
2.1 %
03-02-03
Dan River
Rockingham
QCL P/F Version 9/91
Recommended by:
Farrell Keoug
Date 38 oc . , �9

• convert mgd to m3/d
1995 Production Rates : 653,973 gaud -> 2,475.5 m3/d 0
Full Capacity Production Rate : 849,315 gaVd > 3,215.0 m3/d
conversion: gaud = 0.0037854 • m3/d
Monthly Averages Daily Maximums
suggested guidelines from 1979 letter(s)
Monthly Average BOO 5 Monthly Average TSS
0.140 kg / m3 0.190 kg / m3
Monthly Average BOD 5
1995 : 346.6 kg/d
Capacity : 450.1 kg/d
1995 :
Capacity :
Monthly Average BOO 5
764.1 lbs/d
992.3 lbs/d
Monthly Average TSS
470.4 kg/d
610.8 kg/d
Monthly Average TSS
1,036.9 Ibsid
1,346.7 lbs/d
suggested guidelines from 1979 letter(s)
Daily Maximum BOD 5 Daily Maximum TSS
0.350 kg / m3 0.570 kg / m3
• determine allowable using loadings (kg/m3) per EPA
Daily Maximum BOO 5
1995 : 866.4 kg/d
Capacity : 1,125.2 kg/d
conversio: m3/d • kg/m3
• convert kg/d to lbs/d
<-- Final Recommended Limits in bold ----->
1995 :
Capacity :
conversio: lbs/d = 0.4536 4- kg/d ----- or -------> lbs/d = 0.4536 * (1 / kg/d)
* recommended limits based upon production. not full capacity of facility
Daily Maximum BOO 5
1,910.1 lbs/d
2,480.7 lbs/d
Daily Maximum TSS
1,411.1 kg/d
1,832.5 kg/d
Daily Maximum TSS
3,110.8 lbs/d
4,040.0 lbs/d
©e.g. 2,475.5
d
346.6,kc(
d
x
x
[ 1 lbs = 0.4536 kg I
0.140 kg = 346.6 kg/d
Oa
1
0.4536X _
d

•
elk ti UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGE
,1/ WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
iL .Qe1# V' • /,/ ' /`
.` RECEtVfED
DEC. 19 191«., -2-VI
SEP 30 1980
MEMORANDUM
.WATER QUAUTY DIY,
•
JAN 2 igict
PERMITS AND
ENGINEERING
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
TO: Regional Enforcement Division Directors
NPDES State Directorstlitl�Io<<.:ir:IT
FROM: Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for �� OPERATIOA
Water Enforcement (EN-335)
SUBJECT: Guidance on Setting BCT Permit Limits for Breweries
under section 402(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act
At the request of the Enforcement Division Directors of
Regions III and V, a Headquarters group including representatives
of my office, the Office of General Counsel and the Effluent
Guidelines Division met to determine appropriate BCT permit
limits for brewery facilities. (Guidelines have not been promul-
gated for this industry, although a draft development document
has been prepared by our EPA contractor.) Attached is a copy
of a letter, signed by Jeffrey G. Miller, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Enforcement and dated September 26, 1979,
setting forth this group's conclusion.
Until such time as guidelines are promulgated for the
Brewery industry, the attached letter may be used as guidance in
setting case -by -case BCT permit limits for breweries under
section 402(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act. As more information is
developed, based upon increased data from existing breweries and
more detailed BCT cost analyses, it is possible that the suggested
average BCT limits (BOD5-25mg/1, TSS-35 mg/1) will be changed.
Any comments on the suggested limits are welcome. Please
contact Bill Jordan (755-2545) of my office for further information.
Leonard A. Miller
Attachment
cc: Permit Branch Chiefs
I\,w.I

irect
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
SAY 2 6 i979
MEMORANDUM
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
TO : Director, Enforcement Division Region III
FROM : Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
Enforcement (EN-335)
SUBJECT: Miller Brewing Company
In response to the concerns expressed in your letter to
Leonard Miller and Jim Rogers dated August 7, 1979 concerning
Miller Brewing Company's proposed construction of a new brewery
in either Ohio or Pennsylvania, representatives of all concerned
offices met in Washington on September 5 to discuss the matter.
Present at the meeting were Terry Ode and Dave Arent of your
office, Jack Newman and Chuck Sloustas of Region V, Don Anderson
of Effluent Guidelines Division, Bill Jordan and Dov Weitman of
Permits Division and Diane Olsson of Office of General Counsel.
It was agreed at the meeting that Don Anderson of the
Effluent Guidelines Division would review currently available
data and determine appropriate BCT limits. If BCT were found to
differ significantly from the limits in the proposed Pennsylvania
permit (and issued Ohio permit), it was generally agreed that
Region III should object to the Pennsylvania draft permit and
recommend incorporation of appropriate BCT limits. At the same
time, however, Region V agreed to inform both Miller Brewing and
the State NPDES Agency in Ohio that if Miller Brewing chooses to
locate in Ohio, it will be obligated to meet BCT promptly upon
expiration of its current permit. This approach would result
ultimately, though not initially, in equivalent requirements in.
each State.
The Effluent Guidelines Division has reviewed the draft
development document and other available brewery data and has
conducted preliminary BCT cost tests on previously developed BAT
requirements contained in the draft development document. Its
conclusion, based on an informal BCT cost analysis, is that
existing data would support the following BCT limits for Miller
Brewing: maximum daily loadings (in units of kg per cubic meters
beerproduced) of 0.350 BODS and 0.57 TSS; and average monthly
loadings of 0.140 BOD ;and-,D.190 TSS. These mass average
monthly limits reflec‘ '25 mg/1 for BOD5 and 35 mg/1 for TSS.
lk1� fY1 aPl

2
z,
EPA regulations (40 CFR 122.17(a)) require permittees to
achieve BCT and other requirements as soon as possible; for new
dischargers, this generally means compliance upon startup. As a
result, requiring BCT in the Pennsylvania permit may give Miller
Brewing a temporary incentive to locate in Ohio, since appropriate
BCT requirements could not be imposed immediately in Ohio due to
the existence of a permit issued by Ohio incorporating less
stringent limits. However, it is anticipated that the Miller
Brewing facility will not be constructed for several years, so
that operation in Ohio with only BPT controls would be allowed
for only a brief period. Furthermore, inflation and other
economic factors should encourage Miller Brewing to install BCT
initially rather than delay for two or three years and risk
prohibitive construction costs at that time.
To insure your timely receipt of this letter, I am sending
it to you by Magnafax. If you have any questions, please
call Bill Jordan (FTS 755-2870) or Don Anderson (FTS 426-2707).
cc: Ms. Sandra Gardebring
Mr. Almo Manaardo - -

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
Miller Brewing Company
NC0029980
100 % Industrial
Existing
Renewal
Dan River & ut Dry Creek
C
03-02-03
Rockingham
Winston - Salem
McIntire
9/27/96
B 20 NW
Request # 8512 & 8513
Stream Characteristic:
USGS # Dan River
Date: previous WLA 1996
Drainage Area (mi2): 1,701 1,735
Summer 7Q10 (cfs): 313 369
Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 579 608
Average Flow (cfs): 1,960 1,648
30Q2 (cfs): 704 738
IWC (%): 2.5 % 2.1
1980: Staff Report indicates facility existed, but had trouble meeting daily averages in past - no indication of limits or how they were
derived.
1985: Facility added another process which included chlorination - this wastewater was directed to the treatment plant and no
adverse consequences were expected.
1986: WLA reissued w/ same limits. 1979 and 1980 correspondence in file from EPA indicates that a meeting was held to initiate
finalization of the brewery guidelines, (although no final guidelines have ever been adopted). In this letter, limits based upon
kg per cubic meter of beer produced were suggested which equaled out to approximately 25 mg/I BOD5 and 35 mg/I TSS.
The WLA review used the kg per cubic meters of beer produced, (but did not did not use the mg/I suggested limits) and found
that the current limits were more stringent.
1992: WLA reissued based upon previous limits. Addition of metals monitoring and instream monitoring was also recommended, (an
attached water chemistry analysis indicated that some of these metals existed).
BOD and TSS limits
The current limits, (whose origin is unknown) amount to:
BOD5
TSS
Monthly Average
47 mg/I
66 mg/I
Daily Maximum
118 mg/I Daily Maximum is approximately 2.5's the Monthly Average
163 mg/I Daily Maximum is approximately 2.5's the Monthly Average
The 1979 letter, (attached to the Fact Sheet) suggested various kg / m3 rates based upon production rates. A calculation was used in
the 1986 WLA which used these factors, but we were unable to determine how some of the calculations were made. I reviewed this
with the engineer and we were able to use these number to develope limits, (refer attached spreadsheet) - much of the difficulty lies
in the conversion of units and masses per volume and masses per volume per day, (be sure to remember to drop out denominators
when reviewing this permit far the next review). I will recommend using these, (with this letter, which involved a meeting between the
EPA and Miller Brewing executives) as a justification for applying these recommended limits for the next renewal.
BOD5
TSS
Monthly Average Daily Maximum
763.4 Ibs/d 1,908.5 lbs/d
1,036.0 Ibs/d 3,108.1 lbs/d
Effluent data indicates that the facility should be able to regularily meet these limits.
Instream Monitoring
A letter from Preston Howard, (dated August 16, 1993) dropped the instream monitoring requirements for this facility, but noted that the
1997 basin review may require instream monitoring for all the facilities in this waterbody to either be individual or coordinated amongst
the dischargers.
I will attach a map and proposed instream monitoring coordination sites for all the facilities involved in this segment of the Dan River.

• convert mgd to m3/d
1995 Production Rates : 653,973 gad ----> 2,475.5 m3/d©
Full Capacity Production Rate : 849,315 gaVd > 3,215.0 m3/d
conversion: ga!/d = 0.0037854 ' m3/d
Monthly Averages Daily Maximums
suggested guidelines from 19791e11er(s)
Monthly Average BOD 5 Monthly Average TSS
0.140 kg / m3 0.190 kg / m3
Monthly Average BOD 5 Monthly Average TSS
1995 : 346.6 kg/d 470.4 kg/d
Capacity : 450.1 kg/d 610.8 kg/d
1995 :
Capacity :
Monthly Average BOD 5
764.1 Ibs/d
992.3 Ibs/d
Monthly Average TSS
1,036.9 Ibs/d
1,346.7 Ibs/d
suggested guidelines from 1979 letter(s)
Daily Maximum BOD 5 Daily Maximum TSS
0.350 kg / m3 0.570 kg / m3
• determine allowable using loadings (kg/m3) per EPA
1995 :
Capacity :
conversio: m3/d ' kg/m3
• convert kg/d to lbs/d
<---- Final Recommended Limits in bold ----->
1995 :
Capacity :
conversio: lbs/d = 0.4536 + kg/d ----- or ---..> Ibs/d = 0.4536 ' (1 / kg'd)
• recommended limits based upon production, not full capacity of facility
Daily Maximum BOD 5
866.4 kg/d
1,125.2 kg/d
Daily Maximum BOD 5
1,910.1 lbs/d
2,4130.7 Ibs/d
Daily Maximum TSS
1,411.1 kg/d
1,832.5 kg/d
Daily Maximum TSS
3,110.8 Ibs/d
4,040.0 Ibs/d
w e.g. 2,475.50r
d
x
x
[1Ibs=0.4536kg]
0.140 kg
1
0.4536)r
d
= 346.6 kg/d

Toxics
This faL
paramet—
especialll
those vak
tour a` thr
I drop
Arsen
Cadm
Chron
Copp€
Cyanic
Lead:
Mercu
Nickel:
Silver:
Zinc:
Selenit
MEMO
TO:
DATE.
SUBJECT:
tier w l �-,Pad„c4�Ii�Ue
19ei/� i5
4 1,b1,1 ,c,L ?O
F41315 G.)(1c-stb,s_
rfNct cerN(d O.O -i
01.
lggS= 653,'+ 3 x o•0038 --
CApRcAl"f : 8141.3i54 O.Oa3?
From
Jzi(c.-Ts I La,...„...a/
r,e.(5/yf.
SK q,,,SumG
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources c9
Primed on Recycled Paper
an
Pre,
Miller Brewing NC0029980

MILLER BREWING COMP.ANY
PO Box 3327
EDEN NC 27289-3327
SHIPPING ADDRESS:
863 E MEADOW RD
EDEN NC 27288-3636
PHONE: [phone]
November 19, 1996
Mr. David Russell
NCDEHNR
585 Waughtown St.
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
RE: Miller Brewing Co.
Eden, NC 27288
Wastewater Treatment Plant Staffing
Dear Mr. Russell:
This letter is to confirm recent conversation between Mark McIntire and myself on November
13, 1996 concerning operational changes for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, Miller Brewing
Company (Miller), Eden, NC. These changes are required due to recent downsizing of our facility and
planned retirements.
The plans are to convert the Wastewater Treatment facility to a two shift operation. We plan
to hold our effluent discharge in the polishing lagoons during the third shift and discharge only when
certified operators are present during first and second shifts. The wastewater plant would remain in its
normal operational mode with monitoring of the equipment performed by our Utilities area. In
essence, we will discharge our normal 24 hour effluent flow during a 16 hour window. Our peak flow
has measured 2.9 MGD during our years of operation here in Eden. Millers understanding is that with
this flow, and NPDES permit of 5.2 MGD, certified operators are required only on the shifts that the
WWTP is discharging to the Dan River.
It is Miller's understanding that this operational change would not affect our NPDES permit, its
parameters, and our renewal application, in any way.
Should you have any questions on this notification, please feel free to call me at 910/627-
2353.
Sincerely,
Lctiv„,
Dan M. Foster
cc. Mark McIntire- DEHNR, Raleigh, NC
David Goodrich- DEHNR, Raleigh, NC
• Page 1

NPDES WASTE i. OAD ALLOCATION
•
PERMIT NO.: NC0029980
PERMI'1TEE NAME: Miller Brewing Company
FACILITY NAME:
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal with Modification
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 002
Design Capacity: NOL MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 0 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 100 %
Comments:
Outfall 002 discharges the carbon filter backwash water resulting from
the treatment of the municipal water supply.
RECEIVING STREAM: an unnamed tributary to Dry Creek
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-02-03
Reference USGS Quad: B 20 NW (please attach)
County: Rockingham
Regional Office: Winston-Salem Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 2/28/97 Treatment Plant Class: IV
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by:
Prepared br
Reviewed by:
jot)
Mark i cintire
Date: 8/27/96
Date: Z$ Aftwits&bee 11.16
Dat
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
FlL
.'l21 I IC,
Est 3
Dainage Area (mi2): n/a s7Q10 (cfs): 0 IWC: 100 %
Daily Maximum Monthly Average
Wasteflow (mgd): monitor
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1): 45 30
Settleable Solids (ml/L): 0.2 0.1
Turbididty (NTU): *
pH (SU): 6 - 9
Iron (mg/1): monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (4/1): monitor monitor
* The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water
to exceed 50 NTU. If the turbidity exceeds these levels due to
natural background conditions, the discharge level cannot cause any
increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in
other than trace amounts.
Comments:

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION RECEIVE
Request # 85133 0 `-41441131
67
Regional othce
Miller Brewing Company
NC0029980 - 002
Industrial - 100%
Existing
Renewal
u.t. Dry Creek
C
03-02-03
Rockingham
Winston - Salem
McIntire
9/27/96
A 20 SW
Wasteload Allocation Summary
Domestic - 0%
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
n/a
0
100 %
Carbon filter backwash resulting from the treatment of the municipal watersupply.
Normally these are general permits, but Miller Brewing requested this be placed under it existing
NPDES permit to keep from having more than one waste water discharge permit number.
S cial Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers:
,o40.,w40....44, a..► "4 D o y .: 1.4'.,,,..../.. Ne o0 7. p 9 g0 p•ccc. c4 d R u
Recommended by:
Instream Assessment: (10.hict
Regional Supervisor:
Permits & Engineering:
Date: zs (114'
Farrell Keough
Date: ) /14/4 �Q
Date:/% - '- l
Date: I
Ca 4 19%
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY:
•

CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Existing Limits Daily Maximum
Wasteflow (mgd):
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1): 45
Settleable Solids (ml/L): 0.2
Turbididty (NTU):
pH (SU): 6 - 9
Iron (mg/1): monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (1.4/1): monitor
Monthly Average
monitor
30
0.1
monitor
(weekly)
(2 / month)
(weekly)
(weekly)
(Daily)
(weekly)
(weekly)
* The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the
turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural background conditions, the discharge level cannot
cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Recommended Limits Daily Maximum
Wasteflow (mgd):
Total Suspended Solids (mg/1): 45
Settleable Solids (ml/L): 0.2
Turbididty (NTU):
pH (SU): 6 - 9
Iron (mg/1): monitor
Total Residual Chlorine (141): monitor
Monthly Average
monitor
30
0.1
monitor
(weekly)
(2 / month)
(weekly)
(weekl
ail W
(weekly) Jb (y b k
(weekly)
* The discharge shall not cause the turbidity of the receiving water to exceed 50 NTU. If the
turbidity exceeds these levels due to natural background conditions, the discharge level cannot
cause any increase in the turbidity in the receiving water.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing
✓
treatment facilities? Yes No
If no, which parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the
regional office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach schematic, toxics spreadsheet, copy of model, or, if not modeled,
then old assumptions that were made, and description of how it fits into basinwide
plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

•
P FOR AGENCY USE
>;�{:� :ti;r::.• :•.tip:
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
001
17. Description of Intake and Discharge
For each of the parameters listed below, enter in the appropriate box the value or code letter answer called for (see instructions)
In addition, enter the parameter name and code and all required values for any of the following parameters if they are checked in
Item 16: ammonia, cyanide, aluminum, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, zinc, phenols, oil
and grease, and chlorine (residual).
.-Parameter and Code
- 217
Influent
Effluent
Untreated
Intake
Water
(Daily
average)
(1)
In -Plant
Treated
Intake
Water
(Daily
average)
(2)
Daily
Average
(3)
Minimum
Value
Observed or
Expected
During
Discharge
Activity
(4)
Maximum
Value
Observed or
Expected
During
Discharge
Activity
(5)
Frequency
of Analysis
(6)
Number of
Analyses
(7)
Sample
Type
(8)
Flow• /Y1 /a/ON
Gallons per day
00056
2.10
0.422
5.2
CONT.
250
NA
pH
Units
00400
•:;.:r: rrr<.: • .::::.:.:rr.....
7.7
9.0
5/7
250
G
Temperature (winter)
°F
74028
57.0,
37
86,
5/7
'250
G
Temperature (summer)
°F
74027
83.0
59
99
5/7
250
G
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand
(BOD 5-Day)
mg/1
00310
14.53
5.75
32.12
5/7
250
24
Chemical Oxygen
Demand (COD)
mg/I
00340
NA
Total Suspended
(nonfitterable) Solids
mg/I
00530
22.61
7.96
46.88
5/7
250
24
Specific Conductance
micromhos/cm at 25°C
'`.'r::`..:{:':.�:.::. •••:• l
r- • `#:'
':.Y:.:•:'•:J:� •r.•:•:: �}:•: Jam•.]}�Y'��}}
Settleable Matter •
(residue)
ml/I
00545
.
•
NA
•
•
• Other discharges sharing intake flow (serial numbers) (see instructions)

• 8/ I9/.96 4:10 PM
'FOR AGENCY USE
17. (Cont'd)
DISCHARGE SERIAL NUMBER
001
Parameter and Code
217
Influent
Effluent
Untreated
Intake
Water
(Daily
average)
(1)
In -Plant
Treated
Intake
Water
(Daily
average)
(2)
Daily
Average
(3)
Minimum
Value
Observed or
Expected
During
Discharge
Activity
(4)
Maximum
Value
Observed or
Expected
During
Discharge
Activity
(5)
Frequency
of Analysis
(6)
Number of
Analyses
(7)
Sample
Type
(8)
Ammonia 00610
(Mg / L
)
LT 1.0
LT 1.0
4.0
1/7
51
24
Chlorine Residual
50060
(UG /L)
LT 100
LT 100
LT 100
5/7
250
24
Chronic Toxicity
Pass
Pass,
Pass
4/365
4
24
18. Plant Controls Check if the following
plant controls are available for this discharge
Alternate power source for major
pumping facility
Alarm or emergency procedure for
power or equipment failure
Complete Item 19 if discharge is from
cooling and/or steam water generation
and water treatment additives are used
19. Water Treatment Additives If the
discharge is treated with any
conditioner, inhibitor, or algicide,
answer the following:
a. Name of Material(s)
b. Name and address of manufacturer
c. Quantity (pounds added per million
gallons of water treated)
218
219a
219b
219c
® APS
® ALM
NA