NC0050342_Correspondence_19900215

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHIEST
NC0050342
Muddy Creek 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:
February 15, 1990
This document iia printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reizerse aide

PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
City of Winton-&iEm
February 15, 1990
Mr. Ken W. Eagleson
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Dear Mr. Eagleson:
We certainly appreciate the information you sent regard-
ing Ceriodaphnia mini -chronic test procedure, as well as the
invitation to tour the State's toxicity testing facility.
Some of our City staff is currently reviewing this material,
and may contact your staff regarding these ideas in the next
two weeks.
BHL : of
cc: Trevor Clements
NPDES NC0050342
Tet
Sincerely,
ILITIES DIVISION
dAY
renda H. Letzler,�.
Utility Plants Engi er
•
0
<* 6 f990
Box 2511, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27102

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
February 1, 1990
Ms. Brenda H. Letzler, P.E.
Utility Plants Engineer ..E
Public Works Department
City of Winston-Salem FEB 0 2 1990
P.O. Box 2511
Winston-Salem, NC 27102 TEChrilLAL JUrrUk1 BRANCH
R. Paul Wilms
pirector
Dear Ms. Letzler:
I have received a copy of a letter from you to Trevor Clements dated
January 25, 1990. In your letter you asked that we forward for your review
"the data used by the State to show the validity of using the mini -chronic
procedure to identify toxicity in an effluent". We assume that your question
references the Ceriodaphnia mini -chronic test procedure. With regard to these
data I offer the following information.
The State of North Carolina received training in this technique in 1983
directly from the U.S. EPA. A description of the methodology was published in
1984 by Mount and Norberg. Since that time an extremely large library of
information has been established with regard to this test procedure. I have
attached a bibliography of information which I think will provide you with
useful information. Since this collection of information is extensive, I
would suggest that you begin with the "Technical Support Document for Water
Quality -based Toxics Control" (EPA/440/4-85/032). This document is excellent
at describing technical concepts of toxicity based (including whole effluent)
permit limitation development. I would also city the EPA protocol document
"Short Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and
Receiving Waters to Marine and Estuarine Organisms" (EPA/600/4-87/028). This
is an outstanding source of information.
In previous correspondence from the City of Winston-Salem you indicated
that the basis for our use of this test procedure was a series of instream
comparisons with whole effluent toxicity tests. We indicated at that time
that the basis for implementation of the whole effluent toxicity testing pro-
gram was an expansion of its use for over a decade in developing numerical
standards for specific chemicals. Regardless, I have enclosed a draft copy of
this report (it has not yet been published) that makes these comparisons.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding these data.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

I would also refer you to two excellent studies of similar material in "Vali-
dity of Ambient Toxicity Tests for Predicting Biological Impact"
(EPA/600/385/071) and Validity of Effluent and Ambient Toxicity Tests for
Predicting Biological Impact" (EPA/600/8-86/002).
Each of these previously mentioned documents contain bibliographies which
may direct you to specific areas of interest. In the last seven years
Ceriodaphnia.has become one of the most extensively studies organisms used in
aquatic toxicological work. Finding specifically what you'need amongst all
*this literature is sometimes difficult. We have a large portion of it in our
files. Should you identify a specific subject matter, we may be able to iden-
tify further references. •
Also of use might . be a tour of our..toxicity testing facility. I invite
you to contact'Mr. Larry Ansley at [phone] to arrange a visit. Thank
you for your inquiry egarding this aspect of:our surface water protection
program.
agleson ' z "
t,'Water Quality Section Chief
Bnvronmental Sciences

PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
City of Winton-6alem
January 25, 1990
Mr. Trevor Clements
Division of Environmental Management
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Re: Muddy Plant Permit Discussion
NC0050342
Dear Trevor:
JAN 2 9 19901
TE IiNtLAL 1n i UI BRANCH
I wanted to follow up on two questions related to the
mini -chronic we had asked in our meeting of January 10, 1990.
We had asked to get a copy of the calculations used by the State
to determine if the control and test samples are statistically
similar (pass/fail) for the mini -chronic test. Our staff was
called by Larry Ausley with the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, and he said he would
send this out. We look forward to receiving that as soon as
possible.
During our discussions, we had also requested being able to
review the data used by the State to show the validity of using
the mini -chronic procedure to identify toxicity in an effluent.
Please let us know how/when we can review this data.
I certainly appreciate your follow-up in these two areas.
Sincerely,
UTILITIES DIVISION
Brenda H. Letzler, P.E.
Utility Plants Engineer
/sw
cc: Crystal Couch
Stan Webb
Box 2511, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27102