NC0037834_Wasteload Allocation_19940602

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SKEET
NC0037834
Archie Elledge WWTP
NPDES Permit:
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 2, 1994
This document is printed cm reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reverse aside

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0037834
PERMITTEE NAME:
FACILITY NAME:
City of Winston-Salem
Archie Elledge WWTP
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 30.0 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 77.6 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 22.4 %
Comments:
SIU info submitted to pretreatment 1/27/94 by W-S. City requesting
Cadmium limit be dropped. See cover letter attached.
RECEIVING STREAM: Salem Creek
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-07-04
Reference USGS Quad: C 17 SE
County: Forsyth
Regional Office: Winston-Salem Regional Office
(please attach)
Previous Exp. Date: 12/31/94 Treatment Plant Class: Class IV
Classification changes within three miles:
none
rrer ..*zr
71 lima'
Requested b, : Gre: Nizic10 , 3/15/94
Prepared �y: .limilmon�ri -
Reviewe,r by: �_ vr/
-3F0.1)u.:.
grip
LQ/I / '
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
,l(la
3//' /f>G
7799
2
Drainage Area (mi ) LQ ,) Avg. Streamflow (cfs): (�5
7Q10 (cfs) l' Winter 7Q10 (cfs) (3 30Q2 (cfs) ) 9
Toxicity Limits: IWC .7U % Acut
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters aO, -fempevi fu r? re co I eel, frm CZYldachvl k
Upstream '1 (i 3t fe) Location
Downstream 3 Locatio
(nkke;3kern)
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/1)
al
NH3-N (mg/1)
/ . )
CI
D.O. (mg/1)
e9.5
62.5
TSS (mg/1)
,CIii
SO
F. Col. (/100 ml)
'cOo until l�l6r lch/
ate; 10I311g4
roco Lv L I IDI91
cJ 4r ' 1,I3 94
pH (SU)
(0--ej
12 -.q
i PC. LAANS)
TP (rY lam')
►'Y)orr tt,,-
1'Y)OYl, }L r
j'Y)cn, I-c.-
Yr DYI, tur
TN (rr I K)
Ccv1 m ru,QJ1? 1
Moat toy
0, u(A 1Li -v
r,,,n, iv{
l�c
, •.,,,.1 ,,'(.,
Cu ar c.d C `e)
Cc9 pe r ( A9)
CL I LP ickc)
rrv' n t h7Y
J L rytA4
NV:. inr'
7,0c, l st)
Y1ilcn,i-t.'
VYI'ric'
L€rr , cu.rren+l�{
I-hckK Y iL.. late
t O -Wt c '�,,e{v
, U(bC Ctelu4ll.1
e►rrl- ecael
mof
bI •`itUr-Ir 1
Comments:
(r u\ v ec)lxn rn, l'
1-a=r-.u,'1 hCD noted much color ir7 el( lueo
Cc i lelfer tc pertniP 6hacld it arrr) 4c C4I,
Curren i`-t € amosncn color and rraii deve
recce,v,r Strearn.
a tar cl zvd,

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
Request #
City of Winston-Salem Archie Elledge WWTP
NC0037834
77.7% Domestic/22.4% Industrial
Existing
Renewal
Salem Creek
C
030704
Forsyth
WS
G. Nizich
3/ 16/94
C17SE
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNI
APR 14 1994
Winston-Salem
7789 Regional Office
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
02115857
1988
67.3
15
18
65
19
75.6
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Permit renewed with existing limits for conventional parameters. Current permit has 1000 fecal ,
and toxicity monitoring only since facility could not meet both WET and fecal coliform due to short
chlorine contact time. This monitoring renewed until 12/31 of this year (expiration date of current
permit), and 200 fecal limit and WET limit begin on 1/1/95.
Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers:
71//S /, e/c./TY'S ."r/°GocoA, T Nos ,9 T,2Gire,.,Ddu. s / 1DC 4S or
Co 4_ o e.a / T — TNI s /1 t. s u 4-TS / ,.J A 44 A' CAA 7 I C oc
f,? o ,`1 Tx/ . 4,S t..e".4 foi.a/ T 'To 7 .4' YA D/P/l✓ ,Q vet 64- 8. % „7/4-e ).
6J5/20 6)O4 O L./XL. TO SEE LOLO.F Ii A7G4 L, 1, rs Otil 2?./E Asc.✓4,C6E.
GlPST..2 ri `F Adoc.,NST,[ddH 1-142 n.1, To.t /AJC, o/ Coco/& A//G 7uI41/e/r/ l9ocxL.d
sEd�f 44 V Avr4GEoc(S. ..¢ /8-94-
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
Instream Assessme I c y/j `l Date:
/2"-- Regional Supervisor: �,�. ?, �� Date: S
Permits & Engineering: /,z , C�'v�l�.f Date: fr/q,7
�
Date: i//7/q(1
c. acLuii
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY:
tact I y TrfY cvn se;,snne r) f- D Y' 515 /c4

2
$xisting Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Co1. (/100 m1):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (4/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
J ecomtnended Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mgll):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Co1. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
30 30
21 30
1.2 9
6.5 6.5
30 30
1000 1000
6-9 6-9
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monthly Average
December 31, 1994
Summer Winter
30 30
21 33' ',
1.2 9
6.5 6.5
30 30
1000 1000
6-9 6-9
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
Monitor Monitor
until Monthly Average after
December 31, 1994
Summer
30
1.2
6.5
30
200
6-9
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Winter
30
30
9
6.5
30
200
6-9
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
WQ or EL
WQ
WQ
WQ
Limits Changes Due To: Parameter(s) Affected
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
Instream data
New regulations/standards/procedures
New facility information
(explanation of any modifications to past modeling analysis including new flows, rates, field data,
interacting discharges)
(See page 4 for miscellaneous and special conditions, if applicable)

3
Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
existing Limits
COD (mg/):
Cadmium (ug/l):
Chromium (ug/1):
Copper (ug/1):
Nickel (ug/l):
Lead (ug/1):
Zinc (ug/1):
Cyanide (ug/l):
Recommended Limits
COD (mg/):
Cadmium (ug/l):
Chromium (ug/l):
Copper (ug/1):
Nickel (ug/1):
Lead (ug/1):
Zinc (ug/1):
Cyanide (ug/l):
Limits Changes Due To:
New tox procedure for municipalities
TOXICS/METALS
Chronic Phase II
Monitoring only (monthly summer, qrtrly winter, qrtrly
prechlorination year round).
Existing monitoring until Dec. 31,1994; Limit at 76% after
12/31/94
Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct for quarterly tests
Weekly Avg Daily Max
2.6
66
Monitor
116
33
Monitor
Monitor
10
264
464
45
Weekly Avg. Daily Max
2.6 10
Monitor in LTMP
Monitor in
NPDES
Monitor in LTMP
Monitor in LTMP
Monitor in
NPDES
6.6 26
(WQ/EL)
WQ
WQ
Parameter(s) Affected
Cr, Ni, Pb
X Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
OR
No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.

INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: Salem Ck at SR 1120
Downstream Location: 1. Salem Ck at SR 2991, 2.) Muddy Ck at SR 1493, 3.) Muddy Ck at SR 14S5
Parameters: DO, temperature, fecal coliform, conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
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 I - t1004f.c.IT D&s LT-,.4'
SdoUGO ENA6L.e ff<aC J7 TD NL, .7
If no, which parameters cannot be met? d e AI Fec A'- 4d %oX / c ' T / GP'1 / 7-s .
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?
,13Z- Ceprr,LX7-4D Z1 /2-3/-9'4-.
Special Instructions or Conditions
m is Ct.trrerd-iy wor*.ric on a_ r dnenf mode( of c� k lock- 1- c. Upon conclas+on
of This m ma reopen J4-z perrnhf to inC<<.+Lte mA rier? hrmia ons,
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) Y (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 (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.
Basic background info, toxics analysis notes

• •-. z9nnirs IIl lay
Facility Name Wtn&t - 1 eyy, IArthu Eli Permit # NC 3 -63/ Pipe # 001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
(**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) ChV at 312.%,dcJr Aorivl 0c , See Part JIL , Condition .)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit 48 hour acute toxicity as lethality in an
effluent concentration of 1 b % nor measure a quarterly arithmetic average chronic value
less than this same percentage of waste. The: chronic value will be determined using the
geometric mean of the highest concentration having no statistically detectable impairment of
reproduction or survival and the lowest concentration that does have a statistically
detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The presence of 48 hour acute toxicity
will be determined using Fisher's Exact Test at 48 hours from test initiation. Collection
methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are defined in: The North
Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure (July, 1991) or
subsequent versions.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using these procedures
to establish compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after
thirty days from issuance of this permit during the months of , !VOW 0&
Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent
discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter measures 48 hour acute
toxicity or a chronic value less than that specified above, then multiple concentration testing
shall be performed, at a minimum, in each of the two following months.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the
Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were
performed, using the parameter code THP3B for the Chronic Value and TGA3B for the 48
hour Acute Toxicity measure (Pass/Fail). Additionally, DEM Form AT-3 (original) is to be
sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek.Road
Raleigh, NC 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 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.
Permitted Flow 3) MGD Basin & Sub-basin4'
7Q10 15 cfs Receiving Stream5ctlem Gait
IWC '7C4 % County pprsyth
Recommended by: � .. l� .v5t0Cwil Date: kikilq4
PIIQLR Version 7/91

Effecito. cA,,,chl ialai Iqq, 5 mpte,3 should be. k x4(e n }tenor
FacilityNameWantrGh!°�n�fi � �jem j Archie giltaa Permit # I�Ct 3)g3(/ Pipe # C�1
CHRONIC TOXICITY MONITORING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
(**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) Monitoringi)Gtn,apr 304 Oc.# , See Part 211_, Condition1.)
The permittee shall conduct chronic toxicity tests using test procedures outlined in:
The ,North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure (July, 1991)
or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration defined as the Instream Waste Concentration (IWC) shall be
7lv % . The chronic value for this analysis will be determined using the geometric mean of
the highest concentration having no statistically detectable impairment of reproduction or
survival and the lowest concentration that does have a statistically detectable impairment of
reproduction or survival. The presence of 48 hour acute toxicity will be determined using
Fisher's Exact Test at 48 hours from test initiation. Collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are described by the document referenced above.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using these procedures
to establish compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after
thirty days from issuance of this permit during the months ofJan, Apr ciu.I Oc
Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent
discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter measures 48 hour acute
toxicity or a chronic value less than that specified above, then multiple concentration testing
shall be performed, at a minimum, in each of the two following months.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the
Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were
performed, using the parameter code THP3B for the Chronic Value and TGA3B for the 48
hour Acute Toxicity measure (Pass/Fail). Additionally, DEM Form AT-3 (original) is to be
sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 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 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.
Permitted Flow 30 MGD Basin & Sub -basin '1acWJ4
7Q10 15 cfs Receiving Stream Salem CreEr-
IWC —70 % County
Recommended by: C. &.)2(Zk Date: 441ulg4
PIIQMR Version 7/91

Gf ec we. urth l 12131194. Should be -6r aAmmer rnpv lf) ova (Aped- i4pr1 (fibber)
Facility Name rtsil n e.rn 1Avrhie. filed Permit #M ca37g34 Pipe # DOI
CHRONIC TOXICITY MONITORI G REQUIREMENT (MONTHLY)
(**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) Monitoring, /gi-- Ctibber , See Part j, Condition C .)
The permittee shall conduct chronic toxicity tests using test procedures outlined in:
The North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure (July, 1991)
or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration defined as the Instream Waste Concentration (IWC) shall be
% . The chronic value for this analysis will be determined using the geometric mean of
the highest concentration having no statistically detectable impairment of reproduction or
survival and .the lowest concentration that does have a statistically detectable impairment of
reproduction or survival. The presence of 48 hour acute toxicity will be determined using
Fisher's Exact Test at 48 hours from test initiation. Collection methods, exposure regimes,
and further statistical methods are described by the document referenced above:
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, monthly monitoring using these procedures
to establish compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after
thirty days from issuance of this permit. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be
performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All tests performed under this requirement will be performed using the multiple
concentration exposure of the above referenced protocol.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the
Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were
performed, using the parameter code THP3B for the Chronic Value and TGA3B for the 48
hour Acute Toxicity measure (Pass/Fail). Additionally, DEM Form AT-3 (original) is to be
sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 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 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.
Permitted Flow 30 MGD Basin & Sub -basin d014
7Q10 cfs Receiving Stream 5atenn (re.eX.
IWC "Ito % County t & is i
Recommended by: Rtil CAStattai Date: •0 *
PIIMMR Version 7/91

frt.;e E11ed 11orp
Salem CK
030704
Ct
L
QUP11.07e. model 1 cb p2Q-d5rntact 1( c -< Apnl 1991).
/t rest.t.taz Matti c iciic Jrd eyiksb, Jc kry),1,S ctre
rf /ash" permd reneJJ\2.l ictci re cc cIssfe d N/J3 Jun, / / my-/
fb prc J anaans-1- x crIi j. a d ipt. hin4 Arts
(61.4.0524 ID C9, 5 mccl Q 11m 5 nx51,P). (6(05 tOas n do -fled
s,nL2 laccGfj rde oc SO/5 Y-hvbujk, Major ma cahoh -
1 rmL r ;s pe Lrnh 1 ?Duld a_ very cla& prbi-echn Je
it *eam_ 1 (made( flat rt tri 6NQ-e- ithcd Odua / /ern, f,5 c e cJd
p►ol-ex!Wahl l } and ,Q511 f7 p eci' ).

•
464C
Aclue Oled ff score
Sc�en�. Ck.
Oho?:*
AIlDUYIble YYkiAtS
(Cp)(Q.tp) + (CA CIA)) (ed G2C1)
C.Q:O Cid dandaAd to
oc4p = 150,5 Qi 30Th6D
CCC)(.6)
Cu) kite,
olaktede
C e)(W.5)
440,5
(s15)(er.5
140.6
.75(Li1.6)
4Lg. s cis
caul .u811
t964151,1
ct 3 Atli
xt6(1
= 33 +ug (l
so Cul. 6)
Cu) Z 40S W .5(f
/ (cep, 5)
CIA) '1co . 6 t
05
Nc261414
I5 462.5 = Lzi.5 c�
— off. pier noieo txi
(4)
a.2 (w. s)
v u ZIA flU ,Zq obinal
�pto At:76 m et oa tc Arc.
Copper .. Zinc are_ otdiast_ feud subs ahces So nt _ hfi,k, Will bt,
a ass: W, thu)evec jx eat mods hilt& matt c2llwa&e have
1oQew obaselved o rrbiilari'n co && b2 /el/ a... NP S taumil raw
Ihcu le'hn3 L.rm P d{a sate.
Cc iah; de-- Duon3 pad ye ,., 1eot ha3her '/ho,t alleceable
Mil i/mil NP talon- do13 fwe as 2nalcris .

A.)l rk.ibn - &dem iArch,i a Ellett
Saki& Ct
630704
fc�S
3LTYAN
Gutted Mi12is ft*►t (qrl l - KI93 ird►'ecnn mon,fan'nd
No vialafior►s 613.5ewecl. /qurne►ous -fecal CoIik►nit.
uiofahoho (boFGi updreaht_ a- downstream).
Cadn,;tm
. C4i0 COoer Miler io perfra hwhat_ 021ed 212.2/94/ C' .
a44. Cdtiti 9 l , ,f ead weer o►'� ,.��
ethionn . 3.1 I n,5 cOas r d ad i in. d uma .�,�� s e
wet: NdthueI
4ezt o{ eraei CAI Cannot 'nee/ d, They ke r cs k Chi paz,r5
v. ChlariA4._
CztAid Wed ' ! wer a& ack'nos.i 'hat A tis ca,�ld be Jk cpeni� &eats
e��e �
file ra I S v e
per Conutafxsac. 0- I'�10A- bF - CJ'CZdmiam /n efavenf kS ned - bi meat table_ d
1�
("a✓". are ,n fe/ins o/ b , /& e✓e/ dnypnj ' 4 bone tat
d ocw s fcedi ke) I dD 412, some. - Ei slictdri do
itdher oat 01 treith kcii pr -- wake eiecb to a3 so
Co- OWL more CIc$P #1. perm0lee% itipefs iz,„„e4
h&i received a orani• 464 & Al)w4 on. ?re ven/ra.t. to
inveslisale Cadnion. Sources. Nok21 CaAdt. of W •S end: ca/ed
Secaera.i source,' were fottre e/'m1nafed �r reduced:
0 pktpin3 Ithaca,- a chemical no lortr added cloud keyed C'd
Hat %ieveval n� lafilr/ies. Cnpa.f Woo ificdic� oaf a-Ani s .
p
2t Idler on 31a4194 siathn6 441 callhatin5 is e W/ ckivi c
abaypti _ w 4-his ap,5 mefa,Js mduce,z5 Ck d n um,
_ MDblenl- macf now be. sots/ea'. attack co of lellef Ir, ,t oE&
114.. (eCec✓e 14,
'Talked 5fiakc. (A)eth - kQ iooc eld J II 1, k Cc( 4 all rnelals htlid3
.dvDp nu. he Peel5Th' montly fct (ir cL Chem. SIQci e ).
_a ni 1- fk ,,t9 VO -chi", [)r tOba • - G2ftcf Citregdzia

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Facility Name
^ Winston-Salem;A . Elledge
NPDES #
NC0037834
Ow (MGD)
30
7Q10s (cfs)
;
15
/WC (%)
7.5.61
Reeving Stream
Salem Creek
Stream Class
C
FINAL RESULTS
Chromium
Max. Pred Cw
39.2
Allowable Cw
66.1
Nickel
Max. Pred Cw
112.5
Allowable Cw
116.4
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
22.8
Allowable Cw
33.1
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
0
Max. Pred Cw
0
Allowable Cw
0.0
3/25194
PAGE 1

TOXICANT ANALYSIS - Winston Salem Archie Elledge WWTP
Parameter =
Chromium
Parameter =
Nickel
Standard =
�._.»._.�..�50
_
Standard =
.»»�._.._»88iµg/1
n
BDL=1/2DL
Actual Data
RESULTS
n
BDL=1RDL
Actual Data
RESULTS
1
11
11
Std Dev.
5.673685785
1
14
14
Std Dev.
9.796
2
11
11
Mean
13.67213115
2
13
13
Mean
20.11
3
13
13
C.V.
0.414981814
3
17
17
C.V.
0.487
4
14
14
4
15
15
5
28
28
5
22
22
6
25
25
Mult Factor =
1.4!
6
18
18
Mult Factor =
1.5
7
10
10
Max. Value
28
µg/I
7
14
14
Max. Value
75
8
15
15
Max. Pred Cw
39.2
µg/1
8
21
21
Max. Pred Cw
112.5
9
13
13
Allowable Cw
66.1
µg/1
9
13
13
Allowable Cw
116.4
10
19
19
10
29
29
11
12
12
11
16
16
12
15
15
12
16
16
13
15
15
13
9
9
14
28
28
14
21
21
15
28
28
15
22
22
16
17
17
16
18
18
17
15
15
17
15
15
18
15
15
18
12
12
19
18
18
19
33
33
20
23
23
20
17
17
21
16
16
21
20
20
22
16
16
22
17
17
23
11
11
23
21
21
24
9
9
24
20
20
25
11
11
25
17
17
26
9
9
26
23
23
27
7
7
27
46
46
28
8
8
28
75
75
29
10
10
29
48
48
30
10
10
30
21
21
31
7
7
31
24
24
32
3
3
32
17
17
33
6
6
33
18
18
34
15
15
34
18
18
35
14
14
35
14
14
36
14
14
36
23
23
37
14
14
37
17
17
38
11
11
38
19
19
39
13
13
39
21
21
40
10
10
40
17
17
41
10
10
41
20
20
42
6
6
42
14
14
43
9
9
43
16
16
44
8
8
44
13
13
45
11
11
45
20
20
46
16
16
46
15
15
47
8
8
47
21
21
48
15
15
48
17
17
49
21
21
49
16
16
50
18
18
50
16
16
51
12
12
51
11
11
52
10
10
52
14
14
53
9
9
53
10
10
54
10
10
54
22
22
55
11
11
55
14
14
56
11
11
56
18
18
57
11
11
57
28
28
58
13
13
58
15
15
59
16
16
59
18
18
60
23
23
60
27
27
61
27
27
61
22
22
62
62
25
25
63
63
24
24
3/25/94
PAGE '

TOXICANT ANALYSIS - Winston Salem Archie Elledge WWTP
• 'ammeter = !Lead
Standard = '._._.�.._ 25
lien
n
-`*
BDL=1/2DL
Actual Data
RESULTS
1
12
12
Std Dev.
2.523
2
7
7
Mean
12.64
• 3
10
10
C.V.
0.2
4
10
10
`, 5
16
16
' 6
14
14
Mult Factor = !
1.21
1.4/1.• A 7
11
11
Max. Value
19
µell
Pe 8
15
15
Max. Pred Cw
22.8
µell
µell; 4 9
12
12
Allowable Cw
33.1
nil
• 10
14
14
11
13
13
12
12
12
13
11
11
14
12
12
15
13
13
16
14
14
17
11
11
"• 18
8
8
19
12
1250
ii 20
10
10
y 21
12
12
22
12
12
23
13
13
2A
12
12
25
12
12
• 26
14
14
• 27
18
18
28
13
13
{ 29
17
17
{ 30
14
14
31
15
15
32
10
10
33
9
9
34
19
19
35
14
14
ty 36
13
13
ggi 37
12
12
38
13
13
f:: 39
r
15
15
40
13
13
41
14
14
42
8
8
•}{ 43
14
14
r 44
10
10
45
14
14
46
13
13
47
9
9
48
11
11
49
8
8
50
12
12
`• ' 51
11
11
52
14
14
53
10
10
54
15
15
•{"' 55
12
12
56
12
12
57
12
12
58
18
18
59
15
15
60
16
16
{ " 61
16
16
62
63
3/25/34
PAGE

-"O
CITY OF \VINSTO\SALEM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 2511, WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA 27102
March 24, 1994
Mr. Dennis Ramsey
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Dear Mr. Ramsey:
= hav-e.
coPy. _Ts
`ours ? /
QUALITYSEC`lION
OPERA
T IONS BRANCH
RECEIVED
fAPR 5
TEHNICAL Si,WPORT BRANCH
Winston-Salem has recently discovered an urfusual phenomenon which``
exerts a positive interference on the analyses of certain metals
at the parts per billion level. This phenomenon also renders
spike recovery tests, which are designed to detect such an inter-
ference, ineffective.
Due to the inability of standard quality control procedures to de-
tect this problem, Winston-Salem has inadvertently reported some
falsely high metals monitoring results.
We have found this interference to significantly affect analyses
in the parts per billion range for those heavy metals which absorb
light at wavelengths less than 300 nanometers. Cadmium and Nickel
analyses appear to be the most affected. Zinc and Lead are also
affected, but to a lesser degree.
In the case of Cadmium, we have determined that levels in the
Elledge Plants effluent are approximately 72% lower than previ-
ously reported. While there is no way to reanalyze past samples,
we are confident that violations of the plant's effluent Cadmium
limit have been reported when the true Cadmium concentration was
probably well below the limit.
We asked Perkin-Elmer, Corp., the manufacturer of our atomic ab-
sorption unit, to explain this phenomenon. David Bass, an Appli-
cations Chemist with the company, told us he has encountered this
problem before. It is called "Background Attribution", an effect
that causes an "across the board" increase in the absorbancy of
every absorbing parameter in a sample. We understand that it is
this type of total absorbancy increase that adversely impacts
spike recovery analyses and prevents the detection of the inter-
ference. We have requested a letter from Perkin-Elmer which will
provide additional information on this subject. We will forward a
copy of this letter to your office when it becomes available.

Mr. Dennis Ramsey
March 24, 1994
Page 2
Winston-Salem has already implemented laboratory procedures to
compensate for this interference. We expect that future Discharge
Monitoring Reports will exhibit a decrease in the concentrations
of Cadmium and certain other heavy metals.
Please feel free to contact me at 910/784-4700 if you have any
questions or need additional information.
Sincerely,
'Stanl a ebb
Wastewater Operations Manager
,et&
p A
pc: Steve Mauney, Winston-Salem Regional Office
Tom Griffin, Utilities Superintendent
Barry Shearin, Utility Plants Engineer
Lee Byerly, WTP Superintendent/Elledge/MMC
Crystal Couch, IWC Supervisor
Kathy Southern, Laboratory Supervisor
David Bass, Applications Specialist, Perkin-Elmer
It

0
PERKIN ELMER
The Perkin-Elmer Corporation
3206 Tower Oaks Blvd
P.O. Box 2280
Rockville. MD 20852-2280
Ms. Mary Bumgamer
City of Winston-Salem Treatment Plant
March 24, 1994
Dear Mary:
am writing this response to your inquiry concerning background attribution
in Flame AA and how to recognize and correct for it.
One of the factors that make Atomic Absorption such a powerful analytical
tool is that it is element specific where only copper atoms will absorb light from a
copper lamp regardless of other metals in the sample. This is not the case in
"background" or "nonspecific" absorption since the amount of attribution to the
total signal is not related to the amount of analyte. The origin of background
arises from the fact that not all of the sample matrix is 100% atomized. These
undissociated matrix materials actually absorb the light from the source lamp and
would be counted as absorbance by the instrument even though the they are not
ground state atoms of the element that you are attempting to measure. Another
common source for this problem is tiny particles(salts) that form in the flame when
the aerosol liquid has been removed. Either scenario produces the same result:
More absorbance is being measured than that produced solely from the analyte of
interest which will always produce a high biased result if not corrected for. The
three main criteria for evaluating the presence of a potential background problem
are analytical wavelength less than 250 nm, dissolved solid content exceeds 0.5-
1 % and the actual analyte content is less than 1 mg/l(ppm). If your analytical
conditions meet one of the above, then investigation of a potential
background problem needs to be undertaken. My experience has shown this
problem actually occuring up to 300 nm.
One area of analysis that will typically not indicate this problem is in the use
of outside control samples(read against the calibration curve) and in matrix
spiking. Control samples are usually a mixture of pure metals in an acid medium
generally at fairly low concentrations that do not produce this background effect
when read against aqueous standards in the "AA" mode only. Matrix spikes
typically produce the same percent recovery whether in "AA" or "AA-BG" mode
because the background will be essentially the same in both the original sample
and a spike of that sample so the final recovery is not affected despite the fact that
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]

PERKIN ELMER
The Perkin-Elmer Corporation
3206 Tower Oaks Blvd
P.O. Box 2280
Rockville, MD 20852-2280
the original result may be reported higher than actual due to a background
problem.
Modern instruments provide a readily accessible way of determining
whether a background problem exists and how to correct for it. If you place the
instrument in the "BG" mode and measure the absorbance of your samples, a
positive result indicates that background absorption is occurring. To verify that
the background correction system is functioning properly, run standards/samples
in the "AA" mode then run in the "BG" mode. Rerun the same set in the "AA-BG"
mode. The values obtained in the "AA-BG" mode should match those from the
"AA" mode with the "BG" results subtracted from them. Normally, the analyst will
analyze in the "AA-BG" mode since the reported values will automatically be
corrected for non-specific absorption on the instrument display.
I hope this information will answer your questions regarding flame analysis
on your instrument. If you have any other questions do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely yours,
L o
d/1.
David L. Bass
Sr. AS Product Specialist
Perkin-Elmer Corp.
(301)-984-4730
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]

CITY OF \VJNSTON-SALEM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 2511, WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA 27102
February 22, 1994
Ms. Coleen Sullins
NPDES Permits and. Engineering Unit
Division of Environmental Management
P. O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Dear Ms. Sullins:
Three sets of the documents necessary to renew the NPDES permit
for Winston-Salem's Archie Elledge Wastewater Treatment Plant are
attached. The plant's current permit NC0037834, expires on Decem-
ber 31, 1994.
Winston-Salem re nests that DEM delete the current effluent limits
for
cadmium when -the new permit is issued. The plant consently
fails to meet its weekly average limit because there is sufficient
cadmium entering the plant from uncontrollable sources to cause a
permit violation. More importantly, bioassay analyses of the
plant's unchlorinated effluent have shown no evidence of toxicity.
This suggests that the numerical limit is much too low.
DEM instituted limits on certain heavy metals, such as cadmium, to
comply with EPA's Aquatic Life Metals Criteria. The goal of these
criteria is to prevent toxic effects on aquatic organisms result-
ing from their exposure to heavy metals.
Given this, it would be reasonable to expect the Elledge Plant's
unchlorinated effluent to exhibit toxicity since it consistently
violates the cadmium limit. Biomonitoring data on the plant's ef-
fluent, however, shows conclusively that this is not the case.
One explanation for this phenomenon, wherein a predicted metals
toxicity in a discharge does not occur, is contained in an inter-
nal memorandum from EPA's Office of Water to their Division Direc-
tors.
In this document EPA acknowledges that metals toxicity is sig-
nificantly influenced by "site specific factors". These factors
vary widely and EPA could not possibly compensate for all of them
during the research used to derive the ambient metals .criteria.
As a result, there are some discharges for which EPA's metals
standards do not and should not apply.

Ms. Coleen Sullins
February 22, 1994
Page 2
Our data indicates that the Elledge Plant falls into this cat-
egory. In that the biomonitoring provisions in the permit are ad-
equate to detect and prevent toxicity from any source,
Winston-Salem feels that the elimination of the cadmium limit will
not endanger the receiving water. We also feel that we are being
unfairly regulated in that we are required to meet a limit that is
economically impossible to achieve and unnecessary to protect the
environment.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter and call me at
910/784-4700 if you or your staff need additional information.
Sincerely,
State ey.. B. Webb
Wastewater Operations Manager
pc: Barry Shearin, Utility Plants Engineer
Lee Byerly, WTP Superintendent/Elledge/MMC
Steve Rippey, Asst. WTP Superintendent/Elledge/MMC
Crystal Couch, IWC Supervisor
Larry Coble, DEM Winston-Salem Regional Office
Attachment (s)
It

Archie Elledge Wastewater Treatment Plant
FC
CC
FINAL
CLARIFIERS
(-WA s
THICKENER
NITRIFICATION
ACT1vATED
SLUOGE
a. _ ........ _. 1 P
EFFLUENT TO
SALEM CREEK
Discharge 1/ 001
LEGEND
WASTEWATER FLOW
- - SLUDGE FLOW
p PUMPING STATION
S C SLUDGE CONDITIONING
C C CHLORINE CONTACT
w .. .� ..�
FC FLOOD CONTROL PUMP STATION
1
OPTIONAL SLUDGE WASTING 1
1
4
P
PRIMARY
CLARIFIERS
SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM
1
V
SCR.
a
GRIT
REM.
1
1
SECONDARY
DIGESTERS
Lagoons
Land
Application
AERATED
LAGOONS

GITY of WIYSTON
SALEM
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
P.O. BOX 2511, WINSTON-SALEM, NORTH CAROLINA 27102
t
February 7, 1994
Mr. Preston Howard, Director
Division of Environmental Management
Post Office Box 29535
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27626-0535
.1
RE: Notice of Intent to Renew NPDES Permit
Archie Elledge WWTP (NC0037834)
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Howard:
30.L.
FEB 15 1994
1010.41.‘OF ENVIRO " 'ark MGMNT•
FLi,
This letter is to notify you that the City of Winston-Salem re-
quests the renewal of the NPDES permit for our Archie Elledge
Wastewater Treatment Plant. The plant's current permit expires on
December 31, 1994.
The renewal application, pertinent supporting documents and the
processing fee will be submitted to DEM's Permits and Engineering
section very shortly.
Should you or your staff have questions or need additional infor-
mation regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Stan Webb at
910/784-4700.
Sincerely,
P.W. w
Assistant City Manager/Public Works
pc: Barry Shearin, Utility Plants Engineer
Stan Webb, Muddy Creek Plant
Larry Coble, Winston-Salem Regional Office, D. E. M.
Coleen Sullins, NPDES Permits Group
1t

Attachment to NPDES Renewal Application
Description of Sludge Disposal Program
Archie Elledge WWTP
Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Residual sludges produced during the wastewater treatment process
are anaerobically digested to a PSRP condition and disposed of by
land application on to permitted agricultural lands. All sludges
are applied at agronomic rates and the program is regulated by
NCDEM via non -point discharge permit WQ0000094.
The Muddy Creek Plant produces "1,770 dry tons of sludge annually.
This material is applied as a liquid containing "5% solids. Ap-
proximately 8.5 million gallons are land applied normally.
The City of Winston-Salem disposes of sludges from its Muddy Creek
and Archie Elledge Treatment plants under a single program. The
City's land application program includes "8,738 acres of permitted
farm land in the counties of Forsyth, Davie and Yadkin. At the
present time the City land applies sludge on to "2,500 acres annu-
ally.
It

cc:
Permits and Engineering
Technical Support Branch
County Health Dept.
Central Files
WSRO
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No X
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: (Greg Nizich)
Date: April 15, 1994
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County Forsyth
Permit No. NC0037834
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Archie Elledge WWTP
Mailing Address: Facility Location:
City of Winston-Salem 2801 Griffith Rd.
PO Box 2511 W-S, NC
Winston-Salem, NC 27102
2. Date of Investigation: March 8, 1994
3. Report Prepared by: Lee G. Spencer
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Stan Webb 784-4700
Steve Rippey and Frank Crump - [phone]
5. Directions to Site: From WSRO take North Point/Silas Creek
Pkwy. west to Hwy 158 west (Stratford Rd.). Turn west and
proceed several traffic lights to Hanes Mall Blvd. Turn
left and then immediately right onto Griffith Road. Proceed
about one mile to the WWTP on the left.
6. Discharge Points(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 36°01'46" Longitude: 80°18'54"
U.S.G.S. Quad No. C17SE U.S.G.S. Quad Name W-S West
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application ?
X Yes No If No, explain: Somewhat limited area.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): The WWTP
sets along and immediately adjacent to Salem Creek. Units
are supposed to be designed with the flood plain in mind.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: Some houses, mobile homes and
businesses are within 1000' of the treatment plant.

10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Salem Creek
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 03-07-04
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent
downstream uses: Creek flows through mostly rural
residential and agricultural areas from this point to
its confluence with Muddy Creek and then into the
Yadkin River.
Part II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: (Ultimate Design
Capacity) 30.0 MGD
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Waste
Water Treatment facility? 30.0 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility
(current design capacity)? 30.0 MGD based on past
staff reports and permits.
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two
years. A to Cs issued May 11, 1992 and March 29, 1993.
e. Please provide a description of existing or
substantially constructed wastewater treatment
facilities: Pretreatment lagoons; screening and grit
removal units; primary clarifiers; high rate trickling
filters; nitrification tanks; final clarifiers;
chlorination with chlorine contact chamber; and flow
measurement.
Sludge handling facilities consisting of anaerobic
digesters and sludge storage lagoons.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater
treatment facilities: Upgrades and/or replacements of
several existing units are in progress. The high rate
trickling filters are to be replaced by large single
stage nitrification tanks. Additional items to be
added include odor control facilities, polymer feed
systems, chemical feed systems, dechlorination
equipment, an expanded chlorine contact chamber, and
gravity sludge thickeners.
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: The
application states that chlorinated hydrocarbons known
to be present in the effluent include:
Bromodichloromethane, bromoform, chloroform, and
dibromochloromethane. However, letter accompanying
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
Page 2

application also states that bioassay analyses of the
plant's unchlorinated effluent have shown no evidence
of toxicity. New permit should require toxicity
monitoring and limitation after chlorination and
dechlorination.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved.
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DEM
permit no. WQ0000094.
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP * PFRP Other
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating
sheet): Class IV
4. SIC Code(s): 4952
Primary 01 Secondary 02
Main Treatment Unit Code: 1 1 0 x 3
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant
Funds or are any public monies involved? Yes
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity)
requests: The city has requested that the effluent limits
for cadmium be deleted. They argue that analysis of
unchlorinated effluent has shown no evidence of toxicity.
With this in mind, this office would propose that the
cadmium limits might be slightly increased, rather than
eliminated. The increase could be correlated to the maximum
value which the plant has consistently met since 1983, ie.,
3'OToxicity monitoring and limitation should be imposed
after chlorination and dechlorination. (The WWTP expansion
includes a larger chlorine contact tank which was added in
an effort to consistently pass toxicity tests.)
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: N/A
5. Other Special Items:
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
Page 3

PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Winston-Salem appears to give above average attention to its
wastewater treatment programs and systems. O&M program,
pretreatment program and sludge management program are all
generally outstanding.
This facility's effluent, as well as several others in our
region, has a tremendous amount of color in it. The dark color
from this discharge is usually evident all the way to the Yadkin
River. This office and the City of Winston-Salem have received
complaints about the dark color. It would seem that this dark
color would have to inhibit photometric/photosynthesis activity
for several miles of watercourse. The aesthetic appearance alone
is reason enough to correct the problem. This writer would like
to see the color issue addressed and reasonable limits imposed.
This office does not object to the reissuance of this permit
along current Division guidelines.
Signature of report preparer Date
r///v
Water Quality Regional pervisor
NPDES Permit Staff Report
Version 10/92
4?'5‘
Date
Page 4