Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNC0036196_Wasteload Allocation_19950327NPDES DOCIMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET NPDES Permit: NC0036196 Clark Creek WWTP Document Type: Permit Issuance (aste1oad 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: March 27, 1995 Thin document is printed Girt reuse paper - iarnore airy content on the resrerse aide NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION PERMIT NO.: NC0036196 PERMITTEE NAME: FACILITY NAME: City of Newton Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Status: Existing Permit Status: Renewal Major Minor Pipe No.: 001 Design Capacity: 5.0 MGD Domestic (% of Flow): 70 % Industrial (% of Flow): 30 % Comments: Plant will remain at 5.0 MGD and requests limits for both 5 and 7.5 MGD. Also, they request that theenonitoring for cadmium be eliminated. dwyrt-ttwk RECEIVING STREAM: Clark Creek Class: C Sub -Basin: 03-08-35 Reference USGS Quad: E14NW (please attach) County: Catawba Regional Office: Mooresville Regional Office Previous Exp. Date: 1/31/95 Treatment Plant Class: Class IV Classification changes within three miles: none within three miles Requested by. Prepared by: Reviewe 121--s pumEL a Lucas Date: 7/15/94 Date: 3/23/ 95 Date3)Y / s Modeler Date Rec. # -1MA 7//9 /9Vf 79.3z6., Drainage Area (mi2 ) 029. ,3 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): 3s' 7Q10 (cfs) (o Winter 7Q10 (cfs) /0 30Q2 (cfs) Toxicity Limits: IWC 56 % Acutthroni) Instream Monitoring: Parameters ed Upstream }/ Loca on Sf , - Zo/fz Y Location / f%/2•„.L.20/z Cot - Downstream 2 S e Zoo Effluent Characteristics Summer Winter BOD5 (mg/1) /5 36 NH3-N (mg/1) I Z. D.O. (mg/1) 6 6, TSS (mg/1) 3e 36 F. Col. (/100 ml) Z o 0 z.0 o pH (SU) C -7 6 - 4.h4i./ W /t (feJ h'br„77" (,ht4 (cs/Q) 3.3" (.✓9/ !- - (cl/k) 91 (wq) 4oZ444---... 4, clr, I y v f /4 , A7-----e Comments: i ��jti�- �-- d.oti, ✓4Al p/ P a--- / 1i WJIIIISENGINEERS June 30, 1994 949.028 (34) Ms. Coleen Sullins, P.E. Permits and Engineering Unit Division of Environmental Management Post Office Box 29535 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Subject: City of Newton, Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDES Permit Number NC0036196 Renewal Dear Ms. Sullins: On behalf of the City of Newton we request the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management renew the NPDES Permit for the Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Attached are the completed Permit Application and a check for the Application Fee of $300. The current Permit contains effluent limitations for an average daily flow of 5.0 MGD and 7.5 MGD. At the time of issuance the City anticipated increasing wastewater flows and was constructing an expansion of the facility. Wastewater flow has subsequently decreased due to the loss of a major industrial customer. The City wishes to maintain the existing Permit limits with a provision allowing them to `LA - increase from 5.0 to 7.5 MGD as it becomes necessary. .:-. =, The current Permit contains requirements for weekly downstream cadmium ;;i j ,f R monitoring in addition to effluent monitoring. Over the past year the City has ,L-ir. conducted intensive downstream monitoringof cadmium levels and found no `--� �sR evidence of significant discharge by the Plant or other sources. We therefore ;.a X-4 request downstream cadmium monitoring be removed from the Permit upon renewal) cry v . If you have any questions or need additional information please advise. Yours very truly, WILLIS ENGINEERS 144141, Charles A. Willis, Jr., P.E. CAWjr/dcs Attachments cc w/Attachments: Mr. Radford L. Thomas Mr. Dwight E. Wilson, Sr. cc: Mr. D. Rex Gleason, P.E. 1112 Harding Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 704/377-9844 • FAX 704/377-2965 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 Newton - Clark Creek WWTP NC0036196 70% Domestic / 30% Industrial Existing Renewal Clark Creek C 030835 Catawba Mooresville Lucas 7/18/94 E14NW Request # 7932(a) Stream Characteristic: USGS # Date: Drainage Area (mi2): Summer 7Q10 (cfs): Winter 7Q10 (cfs): Average Flow (cfs): 30Q2 (cfs): IWC (%): 29.3 6 10 35 56 Wasteload Allocation Summary (approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.) Facility requesting renewal of NPDES permit at existing flow of 5 MGD and expansion flow of 7.5 MGD. Limits have previously been assigned at 7.5 MGD in WLA done in 9/91. Newton interacts with Maiden and Delta Mills and has also been cited for color problems. Recommend renewal of existing limits w/ some revisionsjin metals and toxics limits based on updated toxicity analysis. �-o(0, "04,-/,,,v rt(".,14(.,1J /vs" co4vrwH, W,Anf w1i4D 7-j ;f color ,0160[d' rn jve rix- eOrdi /ti g-rJ wi -Colar zl/ /e✓ i6i fl1u.na4liJ�Inf Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers: ce.,, ,--c = co /dr- 7 if2) Recommended by: Reviewed by Instream Assessment: Regional Supervisor:, O: Permits & Engineering: /?,Gi 9r7(0,(14.--- l)&lid-( Date: /2-5/9r Date: 3 di Date: / 3/%<-- Date: 372-v/2.6-- RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY: N.C. DEFT. OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, & NATURAL RESOURCES MAR 8 1995 DIVISION OF Etilinitattlin MAINEOFFICE MENl APR 0 2 t995 -a 2 CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS Existing Limits: Monthly Average Summer Winter Wasteflow (MGD): 5.0 5.0 BOD5 (mg/1): 15 30 NH3N (mg/1): 6 12 DO (mg/1): 6 6 TSS (mg/1): 30 30 Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200 200 pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (µg/1): monitor monitor TP (mg/I): monitor monitor TN (mg/1): monitor monitor e.1..(419M!): ►sue h� Recommended Limits: Monthly Average Summer Winter WQ or EL Wasteflow (MGD): 5.0 5.0 BOD5 (mg/1): 15 30 NH3N (mg/1): 6 12 DO (mg/1): 6 6 TSS (mg/1): 30 30 Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200 200 pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (µg/1): monitor monitor TP (mg/1): monitor monitor TN (mg/1): monitor monitor 4/61, 40g 0: n.o.,, ia,.- 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) lya y 5 c % plc, `%,4 vrf ,L4 3 Type of Toxicity Test: Existing Limit: Recommended Limit: Monitoring Schedule: Existing Limits Cadmium (ug/1): Chromium (ug/1): Copper (ug/1): Nickel (ug/1): Lead (ug/1): Zinc (ug/1): Cyanide (ug/1): Toluene (ug/1): Mercury (ug/1): Silver (ug/1): Recommended Limits Cadmium (ug/1): Copper (ug/1): Lead (ug/1): Toluene (ug/1): TOXICS/METALS Chronic Ceriodaphnia Qrtrly 56% 56% MAR JUN SEP DEC Limits Changes Due To: Change in 7Q10 data Change in stream classification Relocation of discharge Change in wasteflow New pretreatment information Daily Max. 3.5 89 monitor 156 44 monitor 8.9 19 monitor monitor Daily Max. WQ or EL 3.5 WQ Monthly monitor 44 WQ Qrtrly monitor Failing toxicity test Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.) Parameter(s) Affected Cr, Ni, Zn, Cn, Hg, Ag, Cd, Cu, Vb will be monitored in Pretreatment LIMP _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. 4 INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Upstream Location: State Road 2014 Downstream Location: 1) State Road 2012 for Cd 2) State Road 2007 Parameters: Temp, DO, Fecal Coliform,Conductivity, Cd, TP, TN 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 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 Newton -Clark Creek WWTP Permit # NC0036196 _ 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 _56_% (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 _MAR JUN SEP DEC .. 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 6 cfs Permitted Flow 5.0 MGD IWC 56 % Basin & Sub -basin CTB35 Receiving Stream Clark Creek County Catawba QCL PIF Version 9/91 COLOR REOPENER AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS This permit will be revoked and reissued to incorporate color limitations and/or revised monitoring requirements in the event color testing or other studies conducted by the permittee or the Division indicate that color has rendered or could render the receiving waters injurious to public health, secondary recreation, aquatic life and wildlife or adversely affect the palatability of fish, aesthetic quality or impair the water for any designated use. Color monitoring should consist of ADMI monitoring as specified below. All samples taken should have complete descriptive recordings of the color in the sample container including hue (distinctive characteristics and tint), clarity (clearness of the color sample) and luminance (brightness or glowing quality) of the sample as it looks in the collection container. Descriptions of stream color should also be recorded when color samples are collected. Color samples should be analyzed as follows: a) at natural pH b) free from turbidity (True Color); and c) Samples shall be analyzed in accordance with the provisions of Method 2120 E.4. as described in the 18th Edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Using a narrow -band scanning spectrophotometer to produce a COMPLETE spectral curve of the visible spectrum (350-75- nm), calculate and report results in ADMI values for true color values at the sample's ambient pH value. All color data including visual observations should be submitted with the monthly DMRs. Color Monitoring Location and Frequencies: Color Monitoring shall take place instream above the effluent outfall, downstream below the effluent outfall and in the effluent. Frequency shall be 3 consecutive days (preferably Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday) once per month. NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION PERMIT NO.: NC0036196 PERMITTEE NAME: City of Newton FACILITY NAME: Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Status: Existing Permit Status: Renewal Major Minor Pipe No.: 001 Design Capacity: ' 7.S MGD Domestic (% of Flow): 70 % Industrial (% of Flow): 30 % Comments: Plant will remain at 5.0 MGD and requests limits for both 5 and 7.5 MGD. Also. they request that thq Monitoring for cadmium be eliminated. SP.", f '-LAto, RECEIVING STREAM: Clark Creek Class: C Sub -Basin: 03-08-35 Reference USGS Quad: E14NW County; Catawba Regional Office: Mooresville Regional Office Previous Exp. Date: 1/31/95 Treatment Plant Class: Class IV Classification changes within three miles: none within three miles (please attach) Requested by: Jay Lucas Date: / / Prepared by. Date: !�1. N'� Reviewe 0=w C.79/E2 Date. Modeler Date Rec. # SMA Vie IN 1932- Drainage Area (mi2 ) .Z 7, 3 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): 3 5. 7Q10 (cfs) Winter 7Q10 (cfs) Toxicity Limits: IWC GG % Instream Monitoring: Parameters Z/Pea ! A Upstream i Locatio 16 Downstream Acu 30Q2 (cfs) o/c Location degi Q. Zof CS LJ 516G- ie.' J ZOO? Effluent Characteristics Summer Winter BOD5 (mg/1) /s 30 NH3-N (mg/1) D.O. (mg/1) .- 1 TSS (mg/1) 30 3a F. Col. (/100 m1) 2 00 Z o pH (SU) !o -- 9 G - 4 444‘01 ay... Z6 t /, Z6 vie_ e-4„,.....„ilo OfiLl mie 1.0 LaL(c/I) 38 1,Gx. i-G`�''`'' 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 Newton - Clark Creek WWTP NC0036196 70% Domestic / 30% Industrial Existing Renewal Clark Creek C 030835 Catawba Mooresville Lucas 7/18/94 E14NW Request # 7932(b) Stream Characteristic: USGS # Date: Drainage Area (mi2): Summer 7Q10 (cfs): Winter 7Q10 (cfs): Average Flow (cfs): 30Q2 (cfs): IWC (%): 29.3 6 10 35 66 Wasteload Allocation Summary (approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.) Facility requesting renewal of NPDES permit at existing flow of 5 MGD and expansion flow of 7.5 MGD. Limits have previously been assigned at 7.5 MGD in WLA done in 9/91. Newton interacts with Maiden and Delta Mills and has also been cited for color problems. Recommend renewal of existing limits w/ some revisions in metals and toxics limits based on updated toxicity analysis. *Upon next expansion of the Newton facility, updated 7Q10 flow of 5.5 cfs will Hipp have been developed using 6 fs. Ca icy' ten., f74v fS ��(( �, jd ul, /ary 444.41476%i, 1zv gulf ‘L f t,.0l" Asi Special Schedur&Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers: 7 z /r7,Qii✓4 lit)/ (,v r /IJCurr2aa> be used. Current ' r �OrDV� /h L dtrw �• rn o lz'r; 1��Gc C col , „ t, Recommended by: Reviewed by Instream Assessment: Regional Supervisor: Permits & Engineering: Date: /zV79r Date: Date: 3 Date: 3/Z°/`%---- N.C. ENVIRONMEN' x,TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY: APR 0 2 1995 & NATURAL RESOURCES A n- MAR 8 1995 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE_ 2 CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS Existing Limits: Monthly Average Summer Winter Wasteflow (MGD): 7.5 7.5 BODS (mg/1): 15 30 NH3N (mg/1): 1.4 3.1 DO (mg/1): 5 5 TSS (mg/1): 30 30 Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200 200 pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (µg/1): monitor monitor TP (mg/1): monitor monitor TN (mg/1): monitor monitor Recommended Limits: Monthly Average Summer Winter WQ or EL Wasteflow (MGD): $ O'1.5 0`1.5. BOD5 (mg/1): 15 30 WQ NH3N (mg/1): 2 4 WQ, AT DO (mg/1): 5 5 WQ TSS (mg/1): 30 30 Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200 200 pH (SU): 6-9 6-9 Residual Chlorine (14/1): 26 26 TP (mg/1): monitor monitor TN (mg/1): monitor monitor Limits Changes Due To: 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 Parameter(s) Affected NH3 (minimum limits given per DEM procedure) 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 Cadmium (ug/1): Chromium (ug/1): Copper (ug/1): Nickel (ug/1): Lead (ug/1): Zinc (ug/1): Cyanide (ug/1): Toluene (ug/l): Mercury (ug/1): Silver (ug/1): Recommended Limits TOXICS/METALS Chronic Ceriodaphnia Qrtrly 56% 66% MAR JUN SEP DEC Cadmium (ug/1): Copper (ug/1): Lead (ug/1): Toluene (ug/1): Zinc (ug/1): Limits Changes Due To: Change in 7Q10 data Change in stream classification Relocation of discharge Change in wasteflow New pretreatment information Daily Max. 3.5 89 monitor 156 44 monitor 8.9 19 monitor monitor Daily Max. WQ or EL 3.0 WQ Monthly monitor 38 WQ Qrtrly monitor Monthly monitor parameter(s) Affected Cr, Ni, Cn, Hg, Ag will be monitored in Pretreatment LTMP Failing toxicity test Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.) 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. 4 INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS Upstream Location: State Road 2014 Downstream Location: 1) State Road 2012 for Cd 2) State Road 2007 Parameters: Temp, DO, Fecal Coliform, Conductivity, Cd, TP, TN 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 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 Newton -Clark Creek WWTP Permit # NC0036196 _ 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 _66_% (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 _MAR JUN SEP DEC .. 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 6 cfs Permitted Flow 7.5 _ MGD IWC 66 % Basin & Sub -basin CTB35 Receiving Stream Clark Creek County Catawba R mmended by: ‘)4 ' 4#"1-f ate //.1 0 a QCL PIF Version 9/91 COLOR REOPENER AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS This permit will be revoked and reissued to incorporate color limitations and/or revised monitoring requirements in the event color testing or other studies conducted by the permittee or the Division indicate that color has rendered or could render the receiving waters injurious to public health, secondary recreation, aquatic life and wildlife or adversely affect the palatability of fish, aesthetic quality or impair the water for any designated use. Color monitoring should consist of ADMI monitoring as specified below. All samples taken should have complete descriptive recordings of the color in the sample container including hue (distinctive characteristics and tint), clarity (clearness of the color sample) and luminance (brightness or glowing quality) of the sample as it looks in the collection container. Descriptions of stream color should also be recorded when color samples are collected. Color samples should be analyzed as follows: a) at natural pH b) free from turbidity (True Color); and c) Samples shall be analyzed in accordance with the provisions of Method 2120 E.4. as described in the 18th Edition of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Using a narrow -band scanning spectrophotometer to produce a COMPLETE spectral curve of the visible spectrum (350-75- nm), calculate and report results in ADMI values for true color values at the sample's ambient pH value. All color data including visual observations should be submitted with the monthly DMRs. Color Monitoring Location and Frequencies: Color Monitoring shall take place instream above the effluent outfall, downstream below the effluent outfall and in the effluent. Frequency shall be 3 consecutive days (preferably Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday) once per month. NEWTON-CLARK CREEK WWTP CLARK CREEK C 030835 JMN 1/20/95 Facility is requesting renewal of existing NPDES permit @ 5 MGD and is also requesting a modification and expansion to 7.5 MGD. Limits @ 7.5 MGD were previously developed in WLA completed in 9/91. Newton interacts with Maiden and Delta Mills, downstream dischargers also on Clark Creek. Regional Office staff had observed that color was a problem in Clark Creek downstream of Newton. Facility has started the color monitoring program as per requested in the last NDPES permit. Limits @ 5.0 MGD BOD 15 mg/1 30 mg/1 NH3 6 mg/1 12 mg/1 DO 6 mg/1 6 mg/1 TSS 30 mg/1 30 mg/1 Fecal 200 200 pH 6-9 SU 6-9 SU Chlorine monitor Cd 3.5 µg/1 Cr 76 µg/1 Ni 133 µg/1 Pb 38 µg/1 Cn 7.6 µg/1 Toluene 19 µg/1 * Summer and Winter 4 per current Division @ 7.5 MGD 15 mg/1 30 mg/1 1.4 mg/1* 3.1 mg/1* 5 mg/1 5 mg/I 30 mg/1 30 mg/1 200 200 6-9 SU 6-9 SU 26 µg/1 3141 89 µg/1 156 µg/1 44 µgil 8.9 µg/1 17 µg/1 limits for NH3 @ 7.5 MGD should be revised to 2 & procedure. 8/94- Tech Support reviewed Town's request for reduction in monitoring frequency for cyanide limit and reduced it from weekly monitoring to monthly. Newton has asked that downstream monitoring for cadmium be deleted. Samples taken at SR2012, located 1.3 miles downstream of Newton's discharge. A review of instream data does indicate that most of the time the nearly all of the values have been below detection level (<0.5 µg/1). However, there were some dates where the downstream values were above detection : Influent 10/12/94 nd 9/21/94 nd 7/13/94 nd 7/20/94 nd 9/8/93 nd 6/16/93 nd 6/30/93 nd Effluent <0.5 2.2 <0.5 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Downstream 1.2 µg/1 2.3 µg/1 * above the standard 2.0 µg/1 * at the standard 1.0 µg/1 1.9 µg/1 0.5 µg/1 0.5 µg/1 In 1993- 3 of 31 values above detection in 1994 - 4 of 50+ values above detection. It seems that in September '93 and '94, the cadmium levels were elevated. Could be some seasonal activity with the industrial dischargers to Newton's plant. Recommend continuation of instream monitoring for cadmium because of documented instream values above the n standard. ? �.t.�,l� 4104;0� 7's/7 / fvff7Lffs.,, "1. , C- � 4 ` c ()rid di: rF /'i(/r►?c.,„4 fit ,3 t /( NVL 7+ 4c. ,7/l/d ie* pvLK katCJ ;N , .NEWTON-CLARK CREEK WWTP CLARK CREEK C 030835 1994 APAM data 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether 6.5 µg/1 Aluminum 100141 Copper 10 µg/1 Zinc 18 µg/1 Chloride 167,000 µg/1(?) could be in mg/1 Fluoride 1160 µg/1(?) could be in mg/I RECOMMENDATION: Renewal of existing limits for conventional limits @ 5 MGD, renew toxicity limit @ 56%, for metals limits, revised limits and monitoring requirements, Limits for Cd and Pb, monthly monitoring for Cu, quarterly monitoring for Toluene*. Continue Color monitoring. *As for toluene, Joe Pearce of Pretreatment says that there is an environmental group that has raised the toluene issue in Newton's discharge. He recommends that we keep some monitoring for toluene in the NPDES permit. @ 7.5 MGD - Renewal of existing limits for conventional limits, renew toxicity limit @ 66%, for metals limits, revised limits and monitoring requirements, Limits for Cd and Pb, monthly monitoring for Cu and Zn, quarterly monitoring for Toluene. Continue Color monitoring TOXICANT ANALYSIS Facility Name Newton -Clark Creek NPDES # NC0036196 Ow (MGD) 5 7Q10s (cfs) ,_.._.._.._.._.._.._.._. 6 _.._.._..-56.36 !WC (%) Rec'ving Stream Clark Creek Stream Class C FINAL RESULTS df. Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/I Allowable Cw 8.9 ug/I Cutfr'ldM Max. Pred Cw 7.02 ug/I Allowable Cw 3.5 ug/I Max, JAIdki 014 VIQ Chromium Max. Pred Cw 25 ug/I Allowable Cw 88.7 ug/I Copper Max. Pred Cw 55.5 ug/1 Allowable Cw 12.4 ug/I Lead Max. Pred Cw 52.8 ug/I Allowable Cw 44.4 ug/I MP-1, "Mirk' ay ,i_r(4� Nickel J Max. Pred Cw 26 ug/I Allowable Cw 156.1 ug/I Silver Max. Pred Cw 0.5 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.1 ug/I Zinc Max. Pred Cw 75.6 ug/I Allowable Cw 88.7 ug/I Mercury Max. Pred Cw 0.1 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.0 ug/1 Toluene Max. Pred Cw 1.82 ug/1 Allowable Cw 19.5 ug/I 0 Max. Pred Cw 0 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.0 ug/I 1/19/95 Ali "mien Am' U "0009 Al/ hc]w' �bL — Alefito,✓rro>i.dc., ^/d ,.too rTbM,✓G r/o r�Ar70/LIr✓% Alt bc(N ��L , ZJ �e/,,,3 M*W1t'Di' OwinoiAtE..1:41 ct.24,-,-..---.12- rr ,/�� fL . �i »� �✓ /I/f �i�,► PAGE - NEWTON-CLARK CR WWTP U • stream Month Tem. DO Saturation Fecal Conductivit Oct-94 Sep-94 Aug-94 Jul-94 Jun-94 May-94 Apr-94 Mar-94 Feb-94 Jan-94 Dec-93 Nov-93 14 17 20 21 20 15 14 8.2 7.4 7.4 6.7 6.9 7.8 7.8 80% 77% 81% 75% 76% 77% 76% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1341 3888 2700 4036 4387 1594 1450 97 95 100 91 86 93 97.5 Downstream �-e Temp DO 14 8.2 17 7.3 20 6.9 21 6.5 20 7.1 16 7.7 15 7.8 Saturation Fecal Conductivity 80% 76% 76% 73% 78% 78% 77% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1421 2376 2100 3936 4705 1652 1222 200 176 196 149 178 218 158.3 Ammonia - Residual Chlorine - Fecal Colitorm Instream Waste Concentrations Residual Chlorine 7010 (cfs) Design Flow (mgd) Design Flow (cfs) Stream Std (mg/1) Upstream bkgrd level (mg/I) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (mg/I) 6 7.5 11.63 17 0 66.0% 25.8 Fecal Limit 200/100m1 Ratio of 1 : 66.0 6 7.5 11.63 1 0.22 66.0% 1.4 10 7.5 11.63 1.8 0.22 53.8% 3.2 Ammonia as NH3 (summer) 7Q10 (cfs) Design Flow (mgd) Design Flow (cfs) Stream Std (mg/1) Upstream bkgrd level (mg/I) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (mg/I) Ammonia as NH3 (winter) 7Q10 (cfs) Design Flow (mgd) Design Flow (cfs) Stream Std (mgA) Upstream bkgrd level (mgA) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (mg/I) NC0036196 1 /20/95 NEWTON INSTREAM NUTRIENT DATA DATE UPS NH3 DWN NH3 UPS TP DWN TP UPS TN DWN TN UPS TKN DWN TKN Oct-94 AVG. 0.1 0 0.04 0.15 0.54 1.61 0.1 0.2 MAX 0.4 0.1 0.04 0.15 0.54 1.61 0.1 0.2 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.04 0.15 0.54 1.61 0.1 0.2 Sep-94 AVG. 0 0 0.08 0.16 1.01 1.16 0.4 0.2 MAX 0.1 0.2 0.08 0.16 1.01 1.16 0.4 0.2 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.08 0.16 1.01 1.16 0.4 0.2 Aug-94 AVG. 0 0 0.1 0.22 1.89 2.09 1.12 0.6 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.22 1.89 2.09 1.12 0.6 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.22 1.89 2.09 1.12 0.6 JuI-94 AVG. 0.1 0.1 0.07 0.18 1.79 2.14 0.9 0.9 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.07 0.18 1.79 2.14 0.9 0.9 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.07 0.18 1.79 2.14 0.9 0.9 Jun-94 AVG. 0.1 0.1 0.05 0.32 1.41 2.79 0.44 1.3 MAX 0.2 0.1 0.05 0.32 1.41 2.79 0.44 1.3 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.05 0.32 1.41 2.79 0.44 1.3 May-94 AVG. 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.58 1.07 1.99 0 0 MAX 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.58 1.07 1.99 <0.1 <0.1 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.5 0.58 1.07 1.99 <0.1 <0.1 Apr-94 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.06 0.19 1.2 1.38 0.2 0.2 MAX 0.2 0.1 0.06 0.19 1.2 1.38 0.2 0.2 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.06 0.19 1.2 1.38 0.2 0.2 UPS -SR 2014 DWN-SR2007 Page 1 NEWTON INSTREAM NUTRIENT DATA DATE UPS NH3 DWN NH3 UPS TP DWN TP UPS TN DWN TN UPS TKN DWN TKN Oct-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.06 0.25 0.8 2.29 0.2 0.9 MAX 0.1 <0.1 0.06 0.25 0.8 2.29 0.2 0.9 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.06 0.25 0.8 2.29 0.2 0.9 Sep-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.11 0.18 1.13 1.05 0.3 0.3 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.18 1.13 1.05 0.3 0.3 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.11 0.18 1.13 1.05 0.3 0.3 Aug-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.11 0.26 0.91 2.58 0.1 0.9 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.26 0.91 2.58 0.1 0.9 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.11 0.26 0.91 2.58 0.1 0.9 Jul-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.09 0.4 1.02 2.2 0.2 0.5 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.09 0.4 1.02 2.2 0.2 0.5 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.09 0.4 1.02 2.2 0.2 0.5 Jun-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.08 0.23 0.64 1.29 0.1 0.5 MAX 0.4 0.1 0.08 0.23 0.64 1.29 0.1 0.5 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.08 0.23 0.64 1.29 0.1 0.5 May-93 AVG. <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.21 1.12 1.65 0.2 0.6 MAX 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.21 1.12 1.65 0.2 0.6 MIN <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.21 1.12 1.65 0.2 0.6 UPS -SR 2014 DWN-SR2007 Page 2 WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY TESTING 0[SELF-MONITORING SUMMARY] Mon, Dec 19, 1994 FACD,rTY YEAR JAN P NEW MINETTE TEXTILES PERM CHR LIM:78% NC0004235/0OI Begin:3/1/92 Frequency: Q P/F A MAR JUN SEP DEC NonComp:SINGLE County:CEVELIND Region:MRO Subbuin:BRD05 PF:0.450 Speckl SOC:4/15/94-12/31/95 P-2 CHR MONIT Q (90,7050,30,10) 7Q10: 0.20 IWC(%):77.7 l7rder, (JAJO) Y CO 87.3' 01 70.4' 92 15 93 FAIL 04 FAIL 74.2' >90' - FAIL FAIL 70.6' IFl FAIL <10 FAILf 87.8' PA FAIL FAIL FAILf 72.1' - FAIL FAIL - PA PR FAIL 10.25,13.98 PA r«:. 73.5' 70.7' FAIL FAIL 38.73 rsvv 88.4' 59.18' FAIL FAIL - arr 68.4' 88.53' FAIL 27.58 - wt 78.2' 13.78 FAIL FAIL 17.31 MP/ bt 27.58 FAIL FAIL l)t >40' <78 <10 27.577 NEWPORT WWTP LET CHR TAR:66% 90 - - - - - .- - - - - - - NC0021555/001 13egin:1/24/94 Frcqua cy. Q P/F A JAN APR JUL OCT NonComp: 91 - - - - - -- - - - - - - County:CARTERET Region: WIRO Subbasin: WOK03 92 - - - - - - - - - - - - PF:0.5 Special 03 - - - - - - - - - FAIL FAIL - 7Q10: 0.4 IWC(%):66.0 Order 94 - PASS - PASS - - PASS PASS - PASS • NEWTON WWI? PERM CJIR LIM: 56%; 0 7.5MGD CIIR LIM 66% V 90 FAIL PASS - PASS - Nq PASS - PA PASS - PASS NC0036196/001 Begin:S/I/93 Fnsquency: Q P/F A JUN SEP DEC MAR NonComp:SINGLE 91 - - PASS - - FAIL - - FAIL PASS PASS PASS County:CATAWBA Region: MRO Subbnsin: CTB35 02 - - FAIL FAIL - FAIL,PASS PASS FAIL FAIL FAIL PASS PASS PF:5.00 Special 93 PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS - 7Q10:6.0 LWC(%):56.32 Order. 94 - - PASS - - FAIL,PASS - - PASS - NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY CO. PERM: 2411R LC50 AC MONIT EPIS FIIID (GRAB) 90 - - - - - - - - - - - - NC0O46931/001 Degin:9/1P)3 Frequency:5OWIYA NonComp: 01 - - - - - - - - - - - - County:FORSYTH Region: WSRO Subbasin: YADO4 92 - . - - - - - - - - - - - PF:VAR Special D3 - - - - - - - - - - >1001,>1001 >1001,>100t 7Q10: 0 IWC(%): 100.0 Order 04 >1001 - - - - 10.351 - - - >901 NORPOLK SOU17IERN CORPORA-11ON PERM: 2411R AC MONII' 171111) (GRAD) 00 - - - - - - - . - - - - - NC0022071/001 Begin:7/1/91 Fequeney:5OWD/A NonComp: 91 - - - - - - SNONEI - - - - - County: CATAWBA Region: MRO Subbaein: CTB35 PF:0.0076 Special 92 - 93 >1001 NONE, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%): 100.0 Order 94 >100f - - - - - - - - - NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. P13RM C11R LIM:29% Y 90 - - PASS - - PA PASS - PA bt PA FAIL NC0029246/011 Begin:5/1/94 Frequency: Q P/F A MAR JUN SEP DEC NonComp:SINGLE 91 NR - FAIL PA FAIL PASS - - PASS - - FAIL County:DAVIDSON Region:WSRO Subbanin:YAD04 02 FAIL PASS PASS - - FAIL NI PA FAIL PA PA PASS PF:0.317 Special 03 - - FAIL PA PA FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL PASS - FAIL 7Q10: 1.2 IWC(%):29.0 Order 04 PASS - FAIL PASS - LATE PASS - PASS - NORTH SIDE WASTEWATER TREATMENT FA PERM AC LIM: 241IR P/P 0 90% MID 90 - - - - - - - - - - - - NC0081736/00I Begin:9/1/93 Frequency: Q A MAR JUN SEP DEC NonComp:SINGLE 91 - - - - - - - - - - - - County:NEW HANOVE( Region: WIRO Subb►sin:CPF17 92 - - - - - - - - - - - - PF:4.0 Special 93 - - - - - - - - N - - N 7Q10: 11DAI. IWC(%):NA Order. 94 - - N - - N - - N - NORTII WILKESBORO WWIY PERM: 4811R LC50 AC LIM 78% DAPII 90 - - - - - - - - - - - - NC0020761/001 Begin:6/1/94 Frequency: Q A JAN APR JUL OCT NonComp:SINGLE 01 - - - - - - NONE' - - NONE' - ' - County: WILKES Region: WSRO Subbasin: YADO1 92 NONE - - >90.0 - - >00.0 - - . >00.0 - - PF: 1.0 Special 93 >90 - - >90 - - >90 - - >90 - - 7Q10: 196.0 IWC(%):0.783 Order 94 >90 - - >90 - - >90 - - >BO NORWOOD WWI? PERM CIIR LIM:2.7% Y 00 - - bt - - PASS - - PASS - - LATE NC0021628/001 Begin:10/1/92 F,cqucncy: Q P/F A MAR JUN SEP DEC NonComp:SINGLE 01 PASS - NI - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS County:STANLY Region: MRO Subbasin:YADI3 02 - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS PF: 0.75 Special 03 - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS 7Q10: 42.0 IWC(%):2.68 Order 94 - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS - OAKBOHO WWII' PI?RM ('lIR I.IM:19%, 2.6'R. al HIJ.TO ROCKY R. Y 00 FAII. PASS FAIL PASS - - Ni - - PASS - - N00043532/001 Begin:8/I/'93 FnSprney: Q I'/11 A JAN AI'R JUI. OCI' NonComp:SING11l 01 PASS -- - PASS - - FAIL I'A9S - PAS8 - - County:STANLY Region:MRO Subbasin;YAD13 92 PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PF:0.50 Special 03 PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - 7QI0:3.3 IWC(%):19 Order 04 PASS - - PASS - - PASS - - PASS 0 2 consecutive failures = significant noncompliance Y Pre 1990 Data Available LEGEND: PERM = Permit Requirement LET = Administrative Lester - Target Frequency = Monitoring frequency: Q- Quarterly; M- Monthly; BM- Bimonthly; SA- Semiannually; A. Annually; OWD- Only when discharging; D. Discontinued monitoring requirement; IS- Conducting independent study Begin = First month required 7Q10 = Receiving stream low flow criterion (c(S) A = quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon single failure Months that testing must occur - ex. JAN,APR.JUL.00T NonComp = Current Compliance Requirement PF= Permitted flow (MGD) IWC% = lnsueam waste concentration P/F = Pass/Fall chronic test AC = Acute CIIR = Chronic Data Notation: f - Fathead Minnow: • - Ceriodaohnia so.: my - Mvrid shrimp: ChV - Chronic value: P - Mortalitv of suited percentage at highest concentration; at - Performed by DEM Tox Eval Group: bt - Bad test Repotting Notation: •-• = Data not required; NR - Not reported; ( ) - Beginning of Quarter Facility Aclivity Status: 1. Inactive, N - Newly raaucd(ro construct);11- Active but no( discharging; Wore data available for month in question SIG = ORC signature needed 37 TOXICANT ANALYSIS Facility Name Newton -Clark Creek NPDES # NC0036196 Qw (MGD) 7.5 7Q10s (cfs) _.._.._.._.._.._. 6 65.96 /WC (%) Reeving Stream Clark Creek Stream Class C _.._.._.._. -------- _.._. -FINAL RESULTS Cam,, Max. Pred Cw 2.5 ug/I ug/I Allowable Cw 7.6 .GyEratdb C,441,ifM+ Max. Pred Cw 7.02 ug/I Allowable Cw 3.0 ug/I Chromium Max. Pred Cw 25 ug/I Allowable Cw 75.8 ug/I Copper Max. Pred Cw 55.5 ug/I Allowable Cw 10.6 ug/I Lead Max. Pred Cw 52.8 ug/I Allowable Cw 37.9 ug/I Nickel Max. Pred Cw 26 ug/I Allowable Cw 133.4 ' ug/I Silver Max. Pred Cw 0.5 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.1 ug/I Zinc Max. Pred Cw 75.6 ug/I Allowable Cw 75.8 ug/I Mercury Max. Pred Cw 0.1 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.0 ug/I Toluene Max. Pred Cw 1.82 ug/I Allowable Cw 16.7 ug/I 0 Max. Pred Cw 0 ug/I Allowable Cw 0.0�ug/I tNtir Mo,1 r(a ✓i J i Md Alt 8,„niD1-:kil 40 0, )- /.d/.314 n'U 1 /19/95 PAGE' NEWTON-CLARK CR WWTP Residual Chlorine 7010 (CFS) DESIGN FLOW (MGD) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) STREAM STD (UG/L) UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (ug/I) Fecal Limit Ratio of 0.5 :1 Ammonia as NH3 (summer) 6 7010 (CFS) 7.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 11.625 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L) 65.96 IWC (%) 25.77 Allowable Concentration (mg/I) Ammonia as NH3 (winter) 7Q10 (CFS) 200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) STREAM STD (MG/L) UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (mg/I) 6 7.5 11.625 1.0 0.22 65.96 1.40 10 7.5 11.625 1.8 0.22 53.76 3.16 NC0036196 1 /1 9/95 Facility: Newton wwtp NPDES#: nc0036916 Receiving Stream: Clark Creek Comment(s): Low Flow Record Station Number: Hydrologic Area Number: Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station: Qave Low Flow Record Station: s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station: w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station: 3002 Low Flow Record Station: Drainage Area New Site: MAR New Site: Qave per Report Equation: s7010 per Report Equation: w7Q10 per Report Equation: 3002 per Report Equation: Drainage Area Ratio: [new DA/Daatgage ] Weighted Ratio: Over -ride inappropriate Site (y ): gage number not available 02.1432.3600 HMO 84.10 miles squared 100.90 cfs 15.00 cfs 36.00 cfs 48.00 cfs must be < 400 sq. miles 29.30 sq. miles 1.2 cfs/miles squared 35 cfs 5.55 cfs 8.41 cfs 11.89 cfs Continue 0.35 :1 Continue 0.13:1 Drainage Area New Site: MAR New Site: Weighted Qave per Report Equation: Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation: Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation: Weighted 3002 per Report Equation: 29.30 miles squared 1.2 cfs/miles squared 35 cfs 5.51 cfs 8.95 cfs 12.53 cfs NEWTON-CLARK CR WWTP Residual Chlorine 7Q10 (CFS) DESIGN FLOW (MGD) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) STREAM STD (UG/L) UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (ug/l) Fecal Limit Ratio of 0.8 :1 Ammonia as NH3 (summer) 6 7Q10 (CFS) 5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) 7.75 DESIGN FLOW (CFS) 17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L) 0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L) 56.36 IWC (%) 30.16 Allowable Concentration (mg/I) Ammonia as NH3 (winter) 7Q10 (CFS) 200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD) DESIGN FLOW (CFS) STREAM STD (MG/L) UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L) IWC (%) Allowable Concentration (mg/I) 6 5 7.75 1.0 0.22 56.36 1.60 10 5 7.75 1.8 0.22 43.66 3.84 NC0036196 1/1 9/9 5 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT August 12, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO: Jay Lucas THRU: Ruth Swanek Carla Sanderson FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowe11%(u4 SUBJECT: Permit Modification for Frequency of Cyanide Monitoring City of Newton- Clark Creek WWTP NPDES Permit No. NC0036196 Catawba County The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the request from the subject facility for reduction of effluent monitoring for cyanide from weekly to monthly. A review of Newton's daily monitoring reports and 1994 APAM does indicate that from January 1993 to June 1994, all reported values for cyanide were below the detection level. Influent values reviewed during this sample period showed only two months when cyanide was present coming into the Newton facility and corresponding effluent data for those dates was below detection. It should also be noted that during this time period of 18 months, only 24 samples were taken, with weekly sampling only done in August 1993 and July 1994. It does not appear that Newton was strictly adhering to the weekly sampling permit condition. However, based on the data reviewed, the Instream Assessment Unit recommends that effluent monitoring for the cyanide limit be revised from weekly monitoring to monthly monitorin g. If you have any questions concerning this revision, please contact me. cc: Rex Gleason Dave Goodrich Central Files WLA File P.O. Box 550 • Newton, N.C. 28658 • (704) 465-7400 • Fax: (704) 465-7464 July 28, 1994 Jay B. Lucas Environmental Engineer P.O. Box 29535 Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 Subject: Request for Permit Modification Permit No. NC0036196 City of Newton Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility Catawba County Dear Mr. Lucas: I am requesting that the effluent monitoring requirements for Cyanide be modified in our permit that is now due for renewal. In our permit that became effective May 1, 1993 our Cyanide monitoring frequency was changed from monthly to weekly. I am requesting that this be changed back to monthly monitoring. Since we started sampling our effluent for Cyanide in July, 1990, we have sampled 68 times. This sampling included seven consecutive days in May, 1992, and three consecutive days in August, 1993. The results of all 68 of these tests was below detection level (<5 ug/1). From July, 1990 through June, 1994 we have sampled upstream 6 times (5 times in 1992, 1 time in 1993), and downstream 5 times (all in 1992). The results of all these tests were also below detection level. We have sampled our influent 33 times between July, 1990 and June, 1994. This sampling included seven consecutive days in May, 1992, and three consecutive days in August, 1993. Twenty-seven of these samples were below detection level. Due to these results, I believe that the amount of Cyanide in our effluent, if any exists, poses no threat to the receiving waters. If any additional information is needed, please contact me. Sincerely, \_ ib \a, James A. Richards Chief Operator City of Newton Clark Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility = 1 r` • TOXICANT ANALYSIS Facility Name Newton -Clark Creek I Parameter = Cyanide NPDES # ' nc0036196 Standard = 2 µg/l Qw (MGD) 7.5i 7Q10s (cfs) , 6l n BDL=1 /2DL Actual Data RESULTS /WC (%) 65.96! 1 2.5 <5 Std Dev. Rec'ving Stream clark Creek 1 2 2.5 <5 Mean Stream Class c i 3 2.5 <5 C.V. 4 2.5 <5 FINAL RESULTS 1 5 2.5 <5 Cyanide 1 6 2.5 <5 Mult Factor = Max. Pred Cw 0= ug/l 7 2.5 <5 Max. Value Allowable Cw 3.01 ug/l 8 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw i 9 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 0 ! 10 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw Oiugll 11 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 0.0! ug/1 12 2.5 <5 13 2.5 <5 0 i 14 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 01 ug/1 15 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 0.0ug/1 16 2.5 <5 I 17 2.5 <5 0 0 I 18 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 0iug/1 19 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 0.0; ug/1 20 2.5 <5 21 2.5 <5 0 I 22 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 0; ug/l 23 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 0.0ug/I 24 2.5 <5 I 25 8/13/94 PAGE' r TOXICANT ANALYSIS I 0 2.5 0 y 0 2.5 0 µg/I µg/I 3.0 µ9/I 8/13/94 PAGE 6 6 i llfro 5 �j 3 c/A) 1/5 27 0'47 1' / h2;t-- 1 0-C 04, a) To: Permits and Engineering Unit Water Quality Section Attention: Jay Lucas (4/(eldhA SOC RI� P�R03ECT: No Date: August 5, 1994 NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS County: Catawba NPDES Permit No.: NC0036196 MRO No.: 94-172 PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Facility and Address: City of Newton -Clark Creek WWTP Post Office Box 550 Newton, N.C. 28658 2. Date of Investigation: July 26, 1994 3. Report Prepared By: Michael L. Parker, Environ. Engr. II 4. Person Contacted and Telephone Number: Dwight Wilson, (704) 465-7480, James Richards, (704) 465-7404. 5. Directions to Site: From the jct. of Hwy. 321 and SR 2014 (McKay Rd.) south of the City of Newton, travel west on SR 2014 0.7 miles. The WWTP site will be on the left side of SR 2014. 6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge Points: Latitude: 35° 37' 34" Longitude: 81° 13' 55" Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map. USGS Quad No.: E 14 NW 7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application: Yes. Additional acreage is available for expansion, if necessary. 8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Gently rolling topography, 3-5% slopes. The WWTP appears to be constructed above the 100 year flood plain elevation. 9. Location of Nearest Dwelling: None within 500 feet of the WWTP site. Page Two 10. Receiving Stream or Affected Surface Waters: Clark Creek a. Classification: C b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 030835 c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Good flow observed in the receiving stream (4-6 feet wide x 6-8 inches deep). Other dischargers exist downstream of this facility. PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS 1. a. Volume of Wastewater: 5.0 MGD (Design Capacity) b. What is the current permitted capacity: The Permit contains limits for both 5.0 and 7.5 MGD. c. Actual treatment capacity of current facility (current design capacity): 5.0 MGD (see Part IV) d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous ATCs issued in the previous two years: N/A e. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: The existing WWT facilities consist of an influent lift station followed by mechanical screening, grit removal, lime addition, 2 primary clarifiers, 4 aeration basins, 3 secondary clarifiers, dual media filters, chlorine gas disinfection, 2 gravity sludge thickeners, 2 centrifuge sludge thickeners, 2 sludge holding tanks, post aeration and stand-by power. f. Description of proposed WWT facilities: N/A Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: This facility has passed all toxicity tests performed since June, 1993. g• h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved. 2. Residual handling and utilization/disposal scheme: a. If residuals are being land applied specify DEM Permit No. WQ0003902. Residuals Contractor: Sigmon Brothers b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP c. Landfill: N/A d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (specify): The City has entered into a contract with the City of Hickory to participate in a joint residuals composting operation. The composting facility is presently down for repairs, however, operation is expected to resume sometime in the fall of this year. Page Three 3. Treatment Plant Classification: Less than 5 points; no rating (include rating sheet). Class IV 4. SIC Code(s): 4952 Wastewater Code(s): 01 5. MTU Code(s): 04103 PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION 1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies involved (municipals only)? Public monies were used in the construction of this facility. 2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None at this time. At some point in time, color monitoring may be necessary at this facility (see Part IV). 3. Important SOC/JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A 4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: N/A PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The City of Newton requests renewal of the subject Permit. There have been some additions to the existing WWT facilities since the Permit was last issued. It should be noted, however, that the WWTP additions were not constructed for the purpose of expanding the existing plant, but rather to improve operational flexibility of the existing facilities. Therefore, the Permit should be reissued with effluent limitations for 5.0 MGD and 7.5 MGD with language provided that discusses the need to obtain an ATC prior to any expansion above 5.0 MGD. This should clear up any discrepancies that have existed in the past between the City's engineer and the Division regarding the actual treatment capacity of the WWTP. Until recently, this facility discharged a significant amount of color into the receiving stream. The primary source of this color (a textile firm) has since moved and only a trace amount of color can now be observed in the effluent. This has resulted in a significant color reduction in the receiving stream below the WWTP's outfall. Pending a decision on color by the TSB (color limit vs color monitoring), it is recommended that this facility be kept on the list of color dischargers since the area is dominated by textile firms and there is a trace amount of color still evident in the discharge. Page Four Pending receipt and approval of the revised WLA from the TSB, it is recommended that the Permit be renewed as requested. V71,-/we‘L-7 0 .Sr- 9/ Signature of Report Preparer Date Water Quality Regions Supervisor Date Page 1 Note for Jackie Nowell From: Joe Pearce Date: Wed, Jul 20, 1994 9:46 AM Subject: Barium for Newton To: Jackie Nowell Newton's APAMs indicate 6 microg/1 Barium. Therefore, Barium is not an issue. FYI.