NC0029980_Wasteload Allocation_19860624

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNINC 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:
June 24, 1986
This document is printed on reuse paper - igpriore any
content on the i-e' rerse side

1)1n(2-
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION thgineer l ue e het...
sTG 1 G7,18/8s 44,4.67 .1.
Facility Name: PI Lea. ,ikEu, A.1G ea•,tp,a.JY . Date (eAF/PS-
•
Existing a
Proposed 0 Permit No.: NCOO Z pv Pipe No.: 0-6/ County: iee e. Cc Ai tt,,,4„�
CQ el)
Design Capacity (MGD): T. Z. .Industrial (% of Flow): (col, lbmestic (% of Flow):
Receiving Stream: , , jj.., le; ✓er Class : G Sub -Basin: 03 - 0 z- 03
Reference USGS Quad: i� Zo AJ (Please attach) Requestor: 4,(e e✓e,r.sk Regional Office L/540
Svu naSr f—D,Ei1/
(Guideline limitations, if applicable, are to be listed on the back of this form.)
Design 7enp.:
7Q10 (cfs) 3 1 ?j
Drainage Area (mil) :
Winter 7Q10 (cfs)
I icl
579
Location of D.O. minimum (miles below outfall): Q .O
Avg. Streamflow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs)
I %a
-7vy
Slope (fpm) 2,3
Velocity (fps) : . q ' Kl (base e, per day) : , 3"7 K2 (base e. Der day) : 1.7 Z
to 2a'C
26'G
Effluent
Characteristics
Monthly
Average
14GbleE2rk
$Obc
2o'4t, tio04,1
5to-7 *1 a4j
T -S 5
2845 (1043
707% (1 e2
14
6- a so
f
,
r _ ` gt,-----
Conments:
Effluent
Characteristics
:tenthly
I:verage
Cbnments
Reviewed By:
"Zot
Date:______
-8Y

For Appropriate Dischargers, List Complete Guideline Limitations Below
Effluent
Characteristics
Monthly
Average
Maximum Daily
Comments
A
rss
J eLfs-- La/d'y
7076 us4 i
a( -I P f
IN
coA 1.,.i'F?or. i recef•-.M4..1
+Li aqqts,lKi
cMiMce rc -1avf {a
4t
iwct,..414.1.
•,. Aeri c r
,
6
66h
r. e flJQ
117.1 t4
T
TIC
6 5 6 Alia
A, 3. 0 "�
0.0-' cJ�4 pence
Zee of Produc
' "---'---' Lbs/Day Produced
oAJA v-i-i-i ^• P3
�ln dui �l
I�
�.s
_tee`
W` b,• C4.kA -) (^^"
4--w1 0
cl
"711- 6 (42
u)c1
,tait.

Facility Name
Type of Waste
Status
Receiving Stream
Stream Class
S t_t b b a s i. r-t
County
Regional Office
Reques- t:o v
Date of Request
Quad
Request No. . 2437
7
WASTELO1. L) ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM ----------------------
MILLER BREWERY---EDEN FACILITY
: INDUSTRIAL
: EXISTING
. t)N RIVER
C
. 030203
: ROCKINGHAM Drainage Area
: WINSTON--•SA--ALEM 7010 (cfs)
: DALE OVERCASH Winter 7010 (cfs)
3002 (cfs)
B2ONW Average Floe: (cfs)
Wasteflow (mcd)
5--Day BOD (LBS/DAY)
TSS (L.BS/DAY)
pH (SU)
R:ECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS
MN AVG
5.2
2042
2845
Recommended by -
Reviewed Ib y :
Tech. Support Supervisor
Reg:i.ona:l. Supervisor
MAX DL._Y
5107
7076
6--9
(sq mi) : 1701
. 313
. 579
. 704
: 1960
COMMENTS --•-•----•---•---------
jk 4
Permits F. Ertgineer-i.nr.I_.... .......
(04
RECEIVED
MAY ) ? o
Environni n ; arzgoment
Winston-Salem Reg. Office
Dal.; e s%
Dia t:e.._.._.5/01 3/ (57.42
Date C.
Iiate.

Cam rAS 5
-r(7r
5 . z Yv,ttd Pcevi r --� �i %8 4: j rs3
z • rrocl DA,Ies Hie 1..9 v Z 3
. 19
PzeMT Z 9'S5-S E��d
Op,14,,r Av.( , I I z • 1 kd/d
lb z •Zoye,
oQ
Ib=k�x Z•6gZ
Pt2m,� 1-, 3g3-5
On,10. R Z, 9 $ I •7•
-00apww J
Z042_ t'°Ida`c
03oZo5
u"-jr- tira c
t. S tea (co r ON/At ` ,44,,
l cis -aq- cJ Tss cvf-c'F�- pk_)
o-P 1 ma ( l
�j (C
3(3(,L
i ci.1r..,:t VA...A/vs. -Bti`,)a, r f
1
5101 (6pcz.
701.6,
rr
-k -Ater r i {'•( 1-614. r-e--'?
LC v• c.�, Qvt.^�/1_�+2 : � ,,E *DA
I ( f (7 a,rr' v�1A,L.ciA l rl` ` °,,'/!
Cu'nf ;€N± vw. -t-
-�-_km (4-
z)voe,Qec -
-t-
�-
GA (0 6 et cfc„
Craw; •, ioT S
5r27-
e�v.r�
iv\e lM eAT c0. , .J V 1i (4.4
N 5a4.61
>< 111?3c5 y r' Ck = 1(o t{Zc( yela
309.9 mad() t&;j\ \ �i
1
stiv't:v4—
H c(- 5,r nP t -- 1 rrnr px.rt._ C JO L cEn.rfr^,sFicrL.._
3
1 lb =
c..6,c
N 53-
„,„„a

MEMO.
TO: /,✓ 6
- /K-,7(7
DATE-
SUBJECT:
1/7T�C f 45 /9 ( 5
/4 / $i C34/
71/1 0 P-
R�C�EI
l
SSE 1986�/�Q
TE�HN/�q� S6644
a North Carolina ;anent of Natural
;) Resources &Community Development

�1tv r
elk
IV
f
,,it PROD
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20460
!!! RECEIVED
DEC' 19197 0i``f" c,
°�'?'9-2-VI
SEP 30 1980
. WIAhR QUALITY my,
•
JAN 2 MO
PERMITS AND
ENGINEERING
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
DEC 1 1979
Regional Enforcement Division Directors
'
NPDES State Directors ��.�
r',%Lo�..,.apT
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for 10NS
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

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
SE' 2 6 1979
MEMORP.NnUM
TO
FROM Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water
Enforcement (EN-335)
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
Director, Enforcement Division Region III
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
beer produced) of 0.350 BOD and 0.57 TSS; and average monthly
loadings of 0.140 BOD and 0.190 TSS. These mass average
monthly limits reflect 25 mg/1 for BOD5 and 35 mg/1 for TSS.

- 2-
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).
Miller
cc: Ms. Sandra Gardebring
Mr. Almo Manaardo

/!l / 7z, - err ,.)GzzGI 0-7-.
a)i-Lati- I -Le 4
4c c.csl 1/ 4 2 & r, 6
)
d..6tod (-62,40 0 Id._ Za.e---e4/1-,ev-274-
jAo cif vA,o rni
So 5 c._ u) chC 4
5 /1 ,-cGA-`q -,b 1Y1. /(mot
GJh a 5 i 77Y - 7kr1
11 ALA ? __ i //'rn
7

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Winston-Salem Regional Office
July 23, 1985
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dale Overcash,
Leader, NPDES Group
Permits and Engineering
THROUGH: M. Steven Mauney, �h 1
Regional Engineer, WSRO
FROM: T. Gray Hauser, Jr.
Chemical Analyst, WSRO
SUBJECT:
Site Evaluation for Permit Renewal
Miller Brewing Company
NPDES Permit NC0029980
Rockingham County
o+ Jy1rr. 'vd
,JUL 26 1985
PERMITS & ENGINEERING
A site evaluation was conducted on July 16, 1985 at Miller Brewing
Co. Hugh Dinwiddie and Harry Pickens represented Miller. The treatment
facilities are well maintained. The characteristics of the wastewater, and
the treatment works have not changed since the Site Evaluation of September
11, 1980, which is attached. A current Effluent Data Summary is also attached.
The production of an unpasteurized beer named "Plank Road" is in the
testing stage at the plant. This will necessitate the sterilization of the
beer bottles with a water spray containing 40 mg/1 chlorine. The maximum
volume of wastewater produced by the bottle spray will be 411 gallons per
minute. The unit will operate 16 hours per day, 5 days per week. Thus
the maximum discharge rate will be 394,560 GPD, 5 days per week. Mr.
Pickens stated that the expected volume of wastewater is 60% of the maximum,
or 236,763 GPD, 5 days per week.
Miller Brewing Co. proposes to route this water to the polishing lagoons
that receive effluent from the secondary clarifiers of their wastewater
treatment plant. The lagoons are currently operated in parallel, 5 feet
deep. Each lagoon holds 1.3 MG/Ft., and a maximum capacity of 15.2 MG.
Floating aerators are in the lagoons, but are not in use.

Dale Overcash
Page Two
July 23, 1985
The lagoons should provide adequate detention time for chlorine to
dissipate from the bottle rinse water. Routing this water through the
activated sludge treatment system would only create an undesireable additional
hydraulic load. Discharging to the lagoons may reduce algal growth,
decreasing the TSS in the final effluent. Flow measurement and effluent
sampling are located below the lagoon discharge, so the bottle rinse water
will be adequately monitored.
I recommend this method of treatment be approved, with the condition
that chlorine residual be monitored daily in the effluent by grab sample.
I further recommend that the permit be reissued, with the above mentioned
change in effluent monitoring•
TGH/cm
cc: Rockingham County Health Dept.
WSRO

PARAMETER
MILLER BREWING CO.
EFFLUENT DATA SUMMARY
February, March, May, 1985*
PERMIT LIMITS SELF -MONITORING
DAILY AV. DAILY MAX. DATA
Flow (MGD) 5.20 1.29
BOD (lbs./day) 2042 5107 395.3
TSS (lbs./day) 2845 7076 475.8
pH (S.U.) 6-9 8.0 - 8.9
* April data not available.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATIIRAI. R1:SoUuc1•:ti & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Wastewater Management
Winston-Salem Regional Office
8003 Silas Creek Parkway I:xtens ion
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27106
REPORT OF Site Evaluation
Place visited Miller Brewing Company
;1cl•+ress P.O. Box 3327, Eden, NC 27288
•
River Bn in
By Whom Messers. James Johnston & James C. Watson
Date Sept. 11, 1980
Roanoke
Time Spent three (3) hrs.
Persons Contacted Mr. Dan Foster, Manager WWTP and Mr. James M. Daily, Plant Manager
Reason for Visit
to perform a site evaluation prior to issuance of a State NPDES Permit.
Copies to:
A. C. Turnage/Bill Mills
WSRO
REPORT: The following Staff Report and Recommendations pertain to the site evaluation
conducted at Miller Brewing Company, located in Eden, Rockingham County, NC,
at the above address.
fart I INSPECTION OF EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
1. Directions to Site: The wastewater treatment plant, beer production facility is
located on the northeast corner of NC Highway 770 and NCSR 1733. It is 1-1/4 mile
east of the NC Highway 14 junction with NC Highway 770 in Eden.
Latitude: 36° 29' 31"
Longitude: 79° 42' 41" Elevation: 500'
2. Bearing and Distance to Effluent Discharge: the discharge_point isatthe dan river
1.8 miles south from the southwest corner of the Miller Brewinj Company site.

-2-
1. Size: Total size 1707.632 acres (1444.393 :acres in North Carolina), waste-
water treatment y lant site-approximately_19 acres.
•
+. Topography: The wastewater treatment plant site slopes gently from approximately
650' to 620' toward the east.
5. Location of Nearest Dwelling: The nearest home is 1200' west of the edge of
the wastewater treatment plant site. Other homes are greater than 1400' to
the west along NCSR 1733.
6. Receiving Surface Water:
n. Creek: Dan River
b. Class: "C"
c. Average flow: 2200 cfs
J. 7Q10: 373 cfs
e. Drainage Arca: N/A
f. River Basin: Roanoke
g. Sub —basin: ROA03
!'art II DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING/PROPOSED TREATMENT WORKS
A. Treatment Plant: The Miller Brewing system is a 5.2 MGD industrial wastewater treat-
ment facility consisting of an influent lift station, bar screens, grit removal,
.influent sampling., chemical addition. aeration basins, secondary clarifiers,
effluent polishing lagoons, in -plant and effluent lift stations effluent monitoring
and flow measuring standby power and sludge dewatering.
B. Population Served: Approximately 1000 employees. However, all domestic
wastewater goes into the City of Eden's wastewater treatment system.

•
. . .
Part III OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
A. According to Vol. 45, No. 127, pg. 44134 EPA expects to issue a notice of
44
proposed rulmaking in September, 1981, for the beverage industry.
B. There is no fecal coliform limit nor residual chlorine limits listed on the
effluent limitations and monitoring requirements page of the permit. This facility
is not required to chlorinate due to dillution. Residual chlorine monitoring is
only required when chlorination is utilized.
Part IV EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Evaluation: This facility has experienced some difficulty in the past mepring
daily averages, however, this has been corrected and they are presently within
compliance. (See attachment I)
B. Recommendations: Recommend the permit be issued as drafted.
•

NO.4
NO.3
• NO.2
ti
NO.
- EFFLUENT
SETTLING
• BASIN
CHEMICAL
ADDITION
TANK
CHLORINE
BLDG.
SAMPLING
CHAMBER
INFLUENT PUMPING
8 GRIT REMOVAL .
As NT
9z000.�a, •
11430 y�l //1L.
4t4itt- )0P- chl,
SPLITTER BOX
NO.3NO.5 NO.NO.2 NO.4
•
MAIN TREATMENT
0‘54•Mtii
5Cpoo0/Fr •
4(.460 Ilk
s 14AC. Je.
4' , 10 A► Gr
PARALLEL MODE
SPLITTER BOX
3, 7 K1
�L0000/F-r
13, 333 / 11��
0 ' Sac./.4q's
3 • 5 mac.
-AEBRATION
ASINS
•
SECONDARY
CLARIFIERS
BLOWER BLDG.
•
BLDG.
EFFLUENT PUMP
STATION/3 WAY
'SPLITTER BOX
DRAIN PUMP STATION/
OUTLET .CONTROL BOX
FIGURE. 1— i
PLANT PLOT PLAN
WEST
LAGOON
1.3140t/FT
Avti scsPE
12(. 6c.c/14
I5.2"/^vc
S�+k.
4�8Ac.
EAST
LAGOON
SERIES MODE
SPLITTER BOX