NC0023337_Wasteload Allocation_19941121

NPDES DOCUMENT :CANNING: COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0023337
Scotland Neck WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
' Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Return
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
November 21, 1994
This documerit its printed on reuse paper - ignore nay
content on the resrerse side

la-/so15`{
-fcr,Fr ry
PERMIT NO.: NC0023337
PERMITTEE NAME:
FACILITY NAME:
Town of Scotland Neck
NPDES WAS 'I'h LOAD ALLOCATION
�cn 91-z-019 9
Scotland Neck Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 0.675 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 84* %
Industrial (% of Flow): 16* %
Comments:
* based on data in application. Previous WLA gives 88/12%.
STREAM INDEX: 28-79-32-1
RECEIVING STREAM:Canal Creek
Class: C-NSW
Sub -Basin: 03-03-04
Reference USGS Quad: C29SW, Hobgood
County: Halifax
Regional Office: Raleigh Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 2/28/95 Treatment Plant Class: 11I
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by: Susan R bson
Prepared by:-�.
Reviewed by: C�ahJ ESQ/I&7*
V 1a.-
(please attach)
Date: 9/20/94
Date: re ruwe,,,►r_42-
ate: 11
8otZ
Modeler Date Rec. I #
of tea, -. -
Drainage Area (m1): 2.17 Average Streamflow (cfs): 2.36
s7Q10 (cfs): 0.0 w7Q10 (cfs): 0.0 30Q2 (cfs): 0.0
Toxicity Limits: Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P / F 90 %
February, May, August, and November
Upstream Location: Highway 125 North
Downstream Location: Highway 258 South
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform,
conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July,
August, and September and once per week during the remaining months
of the year.
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/I):
NH3N (mg/I):
DO (mg/I):
TSS (mg/I):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/l):
Oil & Grease (mg/I):
TP (mg/I):
TN (mg/I):
Chromium (41):
Copper (µg/l):
Lead (µg/l):
Nickel (µg/I):
Zinc (µg/I):
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
0.675
5.0
2.0
6.0
30
200
6-9
17.0
nr
monitor
monitor
50
monitor
25
88
monitor
10.0
4.0
6.0
30
200
6-9
17.0
nr
monitor
monitor
Daily Maximum
Daily Maximum
Daily Maximum
Daily Maximum
Daily Maximum
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other
than trace amounts.
The temperature of the effluent shall be such as not to cause an increase
in the temperature of the receiving stream of more than 0.5 ° C
and in no case cause the ambient water temperature to exceed
20°C.
Facility has option to resubmit monitoring data for review and possible deletion from
NPDES Permit after at least one full years monitoring and at least twelve data points.
Winter Limits changed for consistency in application of zero : 7010 policy.

RS:
1WELL, JR.
_LISON
I. BUNTING
PARTIN
STATON
ohm of rothadi (Nok
FERD L. HARRISON. MAYOR
pO.BOX 537
SCOTLAND NECK, NC 27874
September 15, 1994
W. SCO T BUFFKIN
ADMINISTRATOR
PATSY A. FAITHFUL
CLERK
Dave Goodrich, Supervisor
)ES Permit Group
ter Quality Section Management
C. Division of Environmental
0• Box 27687
Ileigh, North Carolina 27611
Abject:
Scotland Neck, North Carolina
Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES Permit Renewal AP 1iCa
#NC 0023337, Expires 2
8-95
)ear Mr. Goodrich: and Mr. Scott Buffkin's,
to you 14 9-2-94, enclosed are the following
Pursuant to N. C. General Statute of g- 5 4,
Pu letter
Town Administrator, permit renewal:
documents for application of subject p
1. Standard form A, executed in triplicate.
2. Sludge management plan narrative• ou with the
250 application processing fee was forwarded to y
The Townls $1994 letter. gas dis-
infection 2,chlorine
Th
Tanning to replace the existing permit
system prior to the new
ine Town is currently Pondence with NCDEM coestsning
infection system with an ultrapreviouscorresp
However, recent literature effectivecdlorine ate as residual limits. However,
limits, Should NCDEM p
proposedhapossible so as to be capable
that EPA may relax or eliminate such
thats
fcourse,
the Town needs to kno�a1seXpendatue•
of eliminating an unwarranted cap

Mr. Dave Goodrich
September 15, 1994
Page 2
Our current NPDES permit was issued with twelve new tests required
regarding the presence of various metals. These tests are required
3 per week, weekly and monthly with a resulting high annual costs
associated with sampling, testing and reporting. The discharge has
not violated the established limits and we request that these expensive
parameters be removed from our permit testing requirements:
Conductivity Mercury
Cadmium Copper
Chromium Zinc
Nickel Arsenic
Lead Silver
Cyanide
Please advise if additional information is required.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF SCOTLAND NECK
Ferd L. Harrison
Mayor
FLH/pf
Enclosure

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
Town of Scotland Neck W
NC0023337
Domestic - 84 %
Existing
Renewal
Canal Creek
C - NSW
03-03-04
Halifax
Raleigh
Robson
9/20/94
C29SW
Request # 8012
aste Water Treatment Plant
Industrial - 16 %
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
2.17
0.0
0.0
2.36
0.0
100 %
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Facility discharges to zero flow stream; numerous flow violation August, 1992 through March,
1993. Any expansion of flow would require relocation of outfall
Instream monitoring is being taken at Highway 125 North and Highway 258 South, (up and
downstream respectfully), Highway 258 bridge is on Deep Creek. Request Region input as to
available downstream location on Canal Creek. Instream data indicates severly depressed
dissolved oxygen concentrations both up and downstream.
The submitted DMR data was reviewed for toxics recommendations. Chromium had three values
above the detection level over the past year and 45 values of less than detection. One of the values
was 37 1.1g/1, (the other two were 9.0 and 6.0 µg/1). This one value weighted the analysis such
that a limit was required, (i.e. it was so much higher than all other values that it skewed the
analysis). It is Pretreatment's recommendation that no limit be required per the NPDES Permit
for Chromium; the Technical Support Branch requests both Region and P & E response to this
recommendation. Since the facility has the option of modifiying its Pretreatment Monitoring Plan
to a Short -Term (or Modified) Plan, than chromium should either be Limited or Monitored
Quarterly.
Special S edule Requir; e ts and additial comme ts fro Reviewers.
rio
ico
5/ v� Af/l / w;itbr- c.{ att/L 7
//4?). -✓ (v'
Recommended by:
Reviewed by Instream Assessment: (,IL
,ice./
btfP:-(/(—
Cec4/I Y/fpri,r-f 1'X-o/r�t( M G, / 1471,vi /S
Farrell Keough
Regional Superviso
Permits & Engineering:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY:
Date: is oor093eq, %55Lj
Date: /D//ti ll
Date: ///7 F�
jo;iL-- Date: / I ,I i y
!11n1,!
9 19 4

CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
existing Limits:
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
Wasteflow (MGD): 0.675
BOD5 (mg/1): 5.0 9.0
NH3N (mg/1): 2.0 2.0
DO (mg/1): 6.0 6.0
TSS (mg/1): 30 30
Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200 200
pH(SU): 6-9 6-9
Residual Chlorine (µg/1): 17.0 17.0 as of April 1,1994
Oil & Grease (mg/1): nr nr
TP (mg/1): monitor monitor
TN (mg/1): monitor monitor
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Recommended Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1): TSS (mg/1):.
Fecal Col. (/100 mi):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
There shall be no discharge
Monthly Average
Summer Winter WQorEL
0.675
5.0 9.0
2.0 2.0
6.0 6.0
30 30
200 200
6-9 6-9
17.0 17.0
nr nr
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
WQ
WQ
WQ
WQ
as of April 1, 1994
of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Parameter(s) affected:
Limits Changes Due To:
(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)

Type of Toxicity Test
Existing Limit
Recommended Limit
Monitoring Schedule:
Existing Limits
COD (mg/):
Cadmium (4/1):
Chromium (µg/1):
Copper (4/1):
Nickel (14/1):
Lead (pg/1):
Zinc (µg/1):
Cyanide (µg/1):
Phenols (µg/1):
Mercury (4/1):
Silver (4/1):
Arsenic (µg/1):
Recommended Limits;
COD (mg/):
Cadmium (pg/1):
Chromium (4/1): —
Copper (µg/1):
Nickel (µg/1): ---
Lead (µg/1): — - -
Zinc (µg/1):
Cyanide (µg/i):
Phenols (µg/1):
Mercury (µg/1):
Silver (µg/1):
Arsenic (µg/1):
Arsenic:
TOXICS/METALS
Quarterly Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) Toxicity Test
90 %
90%
February, May, August, and November
Daily Max.
monitor
2.0
50
monitor
88
25
monitor
5.0
nr
monitor
monitor
monitor
Daily Max.
m
not required
50 / monitor *
monitor
88 WQ
25 WQ
monitor
not required
not required
not required
not required
not required
LIMP ? STMP
* request Region and P & E input as to
requirement, (refer cover page). Since
facility has option fot ShortTenn (Modified)
Monitoring Plan, monitoring would be
recommended as Quarterly
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0 12 values of < 5.0 µg/1 over the last year
5 0 not required in NPDES Permit
Cadmium: Max. Pred Cw 0 48 values of < 1.0 µg/1 over the last year
Allowable Cw 2.0 not required in NPDES Pennit
Chromium: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Copper:
Cyanide:
Lead:
Mercury:
Nickel:
Silver:
Zinc:
107.3 45 values of < 5.0 p.g/1 over the last year
50 three hits over last year, 37µg/1 in April, 1994 was the driving force for Max. Predicted
* request Region and P & E comment as to need for NPDES requirement, (cover page)
Max. Pred Cw 236.8 12 values over the last year, all were above Action Level
Allowable Cw 7.0 current SOP requires monitoring Monitor per NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0 48 values of < 5.0 14/1 over the last year
5.0 not required in NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
55.2 43 values of < 5.0 µg/1 over the last year
25 five hits over the last year is reason for limit Limit per NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0 12 values of < 2.0 µg/l over the last year [ incorrectly reported
0.01 as 0.2 µg/1 on DMR's ] not required in NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
121.6 many high values over the last year
88 Limit per NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0 12 values of < 5.0 µg/1 over the last year
0.06 not required in NPDES Permit
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
2732 many high values over the last year above the Action Level
50 current SOP requires monitoring Monitor per NPDES Permit

_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.
1NSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: at least 50' above outfall **
Downstream Location: at least 900' downstream of outfall **
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal conform, conductivity
** request Region comment on appropriateness of locations
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July, August, and September and once per week during the
remaining months of the year.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment facilities? .es
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 updated evaluation of facility, including toxics spreadsheet, modeling analysisif modeled at
renewal, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

•
Facility Name Scotland Neck Waste Water Treatment Plant Permit # NC002337 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 90 % (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 Feb., May., Aug., and Nov. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the
NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened
and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require
immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will
constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10
Permitted Flow
IWC
Basin & Sub -basin
Receiving Stream
County
0.0 cfs
0.675 M G D
100 %
03-03-04
Canal Creek
Halifax
QCL PIF Version 9/91
Recommended b
Farrell Keough/
Date ii- o crAome S

19$1 pltxwitl No't'E
CANAL CREEK & DEEP CREEK 030304
QUAL-II
Originally calibrated to data collected in 1979 (time -of -travel,
slug sampling). Model extends from Scotland Neck outfall down Deep
Creek and includes a short segment of Canal Creek. A follow-up study
was conducted in June 1982, but the results were not included in the
model.
Discharge: Scotland Neck (0.675 mgd)
Summer Winter
BOD5 5 mg/1 9 mgil
NH3 2 mg/1 2 mg/1
DO 6 mg/1 6 mg/1
TSS 30 mg/1 30 mg/1
Fecal Coliform 1000/100 ml 1000/100 ml
pH 6-8.5 SU 6-8.5 SU
(N% eXplAINritION
dAP4G 3 OPIUM/
`'u 3t,*_ AwwsZN l /al
No Ot.1 tk, �►\�
-tO 0 8 I

Request # 8012
Facility Name: Town of Scotland Neck Waste Water Treatment Plant
NPDES No.: NC0023337
Type of Waste: 84 % Domestic 16% Industrial
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Receiving Stream: Canal Creek
Stream Classification: C - NSW
Subbasin: 03-03-04
County: Halifax Stream Characteristic
Regional Office: Raleigh USGS #
Requestor: Robson Date: 1991
Date of Request: 9 / 20 / 94 Drainage Area (mi2): 2.17
Topo Quad: C 29 SW Summer 7010 (cfs): 0.0
Winter 7010 (cfs): 0.0
Average Flow (cfs): 2.36
3002 (cfs): 0.0
IWC (%): 100 %
Existing WLA checked:
Staff Report:
Topo checked:
USGS Flows confirmed:
IWC Spreadsheet:
Stream Classification:
Nutrient Sensitivity:
Instream Data:
1981: there is no documentation prior to this WLA. modeling notes, (including rates) are included in the file with recommended limits
of 5 (9) mg/I BOD5 , 2 (2) NHrN, 6 mgA dissolved oxygen, 30 mg/I TSS, 1,000 / 100 ml fecal coliform, 6 - 8.5 SU
pH, for both a 0.60 and 0.675 mgd flow.
1985: re -issued with same limits. Letter requesting Speculative Limits for 0.4, 0.6, and 0.9 mgd. No retum letter is in file.
1986: two WLA recommendations were same, but for flows of 0.600, 0.675, and 0.900 mgd. Note on Fact Sheet indicates Level C
analysis performed. Memorandum requesting toxicity analysis be done.
1991: re -issued with same limits for flow of 0.657 mgd, (fecal coliform A'd to 200 / 100 ml). An industrial component was included in
the evaluation (12%), therefore various metals limits and monitoring requirements were recommended, (memo in file
indicating mercury limit A'd to monitoring requirement). Residual chlorine limit was phased in to begin in April, 1994.
DMR's
numerous flow violations August, 1992 through March, 1993.
BOD5 violations in June and July, 1994.
Toxicity Test
consistently Passing, failed August, 1994
jnstream Monitoring
upstream saturation values are very low, with somewhat higher saturation values downstream, (except for months of March through
May, 1994). Any future expansion requests, (refer flow violations above, facility also received 80 % expansion letter).
Fecal values are high up and downstream. this is an agricultural area which probably accounts for this.
facility is currently taking instream monitoring at Highway 125 North and Highway 258 South, (up / downstream respectively) The
downstream location is on Deep Creek, (Canal Creek is a tributary to Deep) and therefore may not be reflecting localized effluent
impact. Will request Region comment as to another available site on Canal Creek.
Pretreatment
refer toxics spreadsheet analysis below, also refer copy of mail message from Dana Folley regarding chromium. 1 will request Region
and P & E comment regarding implementation of a limit for this parameter based on this review.
A letter from the facility is attached to the WLA request discussing possible future plans for residual chlorine. From discussions with
P & E, it seems that there is talk of chlorine being reviewed as a possible chemical to be discontinued from use. But no plans or draft
directives have been forwarded. I will implement the Residual Chlorine limit as exists in the current Permit.

Ddsting Limits;
Monthly Averages
Summer Winter
Wasteflow (MGD): 0.675
BODE (mg/I): 5.0
NH3N (mg/I): 2.0
DO (mg/1): 6.0
TSS (mg/1): 30
Fecal Col. (/100 ml): 200
pH (SU): 6 - 9
Residual Chlorine (Ng/I): 17.0
Oil & Grease (mgA): nr
TP (mgll): monitor
TN (mg/l): monitor monitor
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Metals limits and monitoring requirements - refer analysis below.
Upstream Location:
Downstream Location:
Parameters:
9.0
2.0
6.0
30
200
6-9
17.0
nr
monitor
April 1, 1994
at least 50 ft upstream
at least 900 ft downstream
temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal conform, conductivity
Arsenic: Max. Pred Cw 0
Allowable Cw 50
Cadmium: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Chromium: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Copper: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Cyanide: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Lead: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Mercury: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Nickel: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Silver: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Zinc: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
0
2.0
107.3
50
236.8
7.0
0
5.0
55.2
25
0
0.01
121.6
88
0
0.06
2732
50
LTMAP
12 values of < 5.0 µg/l over the last year
not required in NPDES Permit
48 values of < 1.0 µfill over the last year
not required in NPDES Permit
45 values of < 5.0 NA over the last year
three hits over last year, 37gg/l in April, 1994 was the major
reason for a limit Limit per NPDES Permit
12 values over the last year, all were above Action Level
current SOP requires monitoring Monitor per NPDES Permit
48 values of < 5.0 fig/I over the last year
not required in NPDES Permit
43 values of < 5.0 µg/l over the last year
five hits over the last year is reason for limit Limit per NPDES
Permit
12 values of < 2.0 µg/l over the last year [ incorrectly reported
as 0.2 pg/l on DMR's ] not required in NPDES Permit
many high values over the last year
Limit per NPDES Permit
12 values of < 5.0 µfill over the last year
not required in NPDES Permit
many high values over the last year above the Action Level
current SOP requires monitoring Monitor per NPDES Permit
SI U's
* doe -to
2 airnG�tt' co Jc3 pAt�Q�J i�4� � S nl►D
�Acr �EffteWQ-Ai nsl�eratioirOd� P4.R d ►ct s Q
p�obab � f.t `%R /u
No 4 •s t1v�N c tea ►i%-
w tl � 6 o3E. 4 LtM,T / mom not) bE
-in CAIK�1s a dC-+d dam, �
p}'v � sae., a ko2c-
Tmiait
Scotland Neck Waste Water Treatment Plant NC0023337

Page 1
Note for Farrell Keough
From: Dana Folley
Date: Oct 13, 1994 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: Scotland Neck
To: Farrell Keough
They have a complete LTMP which they started in Dec 93 or Jan 94, but when the new rules
become effective (nov 1, 94), they will become a modified program and will be eligible to
change to a STMP.
From: Farrell Keough on Thu, Oct 13,1994 9:34 AM
Subject: Scotland Neck
To: Dana Folley
I forgot to ask..., does Scotland Neck have a complete LTMP, (i.e. Quarterly Monitoring) or
does it have one of the other plans?

Page 1
Note for Farrell Keough
From: Dana Folley
Date: Oct 12, 1994 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: I lied...
To: Farrell Keough
As there are only three hits out of 48, and one, the 37 ug/1, is way higher than the rest (the
next highest is 9), and this 37 is only 60% of the limit of 50 ug/1, I strongly recommend no
limit in the NPDES permit
I agree with the rest of the decisions.
I'm somewhat baffled about the nickel as it seems to be consistently present, although not
about the limit. It is present at both of the POTW s SIUs, in fact at about the same amounts
as in the POTW effluent, but because the SIUs' flows are relatively low, the lbs/day for each
SIU was less than 5 % of the POTW s Ni MAHL, so there are no IUP limits. When the
POTW is required to do their STMP, I will require some extra Ni monitoring at the SIUs and
maybe an uncontrollable site.
From: Farrell Keough on Tue, Oct 11,1994 5:48 PM
Subject: I lied...
To: Dana Folley
check out chromium, the 37 µg/1 hit in April, 1994 is the driving force for this limit. What
do you think?

•
•
August, 1994 through September, 1993
Facility Name =
NPDES a=
Qw (MOD) =
7Q1Oa (cfs)=
IWC(%)=
Scotland Neck WWTP
NC0023337
0.68 mgd
0.00 cfs
100.00 %
FINAL RESULTS
Arsenic Maximum Value 2.5
Max. Pred Cw 0.0
Allowable Cw 50.0
Cadmium Maximum Value 0.5
Max. Pred Cw 0.0
Allowable Cw 2.0
Chromium Maximum Value 37.0
Max. Pred Cw 107.3
Allowable Cw 50.0
Copper [Al] Maximum Value . 74.0
Max. Pred Cyst. 236.8
Allowable Cw . 7.0
Cyanide Maximum Value 2.5
Max. Pred Cw . 0.0
Allowable Cw 5.0
Lead Maximum Value 23.0
Max. Pred Cw 55.2
Allowable Cw 25.0
Mercury Maximum Value 0.1
Max. Pred Cw 0.00
Allowable Cw 0.01
Nickel Maximum Value 76.0
Max. Pred Cw 121.6
Allowable Cw 88.0
Silver [AL] Maximum Value 2.5
Max. Pred Cw 0.00
Allowable Cw 0.06
Zinc [AL] Maximum Value 396.0
Max. Pred Cw 2732.4
Allowable Cw 50.0
10/11/94

August. 1994 through September, 1993
Parameter_ Arsenic
Standard - 50
to
n BDL-1/20L 'if 1/2 DL RESULTS
t 2.5 Sid Dev. 0.0
2 2.5 Mean 2.5
3 2.5 C.V. 0.0
4 2.5
5 2.5
6 2.5 • Mutt Factor - 0.0
7 2.5 • Max. Value 2.5 µgn
B 2.5 • Max. Pred Cv 0A µgo
9 2.5 • Allowable Cvi 50.0 µfill
10 2.5
11 2.5
12 2.5
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2a
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
arameter- Cadmium
Standard - 2 lagA
n BDL-112DL 'ii 1/2 DL RESULTS
1 0.5 Sid Dev. 0.0
2 0.5 Mean 0.5
3 0.5 C.V. 0.0
4 0.5
5 0.5
6 0.5 MutFactor- 0.0
7 0.5 • Max. Value 0 5 µg1
B 0.5 flax. Prod Cv 0.0 µg1
B 0.5 Allowable Ca 20 µgi1
10 0.5
11 0.5
12 0.5
13 0.5
14 0.5
15 0.5
16 0.5
17 0.5
18 0.5
19 0.5
20 0.5
21 0.5
22 0.5
23 0.5
24 0.5
25 0.5
26 0.5
27 0.5
28 0.5
29 0.5
30 0.5
31 0.5
32 0.5
33 0.5
34 0.5
35 0.5
36 0.5
37 0.5
3a 0.5
39 0.5
4o 0.5
41 0.5
42 0.5
43 0.5
44 0.5 '
45 0.5
46 0.5
47 0.5
45 0.5
49
50
ammeter - Chromium
Standard - 50 141
• BDL-1/2DL 'if 1/2 DL RESULTS
1 2.5 Std Dev. 5.1
2 2.5 Mean 3.4
3 2.5 C.V. 1.5
4 9 Aug-94
5 2.5
6 2.5 Mut Factor - 2.9
7 2.5 Max. Value 37.0 µgo
B 2.5 Max. Pred Cv 107.3 µgn
e 2.5 Allowable Ca 50.0 µgo
10 2.5
11 2.5
12 2.5
13 2.5
14 2.5
15 2.5
16 2.5
17 2.5
18 2.5
19 2.5 P2e.'Tae76-rr.1 _A1T
20 37 Apr-94 RCc.ornMtS+J 675
21 2.5 22 2.5 rr 6
LIfncr Alit,*
'
23 2.5 k3 due 7o 9-ku
24 2.5 p,6 Vn1.vo
25 2.5
26 2.5
27 2.5
28 2.5
29 2.5
30 2.5
31 6 Jan-94
32 2.5
33 2.5
34 2.5
35 2.5
36 2.5
37 2.5
38 2.5
39 2.5
4o 2.5
41 2.5
42 2.5
43 2.5
44 2.5
45 2.5
46 2.5
47 2.5
48 2.5
49
50
10/11/94

August. 1994 through September,1993
Brawler.. Capper [Al]
SlandRd. 7 PO
n BDL.I2DL •612 DL RESULTS
1 10 Std Dev. 18.8
2 15 'Ann 28.1
3 24 C.V. 0.7
4 19
5 33
8 10 At* Factor• 3.2
7 34 Max. Value 74A µg+l
8 74 Max. Prod Co 236.8 µfill
9 15 Allowable Cy. 7A µg/
10 24
it 26
12 53
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
38
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
48
47
48
49
50
Panvrw/er. Cyanide
SaAdafds 5 POI
. n BDL•12DL If 12 DL RESULTS
1 2.5 • Sid Dev. 0.0
2 2.5 • Mean 2.S
3 2.5 • C.V. 0A
4 2.5 •
5 2.5 •
6 2.5 • Mil Factor. 0A
7 2.5 • Max. Value 2.5 NA
8 2.5 • Max. Prod Cr 0A µg1
9 2.5 • Allowable Co 3A ILO
to 2.5 •
it 2.5 •
12 2.5 •
13 2.5 •
14 2.5 •
15 2.5 •
18 2.5 •
17 2.5 •
18 2.5 •
19 2.5 •
20 2.5 •
21 2.5 •
22 2.5 •
23 2.5 •
24 2.5 •
25 2.5 •
26 2.5 •
27 2.5 •
28 2.5
29 2.5 •
30 2.5 •
31 2.5 •
32 2.5 •
33 2.5 •
34 2.5 •
35 2.5 •
38 2.5 •
37 2.5 •
38 2.5 •
39 2.5 •
40 2.5 •
41 2.5 • Oe1-03 data
42 2.5 • Ocba3 entered
43 2.5 • Ocf-93 without
44 2.5 • Oct-93 < gimbal
45 2.5 •
46 2.5 •
47 2.5 •
48 2.5 •
49
50
Pwan*ter f Lead
Staldand. 25 µGA
n BDL.12DL
1 2.5
2 2S
3 2.5
4 2.5
5 2.5
8 2.5
7 2.5
e 2.5
9 2.5
10 2.5
11 2.5
12 2.5
13 2.5
14 2.5
15 2.5
16 2.5
17 2.5
18 2.5
19 2.5
20 7
21 2.5
22 2.5
23 2.5
24 23
25 2.5
28 2.5
27 2.5
28 2.5
29 2.5
30 6
31 11
32 2.5
33 2.5
34 2.5
35 2.5
38 17
37 2.5
38 2.5
39 2.5
40 2.5
41 2.5
42 2.5
43 2.5
44 2.5
45 2.5
48 2.5
47 2.5
48 2.5
49
50
'I 12 DL RESULTS
• Std Dev. 3.8
• Mean 3.6
• C.Y. 1.1
•
•
• Iltm Fader• 24
• Max. Value 23.0 µg 1
• Max. Prod Ca 55.2 µg+l
• Allowable Ce 23.0 µgl
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A 94
•
•
•
Mw04
•
•
•
•
•
Jan 94
41*94
•
•
•
•
Deo93
•
10111f94

August, 1994 through September, 1993
Parameter. Mercury
Standard - 0.012 µgA
n BDL-12DL "rf 12 DL RESULTS
1 0.1 Sid Dev. 0.0
2 0.1 • Mean 0.1
3 0.1 C.V. 0.0
4 0.1
5 0.1 •
6 0.1 Mut Factor - 0.0
7 0.1 Max. Value 0.1 1.41
8 0.1 Max. Pred Cy 0.00 µg1
9 0.1 Allowable Ca 0.01 µgA
10 0.1 •
11 0.1 •
12 0.1
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Parameter. Nickel i Parameter. Silver [AL]
Standard . 88
n BDL-12DL 1 12 DL RESULTS
1 26 Std Dev. 16.9
2 29 Mean 34.5
3 16 C.V. 0.5
4 23
5 17
6 18 Mult Factor - 1.6
7 19 Max. Value 76.0 µg9
8 24 Max. Pred Co 121.6 AO
9 24 Allowable Cy. 88.0 µryl
10 37
11 46
12 19
13 31
14 38
15 5
16 25
17 28
18 37
19 34
20 51
21 73 Mar•94
22 22
23 19
24 31
25 70 a Te-P-ASTmeArr
26 44 Gon1CG2Atii er4:000t
27 29
28 51 Yam- Vfl hA .s .. ,
29 43 4-1111 ✓ I I f-
30 63
31 44 DArlq
32 31 will zc i,e-C,..
33 52
34 49 Alt Itar 1 M cNt1'6a,
35 47 041 !Aidvs b
36 25
37 38 P EAR -
38 76 Nov-93
39 25
40 34
41 55
42 21
43 45
44 52
45 5
46 5
47 19
48 39
49
50
Standard . 0.06 441
n BDL-12DL rf 12 DL RESULTS
2.5 Std Dev. 0.0
2 2.5 Mean 2.5
3 2.5 C.V. 0.0
4 2.5
5 2.5
6 2.5 Wit Factor - 0.0
7 2.5 Max. Value 2.5 nil
8 2.5 Max. Pred Cy 0.0 µg1
9 2.5 Allowable Cy. 0.1 µgA
10 2.5
1t 2.5
12 2.5
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2B
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
10/11/94

August,1994 through September 1993
10/11/94

0
9/-l01QagC
LONG TERM MONITORING PLAN REQUEST FORM n P
FACILITY: SC O+IG,fCE (,%3 ( O
NPDES NO.: I I Goo Z 3-
EXPIRATION DATE: (D_ q
REGION:
P&E REQUESTOR:SU5Gk.r) b50 v1 FACILITIES ASSESSMENT UNIT
PRETREATMENT CONTACT:
DATE OF REQUEST: q (3
INDICATE THE. STATUS OF PRETREATMENT PROGRAM:
1) THE FACILITY HAS NO SIU'S AND SHOULD NOT HAVE PRETREATMENT LANGUAGE.
()THE FACILITY HAS OR IS DEVELOPING A PREATREATMENT PROGRAM.
3) ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS REGARDING THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ATTACHED.
PERMITTED FLOW:
% INDUSTRIALla
( 5 I o ,0
ce2r.
�,% DOMESTIC <p 4J (L;v))
Pretreatment Unit Staff (Region)
Jeff Poupart (WSRO)
Tom Poe (FRO, ARO, WiRO)
Dana Folley (RRO, WaRO)
Joe Pearce (MRO)
L P — r\e.. a Gz. ? P b, + 2-,,, a.Q.
uP*
Q�cs
p P� s .
e'il A.
ca20_ LTY\A P ol,xerik QA/Lept 11/\_frY*DesUQ-A-4-- --t-
; t IfV2.€A.M_ ate- cSY•,_ ink Rs . L . ►ti.
. Y1n � d ti c w\.Rs p .
RECEIVED
SEP 2 0 1994
FACILITIES ASSESSMENT UNIT
RECEIVED
p503

Town of Scotland Neck
Headworks Long Term Monitoring Plan
A Sampling Points (See Figure 1l
1 - Influent (prior to mixingwith side streams use regular composite sample
collected for NPDES monitoring)
2 - Effluent (after chlorination - use regular composite sample collected for
NPDES monitoring)
3 - Activated Sludge Basin (collect a grab sample from each basin - combine
these into one sample sample using a portion of each according to
volume of WWTP flow)
4 - Sludge to Disposal (sample from digester after thickening, collect just
before land application)
5 - SIU 0001 - Halifax Hosiery
6 - SIU 0003 - Fulflex
B. Pollutants of Concern. (P.O.C,) Reason for Inclusion:
NPDES - POTW NPDES Permit limit
Sludge - 40 C1 R 503 Sludge Land Application
EPA - EPA Required
IUP - SIU Industrial User Permit Limit
BOD
TSS
NH3 as N
Arsenic
Cadmium.
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Oil & Grease
Selenium
Zinc
%solids
Sludge to Disposal Flow
NPDES; IUP
NPDES; IUP
NPDES
Sludge
NPDES; Sludge; EPA
NPDES; Sludge; EPA; IUP
Sludge; EPA
NPDES
NPDES; Sludge; EPA; IUP
Sludge
Sludge
NPDES; Sludge; EPA
IUP
Sludge..,
Sludge; EPA; IUP
Sludge
Sludge
C, Detention Times
The combined aeration basin and clarifier detention time during typical flow periods
is 36 hours. Therefore, samples from point 2 will be taken 36 hours after samples
from point 1 are taken.
D, Flow
Flow monitoring points are indicated on the attached facility diagram, see Figure 1.
Flow at influent (Pt. 1) will be monitored during sampling events. Flow or volume
of sludge to disposal (Pt. 3) can either be monitored or calculated.
E, SITU Monitoring
Significant Industrial User monitoring will be conducted per industrial user permit
(IUP).
File Name: scotland neck(ltmp mode1930727) Page 1
Printed: November 17, 1993; "9:24 AM
Modeled after: Chapter 4, Appendix 4-A (LTMP model 930727) Revision Date: September 1, 1993

Scotland Neck Waste Water Treatment Plant NC0023337
r+ta-t tz5 /0t+rz.7y
Upstream: SR-1-775-bridgo
Month Temp DO
Aug-94
Jul-94
Jun-94
May-94
Apr-94
Mar-94
Feb-94
Jan-94
Dec-93
Nov-93
Oct-93
Sep-93
22
24
19
12
16
13
9
7
7
11
15
22
2.2
2.1
3.4
4.8
5.6
6.5
7.6
6.0
5.5
3.9
3.4
3.3
Saturation Fecal Conductivity _
25%
25°A°
37%
45%
57%
62%
66%
49°A°
45%
35%
34%
38%
385.2
2046.8
961.3
7780.3
464.5
2477.2
129.4
942.9
358.4
364.7
918
1276.4
135
141
137
164
123
95
119
140
149
217
207
450
1-W4 7.58 zoUt-I-t
Downstream: U$.Hw
Temp
23
22
20
13
16
12
9
7
8
11
17
23
DO Saturation
4.2
3.6
4.2
4.3
4.5
6.4
8.0
7.5
6.8
6.1
5.0
5.2
49°Ao
41%
46%
41%
46%
59%
69%
61%
57%
55%
52°A°
61%
Fecal Conductivity
226.6
654.1
723.7
19330.8
316.7
2370.2
174.1
649.7
267.6
95.6
95.1
74.9
519
385
412
335
258
169
216
213
250
222
218
246
Ammonia [2 / 4 mg/I] - Residual Chlorine - Fecal Coliform
instream Waste Concentrations
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (cfs)
Design Flow (mgd)
Design Flow (cfs)
Stream Std (µg/1)
Upstream bkgrd level (µg/1)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (µg/1)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 0.0 :1
0.0
0.675
1.044
17
0
100.0%
17.0
0.017
200/100m1
0.0
0.675
1.044
1
0.22
100.0%
1.0
0.0
0.675
1.044
1.8
0.22
100.0%
1.8
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 (mg/1)
Upstream bkgrd level (mg/1)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
10/12/94

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes
If Yes, SOC No.
No 1(
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Susan Robson
Date: December 30, 1994
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County:Halifax
NPDES Permit No.: NC0023337.(Renewal)
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Town of Scotland Neck
Wastewater Treatment Plant
P.O. Box 537
Scotland Neck, NC 27874
2. Date of Investigation: November 9, 1994
3. Report Prepared by: Peggy Redmond
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
Mr. Gene Butler, operator in responsible charge
[phone]
5. Directions to Site: From Raleigh, take U.S. 64 to Tarboro.
Take U.S. 258 to Scotland Neck; facility is approximately
0.5 miles outside of town limits on the left.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 36°07' 10"N Longitude: 7 7°2 6' 01"W
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility
site and discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No.: C 29 SW U.S.G.S. Quad Name: Hobgood,
NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application ?
XX Yes No If No, explain:
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Facility
location relatively flat with very little slope (less than
5%) .

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No
If Yes, SOC No.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: Approximately 1000 feet away,
on the other side of the sludge application fields.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Canal Creek to
Deep Creek -Index number 28-79-32-1
a. Classification: C NSW
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 03 03 04
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent
downstream uses: Drains to the Tar River
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater to be permitted: .675 MGD
(Ultimate Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Waste
Water Treatment facility? .675 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility
(current design capacity)? .675 MGD
d. Please provide a description of existing or
substantially constructed wastewater treatment
facilities:
Bar screen, grit removal flume, pump station, two
oxidation ditches, two final clarifiers, two digestors,
chlorinator and tertiary filters
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Aerobic
digester and land application on permitted land.
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating
sheet): Class III
4. SIC Code(s):4952
Wastewater Code(s) of actual wastewater, not particular
facilities i.e.., non -contact cooling water discharge from a
metal plating company would be 14, not 56.
Primary 01 Secondary
Main Treatment Unit Code: 1 0 1 - 3

•
a
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No
If Yes, SOC No.
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant
Funds or are any public monies involved (municipal only)?
Not at this time
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity)
requests: Plant has textile industrial influent,
approximately 16% of flow. Main component of industrial
wastewater is chlorine.
3. Other Special Items: Currently, plant has had problem with
passing chronic toxicity test in last 2 months.
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated
all of the non -discharge options available? Please provide
regional perspective for each option evaluated.
Spray Irrigation: N/A
Connection to Regional Sewer System: N/A
Subsurface: N/A
Other disposal options: N/A
5. Other Special Items: Residuals disposal is land applied on
permitted acreage.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon this site visit, the facility was operating well.
Installation of a staff gauge and maintaining a proper ORC
logbook was recommended. The facility is experiencing some
problems passing the chronic toxicity test, and the operator was
referred to the Aquatic Toxicology Unit. The RRO recommends
renewal of the NPDES permit no. NC0023337.
Sig
W
Date
SCOTNK.REP
a.
re of report
I!. J.6-12±t
ua 'ty Regional Supervisor
preparer

.igAukci 114_ CLAdT10
t-bAVA
00AAd
e 2 Y ,t,0 Fielar c i , At,
0 i\titio
.,____- 0-5 03 uz/
cu t.->ta, 2rti)) °67> st, '2(/01"0
5556 III NW ' " 77
280 I RFREESBORO 32 MI.
(SCOTLAND NECK) ,81
81 RICH SOUARE 15 MI

pos
VT
G5
Latitude: 36°07'40"
Longitude: 79°31'56"
Quad # C29SW
Stream Class: C-NSW
Subbasin: 30755
Receiving Stream: Gum Swamp Creek
NC0023337
Scotland Neck WWTP
Kehukee C
t
Facility
Location
SCALE 1 :24000

a
,RATING SCALE FOR CLASSIFICATION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
Name of Facility:
Owner or '- > Per n:
9
Mailin -Addy ss• • �•O •
ei �
County:
Present Classification: ur
•NPDES Per. No N 00 1 Nondisc.
Rated by: (--P.
Reviewed by:
Ntrad2 vow-TP nGC cirp,333%
ORC: QJt
Telephone:
New Facility Existing Facility
Per. No.WQ Health Dept.Per No._
Telephone: (q,q) 5'7)'47(ODate:
Health Dept. Telephone:
Regional Office Telephone:
Check Classification(s): Subsurface
Wastewater Classification: (Circle One) I
Central Office-- Telephone:
Telephone: -t Q I ) n4 O
Grade:
Spr Irrigation Land Application
II • II IV Total Points: 51
JN-PLANT PROCFSSFS AND RFLATFD CONTROL FOUlPMFNT WHICl-IARF AN INTEGRP,LPABT OF 1NDL TR1A1 PROD__lCT]ON SHAD L NOT RF
CONSIDERED WASTE TREATMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OFCI SSIFiCATICN. ALSO SEPTIC TANK SYSTEMS CONSISTING ONLY OF SEPTIC TANK
ANIZGRAVITY NfTRIEATION LIES ARE EXEMPT FROM LASSIFICAT1Q I.
SUBSURFACECLASSIFICATION
(check all units that apply)
1. septic tanks
2. pump tanks
3. siphon or pump -dosing systems
4. sand filters
5. grease trap/interceptor
6. oil/water separators
7. gravity subsurface treatment and disposal:
8. pressure subsurface treatment and disposal:
SPRAY IRRIGATION Ct.ASSIFICATION
(check all units that apply)
1. preliminary treatment (definition no. 32 )
2. lagoons
3. septic tanks
4. pump tanks
5. pumps
6. sand filters
7. grease trap/interceptor
8. oil/water separators
9. disinfection
10. chemical addition for nutrient/algae control
11. spray irrigation of wastewater
In addition to the above classifications, pretreatment of wastewater in excess of these components .shal•
be rated using the point rating system and will require an operator with. an appropriate dual certification .
LAND?PLICATION/RESIDUALS CLASSIFICATION (Applies only to permit holder)
1. Land application of biosolids, residuals or contaminated soils on a designated site.
to _1.611f)
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY CLASSIFICATION
The following systems shall be assigned a Class I classification, unless the flow is of a significant quantity or the technology is unusually
complex, to require consideration by the Commission on a case -by -case basis: (Check if Appropriate)
1. Oit/water Separator Systems consisting only of physical separation, pumps and disposal;
2. Septic Tank/Sand Filter Systems consisting only of septic tanks, dosing apparatus, pumps,sand filters, disinfection
and direct discharge;
3. Lagoon Systems consisting only of preliminary treatment, lagoons, pumps, disinfection, necessary chemical treatment for
algae or nutrient control, and direct discharge;
4. Closed -loop Recycle Systems;
5. Groundwater Remediation Systems consisting only of oil/water separators, pumps, air -stripping, carbon adsorption, disinfection
and disposal;
6. Aquaculture operations with discharge to surface waters;
7. Water Plant sludge handling and back -wash water treatment;
8. Seafood processing consisting of screening and disposal.
9. Single-family discharging systems, with the exception of Aerobic Treatment Units, will be classified if permitted after July 1,
1993 or if upon inspection by the Division, it is found that the system is not being adequately operated or maintained. Such
systems will be notified of the classification or reclassification by the Commission, in writing.

The following scale is used for rating wastewater treatment facilities: (circle appropriate point
t a
• rT.EM POI$ ,
(1) Industrial Pretreatment Units or Industrial Pretreatment Program (see definition No. 33) Et
(2) DESIGN FLOW OF PLANT IN gpd [not applicable to ron•contaminated cooling waters, sludge handling facilities for
water purification plants, totally closed cycle systoms(see.delnition No. 11). and facilities consisting only of hem
(4)(d) or Items . (4)(d) and (11)(d))
0 - 20,000 1
20,001 - 50.000 ....
50.001 - 100.000
100.001 - 250,000 4
250.001 - 500,000 ,5
500.001 - 1.000,000 43-
1.000.00t - 2.000,000 ... 1
2.000.001 (and up) rat 4 nt ad 'anal for each 200,000 gpd capacity up to a maximum of .................3 0
Design Flow (gpd)
PRELIMINARY UNITS/PROCESSES (see de tuition No.32)
(a) Bar Screens
'or
(b) Mechanical Screens. Static Screens or Comminuting Devices
(c) Grit Removal 1
or
(d) Mechanical or Aerated Grit Removal 2
(e) Flow Measuring Device ... 1
or
• (I) Instrumented Flow Measurement ...
(g) Preaeratlon 2
(h) Influent Flow Equalization .2
_ (1) Grease or Oil Separators - Gravity ... 2
Mechanical 3
Dissolved Air Flotation ... 8
()) Prechlorination....... .......... 5
(4) PRIMARYTREATMEI•tr LN1TS'PR3CESSES
(a) Septic Tank (see definition No. 43) • ................... 2
(b) Imhoff Tank .5
(c) Primary Mallets .5
(d) Settling Ponds or Settling Tanks for Inorganic Non -toxic Materials (sludge handling facilities for water
purification plants, sand. gravel, stone. and other mining operations except recreational activities such as gem
or gold mining) 2
(5) SECONDARY TREATMEAITWITSfPROCESSES
(a) Carbonaceous Stage
(I) Aeration -High Purity Oxygen System 20
Diffused Air System 10
Mechanical Alt System (fixed. floating or rotor)
Separate Sludge Reaeration 3
(ii) Trickling Fitter
High Rate 7
Standard Rate.. ».. 5
Packed Tower.... .5
(iii) Biological Aerated Fitter or Aerated Biological Fher 10
(iv) Aerated Lagoons 10
(v) Rotating Biological Contactors 10
(vi) Sand Filters -intermittent biological 2
Recirculating biological 3
(vii) Stabilization Lagoons......
(vur) Clarifier -.-.. (ix) Single stage system for combined carbonaceous removal of BOD and nitrogenous removal by
nitrification (see definition No. 12)(Points for this item have to be in addition to hems
(5)(a)(1) through (5)(a)(viii),
utilizing the extended aeration process (see definition No.3a) 2
utilizing other than the extended aeration process 8
(x) Nutrient additions to enhance BOD removal 5
(xi) Biological Cuhure ('Super Bugs')addition 5
(b) Nitrogenous Stage
(1) Aeration - High Purity Oxygen System 20
Diffused Air System •J.�
Mechanical Air System (fixed, floating or rotor) (.81
Separate Sludge Reaeration
(il) Trickling Filter -High Rate 7
Standard Rate .5
Packed Tower... • .5
(lii) Biological Aerated Filter or Aerated Biological Filter 10
(Iv) Rotating Biological Contactors 10
(v) Sand Fitter - Interminont biological ..2
Roclrculating biological
(vi) Clarifier
(6) TERTIARY OR ADVANCED TREATMENT LNRSPROCESSES
(a) Activated Carbon Beds -
without carbon regeneration 5
with carbon regeneration 15
(b) Powdered or Granular Activated Carbon Feed -
without carbon regeneration .5
with carbon regeneration 1 5
(c) Air stripping ,5
(d) Donitrification Procoss 10
(a) Electrodialysis 5
(1) Foam Separation 5
(g) Ion Exchango .5
(h) Land Application of Treatod Effluent (soe dofinizion No. 22b) (not applicable for sand, gravot, Bono
and otho( similar mining oporations) by high rato infiltration
(i) Microscroons 5
(I) Phosphorous Romoval by Biological Procossor. (Soo dollnitlon No. 26) .20
(k) Polishing Ponds - without aoration 2
with notation 5
(3)
•
4

Post Aeration - cascade 0
diffused or mechanical 2
Reverse Osmosis 5
Sand or Mixed -Media Filters - low rate
(7)
(8)
(i)
(m)
(n)
(o) Treatment processes for removal of metal or cyanide
(p) treatment processes for removal of toxic materials other than metal or cyanide
SWOGETRf:ATMENT
(a) Sludge Digestion Tank - Heated (anaerobic)
Aerobic
Unheated (anaerobic)
(b) .•Sludge Stabilization (chemical or thermal)
(c) Sludge Drying Beds = Gravity
Vacuum Assisted
(d) Sludge Elutrlation
(e) Sludge Conditioner {chemical or thermal)
(1) Sludge Thickener (gravity)
(g) Dissolved Air Flotation Unit (not applicable to a unit rated as (3)(i))
(h) Sludge Gas Utilization (including gas storage)
(1) Sludge Holding Tank - Aerated
Non -aerated
(J) Sludge Incinerator (not including activated carbon regeneration)
(k) Vacuum Filter, Centrifuge. or Filter Press or other similar dewatering devices
RESIDUALS UTiLIZATION/DISPOSAL (including incinerated ash)
(a) Lagoons
(b) Land Application (surface and subsurface) (see delinhion 22a)
by contracting to a land application operator or landfill operator who holds the
or landfill permit
(c) Dedicated Landfill(burial) by the permittee of the wastewater treatment facility
(9) Det,FcCirN
(a) Chlori
(b) Dechlo
(c) Ozone
(d) Radiation
(10) CHEMICAL ADDITION SYSTEM(S) ( see definition No. 9) (not applicable to chemical additions rated as hem pm.
(5)(a)(xi), (6)(a), (6)(b). (7)(b). (7)(e). (9a). (9)(b) or (9)(c) 5 points each:
List
high rate
15
15
3 •
5
2
5
5
5
5
8
2
5
land application permit
2
10
10
2
2
nation
rination
5
5
5
5
(11) MISCELLANEOUS UNITSrPRDCESSES
(a) Holding Ponds, Holding Tanks or Settling Ponds for Organic or Toxic Materials Including wastes from mining
operations containing nitrogen or phosphorus compounds in amounts significantly greater than Is common
for domestic wastewater 4
(b) Effluent Flow Equalization (not applicable to storage basins which are inherent In land application systems) 2
(c) Stage Discharge (not applicable to storage basins inherent in land application systems)
(d) Pumps r3
(e) Stand -By Power Supply 3
(i) Thermal Pollution Control Device
3
TOTAL POINTS el _
CLASSIFICATION
Class I 5-25 Points
Class II 26-50 Points
Class III 51-65 Points
Class IV 66-Up Points
Facilities having a rating of one through four points, Inclusive, do not require a certified operator.
Facilities having an activated sludge process will be assigned a minimum classification of Class II.
Facilities having treatment processes for the removal of metal or cyanide will be assigned a minimum classification of Class II.
Facilities having treatment processes for the biological removal of phosphorus will be assigned a minimum classification of Class III.
.0004 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply throughout this Subchapter.
(1) Activated Carbon Beds. A physical/chemical method for reducing soluble organic material from wastewater effluent; The column -type beds used in this
method will have a flow rate varying from Iwo to eight gallons per minute per square foot and may be either upflow or downflow carbon beds. Carbon mr
may not be regenerated on the wastewater treatment plant site;
(2) Aerated Lagoons. A basin in which all solids are maintained in suspension and by which biological oxidation or organic matter is reduced through artilk
accelerated transfer of oxygen on a flow -through basis;
(3) Aeration. A process of bringing about intimate contact between air or high purity oxygen in a liquid by spraying, agitation or diffusion;(3a) Extended
Aeration. An activated sludge process utilizing a minimum hydraulic detention time of 18 hours.
(4) Agriculturally managed she. Any site on which a crop Is produced, managed, and harvested (Crop includes grasses, grains, trees, etc.);
(5) Air Stripping. A process by which the ammonium ion is first converted to dissolved ammonia (pH adjustment) with the ammonia then released to the
atmosphere by physical means; or other similar processes which remove petroleum products such as benzene, toluene, and xylene;
(6) Carbon Regeneration. The regeneration of exhausted carbon by the use of a furnace to provide extremely high temperatures which volatilize and oxidi
absorbed impurities; •
(7) Carbonaceous Stage, A stare of wastewater treatment designed Co. achieve .'secondary' effluent limits;
(8) Centrifuge, A mechanical device in which centrifugal force is used to separate solids from liquids or to separate liquids of different densities;
(9) Chemical Addition Systems- The addition of chemlcat(s) to wastewater at an application point •tor purposes of improving solids removal, pH adjustmer
alkalinity control, etc.; the capability to experiment with different chemicals and different application points to achieve a specific resuh will bo considered on(
system; the capability to add chemical(s) to dual units will be rated as one system; capability to add a chemical at a different application points for dilioren
purposes will result in the systems being rated as separate systems;
(10) Chemical Sludge Conditioning. The addition of a chemical compound such as lime, ferric chloride, or a polymer to wet sludge to coalesce the rr.ass p
its application to a dewatering device;
(11) Closed Cycle Systems. Use of holding ponds or holding tanks for containment of wastewater containing inorganic. non•toxic materials from sand, gr
crushod stone or ott.or similar operations. Such systems shall carry a maximum of two points regardless of pumping facilities or any other appurtenances;
(12) Combined Removal of Carbonaceous BOO and Nitrogenous Removal by Nitrification- A single stage system required to achieve permit effluent limits on
and ammonia nhrogen within the samo biological reactor,
(I3) Dechlorination. Tho partial or complete roouction of residual ch!o:ine in a liquid by any chemical or physical process;
(14) Denitrification Process. Tho conversion of nitrate•nitrogon to nitrogen gas;

(15) Electrodalysls. Process for removing Ionized sails from water through the use of ion!solective ion -exchange membranes;
(16) Filter Press. A process operated mechanically for partially dewatering sludge;
(17) Foam Separation. The planned frothing of wastewater or wastewater effluent as a means of removing excessive amounts of detergent materials through
the introduction of air in the form of fine bubbles; also called foam fractionation;
(16) Grit Removal The process of removing grit and other heavy mineral matter from wastewater,
(19) !mho fl Tank. A deep two story wastewater tank consisting of an upper sedimentation chamber and a lower sludge digestion chamber.
(20) Instrumented Flow Measurement. A device which Indicates and records rate ol llow;
(21) lon Exchange. A chemical process in which ions Irom two different molecules are exchanged:
(22) Land application: • •
(a) Sludge Disposal. A final sludge disposal method by which wet sludge may be applied to land either by spraying on the surface or by subsurface injection
(i.e., chisel plow); (not applicable for types of sludge described In (11) of this Rule);
(b) Treated Effluent. The process of spraying treated wastewater onto a land area or other methods of application of wastewater onto a land area as a
means of final disposal or treatment; •
(23) Microscreen. A low speed. continuously back -washed, rotating drum filter operating under gravity conditions as a polishing method for removing
suspended solids from effluent; •
(24) Nitrification Process. The biochemical conversion of unoxidized nitrogen (ammonia and organic nitrogen) to oxidized nitrogen (usually nitrate);
(25) Nitrogenous Stage. A separate stage of wastewater treatment designed for the specific purpose of converting ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen;
(26) Phosphate Removal. Biological. The removal of phosphorus from wastewater by an oxicianoxic process designed to enhance luxury uptake ol phosphorus
by the microorganisms;
(27) Polishing Pond. A holding pond following secondary treatment with sufficient detention time to allow settling of finely suspended solids;
(28) Post Aeration. Aeration following conventional secondary treatment units to increase effluent O.O. or for any other purpose;
(2S) Post Aeration. (Cascade) A polishing method by which dissolved oxygen is added to the effluent by a nonmechanical. gravity means of flowing down a
series of steps or weirs; The flow occurring across the steps or weirs moves in a fairly thin layer and the operation of the cascade requires no operator
adjustment; thus, zero points are assigned even though this is an essential step to meeting the limits of the discharge permit;
(30) Powdered to Granular Activated Carbon Feed. A biophysical carbon process that utilizes biological activity and organic absorption by using powdered or
granular activated carbon; Virgin or regenerated carbon is feed controlled into the system;
(31) Preaeration. A tank constructed to provide aeration prior to primary treatment;
(32) Preliminary Units. Unit operations In the treatment process, such as screening and comminution, That prepare the liquor for subsequent major operations;
(33) Industrial Pretreatment.
(a) Pre-treatment Unit. Industrial. The conditioning of a waste at its source before discharge, to remove or to neutralize substances Injurious to sewers and
treatmenx processes or to effect a partial reduction in load on the treatment process which is operated by the same governing body as the wastewater
treatment plant being raced;
b) Pre-treatment Program. industrial - must be a Stale or EPA requiredprogram to receive points on the rating sheet;
(34) Primary Clarifiers. The first settling tanks through which wastewater is passed in a treatment works for the purpose of removing settleable and suspended
solids and BOO which is associated with the solids;
(35) -Pumps. All influent. effluent and in -plant pumps;
(36) Radiation. Disinfection or sterilization process utilizing devices emitting ultraviolet or gamma rays;
(37) Reverse Osmosis. A treatment process In which a heavy contaminated liquid is pressurized through a membrane forming nearly pure liquid free from
suspended solids;
(38) Rotating Biological Contractors..A fixed biological growth process in which wastewater !lows through tanks In which a series of partially submerged circular
surfaces are rotated;
(39) Sand Fillers:
(a) Intermittent Biological. Fhration of effluent following septic tanks, lagoons. or some other treatment process In which further biodecomposition is
expected to produce desired effluents; Hydraulic loading rates on these filters am computed In gpd/ac and have a resuhing !ow gpm/sf (less than one);
b) Recirculating biological - the same type of sand filter as dalined in Subparagraph (39) (a) of this Rule with the added capability to recycle effluent back
through the sand fiber;
(40) Sand or Mixed -Media Filters. A polishing process by which effluent limits are achieved through a further reduction of suspended solids;
(a) !ow rate — gravity. hydraulically loaded filter with Loading rates in the one to three gpmisf range;
(b) high rate -- a pressure. hydraulically loaded lifter with loading rates in the five gprn/sf range; Al any rate, the loading rate will exceed three gprr✓sf;
(41) Secondary Clarifiers. A tank which follows the biological unit of treatment plant and which has the purpose of removing sludges associated with the
biological treatment units;
(42) Separate Sludge Reparation. A part of the contact stabilization process where the activated sludge is transferred to a lank and aerated before returning it
to the contact basin;
(43) Septic Tank. A single -story settling tank in which settled sludge is in contact with the wastewater flowing through the tank; shall not be applicable for
septic tank systems serving single family residences having capacity ol 2.000 gallons or less which discharge to a nitrification field:
(44) Sludge Digestion. The process by which organic or volatile matter and sludge is gasified. liquefied, mineralized or converted into more stable organic matter
t1>tough the activity of living organisms. which includes aerated holding tanks;
(45) Sludge Drying Beds. An area comprising natural or artificial layers of porous materials upon which digested sewage sludge Is dried by drainage and
evaporation;
(46) Sludge Elutriation. A process of sludge conditioning in which certain constituents are removed by successive washings with fresh water or plant effluent;
(47) Sludge Gas Utilization. The process of using sewage gas for the purpose of heating buildings. driving engines. etc.;
(48) Sludge Holding Tank (Aerated and Nonaerated). A tank utilized for small wastewater treatment plants not containing a digester In which sludge may be
kept fresh. and supernatant withdrawn prior to a drying method (i.e. sludge drying beds); This may be done by adding a smail amount of air simply to keep the
sludge fresh. but not necessarily an amount that would be required to achieve stabilization of organic matter. A nonaerated tank would simply be used to
decant sludge prior to dewatering and would not allow long periods (several days of detention) without resuhing odor problems;
(49) Sludge Incinerators. A furnace designed to bum sludge and to remove all moisture and combustible materials and reduce the sludge to a sterile ash;
(50) Sludge Stabilization (Chemical or Thermal). A process to make treated sludge less odorous and putrescble. and to reduce the pathogenic organism
content; This may be dono by pH adjustment. chlorine dosing. or by heat treatment;
(51) Sludge Thickener. A type of sedimentation tank In which the sludge is permitted to settle and thicken through agitation and gravity;
(52) Stabilization Lagoon. A type of oxidation lagoon in which biological oxidation of organic matter Is effected by natural transfer of oxygen to the water from
air (not a polishing pond);
(53) Stand -By Power Supply. On site or portable electrical generating equipment;
(54) Static Screens. A stationary screen designed to'remove solids. including non -biodegradable particulate (iloatable solids. suspended solids and BOO
reduction) Irom municipal and industrial wastewater treatment systems;
(55) Tertiary Treatment. A stage of treatment following secondary which is primarily for the purpose of effluent polishing; A settling lagoon or sand or coal filter
might be employed for this purpose;
(56) Therrral Pollution Control Device. A device providing for the transfer of heal from a fluid flowing In tubes to another fluid outside the tubes. or vice versa;
or other means of regulating liquid temperatures;
(57) Thermal Sludge Conditioner. A conditioning process by which heat is added for a protracted period of time to improve the dewaterability of sludge by the
solubilizing and hydrautizing of the smaller and more highly hydrated sludge particles;
(58) Toxic Materials. Those wastes or combinations of wastes. Including disease -causing agents which atter discharge and upon exposure. Ingestion. Inhalation
or assimilation into any organism, either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through food chains. will cause death. disease. behavioral
abnormalities. cancer. genetic mutations. physiological malfunctions (including malfunctions in reproduction) or physical deformations. in such organisms or their
offspring; Toxic materials Include, by way of illustration and not limitation: lead. cadmium, chromium, mercury, vanadium, arsenic. zinc. ortho-nitro-chlorobenzene
(ONCS). polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane (DDT); and any other materials that have or may hereafter be determined to have
toxic properties;
(59) Trickling Filter. A biological treatment unit consisting of a material such es broken stone or rock over which wastewater is distributed; A high rate trickling
filter is one which operated al between 10 and 30 tngd par acro. A low rate trickling fitter is ono which is designed to operate at one to four ngd per acre: (60) Trickling Filter (Packed Tower). A plug flow typo of operation in which wastewater flows down through successive layers of media or filtrate material; Organic
material Is removed corrtnually by the active biological fixed growth In each successive layer. This method may produce 'secondary' quality effluent. or may bo
adapted to produce a nitrified effluent:
(at) vacuum Flier. Conlriiugos. or Filter Presses. Devices which are desig::. to remove excess water Irom either digested or undigested sludge prior le disOosal
or further treatment.

Division of Environmental Management
Technical Support Branch
February 26, 1992
Memorandum
To: Dale Overcash
From: Norm Bedwell 235
Through: Carla Sanderson
Ruth Swanek ,
Subject: Town of Scotland Neck Permit Metal Limits
This memorandum was. drafted in response to a letter from Radford L. Thomas, Town
Administrator, Scotland Neck inquiring about the inclusion of metal limits in the their
draft permit. The limits were incurred from SOP toxicity analysis of PIRF data (see
attached PIRF forms and Toxicity spreadsheets). Metals were not considered in the last
permit because no pretreatment information was submitted with the renewal package.
According to the Pretreatment Unit, the concentration for domestic input of Mercury
were based on default values. Since the parameter was limited based on this default
value, Technical Support feels this parameter should be monitored instead of limited
(see included draft permit), Except for Mercury, all other limits in the draft permit
should remain the same. Cyanide was limited based on the domestic input also, however,
these data were actual effluent concentrations. There is some question as to the
accuracy of the analysis because the influent concentrations were below detection
level. The facility.may want to check its sampling and testing technique to eliminate
possible interferences.
Should you need further information contact me at extension 510.

COMMISSIONERS:
N. O. MCDOWELL. JR.
JOHN D. ALLISON
LEONARD J. BUNTING
ROBERT B. PARTIN
loan t Haa-il',
641-7'
r is ice..
ike,t ejlatlf-
Zebu . tEt1Ub Xerit 3(2 (CZ
FERD L. HARRISON, MAYOR
P.O. BOX 537
SCOTLAND NECK, NC 27874
February 4, 1992
Mr. Dale Overcash
N. C. Environmental Management Commission
P. 0. Box 29535
Raleigh, N. C. 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Overcash:
RADFORD L. THOMAS
ADMINISTRATOR
PATSY A. FAITHFUL
CLERK
The Town of Scotland Neck has received a draft copy of the NPDES Permit
which has been proposed for the town and is scheduled to become effective
March 2, 1992. I-havereviewed the draft with Mr. Gene Butler, chief operato
of our wastewater treatment facility, and we agree that there are significant
changes in the monitoring frequency of certain parameters which are of great
concern to us in the proposed permit. These parameters, more specifically,
are B.O.D.'s, Total Suspended Residue, NH3 as N, Fecal Coliform and metals.
Our facility is a small Grade III plant with a permitted daily flow of
650,000 GPD. We are currently averaging around 360,000 GPD and serve 2,575
residents with two industries on pretreatment programs. Currently our
monitoring frequency calls for twice monthly monitoring for B.O.D.'s,
suspended residue, NH3 as N and fecal coliform and metals have no regular
monitoring schedule.
The proposed changes to daily testing of B.O.D.'s, suspended residue, NH3
as N, and fecal coliform did not come as an unexpected surprise; however,
we feel this frequency is excessive in relation to the daily flows and
operational procedures for our facility. There have been no changes in
the characteristics of our influent due to heavy growth or changes in the
industrial processes of our two SUI's which, in our opinion, would support
such a significant change to our monitoring frequency. Everything is basically
unchanged.
ohri'5
4kA Air;
cwy
The sudden inclusion of weekly monitoring requirements for the numerous metal
parameters came as a great surprise to us. Metals have not been any problem
in the past with our effluent quality, nor has it been a problem with our
influent. There have been no changes within our system to the detriment of
our treatment quality regarding metals. If any changes have occured, they
should prove to be to the benefit of our influent. One of our S.U.I.'sL
QY -W
6.4;4

r . 4
is no longer using a dying process which was in place several years.ago. We
do not agree With the inclusion of these parameters in our permit and are
quite confused as to any reasons which would necessitate such a significant
change to be included within this permit.
All of these changes will have a considerable impact upon the town both
operationally and economically. We feel we have a reasonable and just cause
to object to these changes and we respectfully request that they be reviewed
and relief be granted to the town. We would further like to request an
opportunity to discuss this matter with you and members of your staff at a
mutually agreeable date.
We are working dilligently to obtain the best wastewater quality possible to
meet the needs of our town. The staff at D.E.M. has been very helpful in
assisting us accomplish our goal. We thank you for your time and look forward
to your response. Your consideration of our request is greatly appreciated. If
you have any questions, please contact me at the Municipal Complex. (919) 826-
3152.
cc: George T. Everette, Director
DEM
Arthur Mouberry, Regional Supervisor
Sincerely,
0.0pfd<a*,,
Radford L. Thomas,
Town Administrator

TOXICS REVIEW
01/17/92
Facility: Town of Scotland Neck
NPDES Permit No.: N00023337
Status (E, P, or M) : E
Permitted Flow: 0.68 mgd
Actual Average Flow: 0.27 mgd
Subbasin: TAR04
Receiving Stream: Canal Creek
Stream Classification: C-NSW
7Q10: 0.00 cfs
INC: 100.0 %
ver 3.0
PRETREATMENT DATA EFFLUENT DATA ---
ACTUAL ACTUAL PERMITTED 1
or Ind. + Ind. + 1 ACTUAL ACTUAL
Default ACTUAL Domestic PERMITTED Domestic 1 Maximum Weekly
Standard Acute 1 Removal Allowable Domestic Industrial Total Industrial Total 1 Daily Average
Pollutant AL Criteria 1 Eff. Load Load Load Load Load Load I Value Value
(ug/1) (ug/1) 1 % (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1)
Cadmium S 2.0 1.79 1 92% 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.029
Chromium S 50.0 984 1 76% 0.46 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.19 0.208
Copper AL 7.0 9.2 1 82% 0.09 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.31 0.333
Nickel S 88.0 789 1 32% 0.29 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.093
Lead S 25.0 34 1 50* 0.11 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.05 0.080
Zinc AL 50.0 65 1 30% 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.31 0.383
Cyanide S 5.0 22.0 1 59% 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.020
Mercury S 0.012 2.4 1 86% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000
Silver AL 0.060 1.2 1 94% 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.010
Selenium S 5.0 20 1 80% 0.06 0.00 0.00
Arsenic S 50.0 360 1 40% 0.19 0.01 0.00 0.010
Phenols S NA 1 0.99
ANALYSIS RESULTS
Monitor / Limit / Special Condition*
Allowable Allowable) Predicted Predicted 1
1 Effluent Effluent 1 on ACTUAL on PERMIT.I Actual Actual 1 INSTREAM MONITORING
Bkg 1 Conc. Conc. 1 Influent Influent 1 ACTUAL PERMITTED Daily Max. Wk. Avg. 1 Based on Based on
Pollutant Conc. 1 CHRONIC ACUTE 1 Data Data 1 Influent Influent Effluent Effluent ( Actual Actual
(ug/1) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1) 1 Loading Loading Data Data 1 Daily Max. Wk. Avg.
Cadmium S 1 2.000 1.790 1 0.359 1.033 1 Limit Limit
Chromium S 1 50.000 984.320 1 3.229 22.356 1 Monitor Limit
Copper AL 1 7.000 9.220 1 4.036 26.865 I Monitor Monitor
Nickel S 1 88.000 789.000 1 12.198 28.240 1 Limit Limit
Lead S 1 25.000 33.780 1 6.727 17.939 1 Limit Limit
Zinc AL 1 50.000 65.040 1 43.950 120.173 1 Monitor Monitor
Cyanide S ► 5.000 22.000 1 0.000 3.677 1 Limit
Mercury S 1 0.012 2.400 1 0.000 0.025 1 Limit
Silver AL 1 0.060 1.230 1 0.269 0.269 1 Monitor Monitor
Selenium S 1 5.000 20.000 1 0.000 0.000 1
Arsenic S 1 50.000 360.000 1 0.000 2.691 1 Monitor
Phenols S 1 0.000 0.000 I 0.000 0.000 1

TOXICS
REVIEW 01/17/92
ver 3.0
Facility: Town of Scotland Neck
NPDES Permit No.: NC0023337
Status (E, P, or M) : E
Permitted Flow: 0.68 mgd
Actual Average Flow: 0.27 mgd
Subbasin: TAR04
Receiving Stream: Canal Creek
Stream Classification: C-NSW
7010: 0.00 cfs
INC: 100.0 %
PRETREATMENT DATA EFFLUENT DATA ---
ACTUAL ACTUAL PERMITTED 1
or Ind. + Ind. + 1 ACTUAL ACTUAL
Default ACTUAL Domestic PERMITTED Domestic 1 Maximum Weekly
Standard Acute 1 Removal Allowable Domestic Industrial Total Industrial Total 1 Daily Average
Pollutant AL Criteria 1 Eff. Load Load Load Load Load Load 1 Value Value
(ug/1) (ug/1) 1 B (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1)
Cadmium S 2.0 1.79 1 92% 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.070
Chromium S 50.0 984 1 76% 0.46 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.65 0.670
Copper AL 7.0 9.2 1 82% 0.09 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.32 0.340
Nickel S 88.0 789 1 32% 0.29 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.19 0.220
Lead S 25.0 34 1 50% 0.11 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.32 0.350
Zinc AL 50.0 65 1 30% 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.14 0.32 0.390
Cyanide S 5.0 22.0 I 59% 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.020
Mercury S 0.012 2.4 1 86% 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000
Silver AL 0.060 1.2 1 94% 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.010
Selenium S 5.0 20 1 80% 0.06 0.00 0.00
Arsenic S 50.0 360 I 40% 0.19 0.01 0.00 0.010
Phenols S NA 1 0.99
ANAL Y S I S RESULTS
Monitor / Limit / Special Condition*
Allowable Allowable) Predicted Predicted 1
I Effluent Effluent 1 on ACTUAL on PERMIT.I Actual Actual 1 INSTREAM MONITORING
Bkg 1 Conc. Conc. 1 Influent Influent 1 ACTUAL PERMITTED Daily Max. Wk. Avg. 1 Based on Based on
Pollutant Conc. 1 CHRONIC ACUTE 1 Data Data 1 Influent Influent Effluent Effluent 1 Actual Actual
(ug/1) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1) 1 (ug/1) (ug/1) 1 Loading Loading Data Data 1 Daily Max. Wk. Avg.
Cadmium S 1 2.000 1.790 1 0.359 2.511 1 Limit Limit
Chromium S 1 50.000 984.320 1 3.229 72.115 1 Monitor Limit
Copper AL 1 7.000 9.220 1 4.036 27.447 1 Monitor Monitor
Nickel S 1 88.000 789.000 1 12.198 67.092 1 Limit Limit
Lead S 1 25.000 33.780 1 6.727 78.483 1 Limit Limit
Zinc AL 1 50.000 65.040 1 43.950 122.433 1 Monitor Monitor
Cyanide S 1 5.000 22.000 1 0.000 3.677 1 Limit
Mercury S 1 0.012 2.400 1 0.000 0.025 1 Limit
Silver AL 1 0.060 1.230 I 0.269 0.269 1 Monitor Monitor
Selenium S 1 5.000 20.000 1 0.000 0.000 1
Arsenic S 1 50.000 360.000 1 0.000 2.691 1 Monitor
Phenols S 1 0.000 0.000 1 0.000 0.000 1

Cd
Cr
Cu
Ni
Zn
CN
Phenol
Other a
Ac
NPDES PRETREATMENT INFORMATION REQUEST F'ORM
FACILITY NAME: �w f 1 a 4 e-k NPDES NO. NCO0 a 3 3 3
REQUESTER: 1,{741. 1s ,0.4,„ DATE: f / J 6 /� REGION: T ) YQO
PERMIT CDNDl'1'IONS COVERING PRETREATMENT
This facility has no SIUs and should not have pretreatment language.
This facility should and/or is developing a pretreatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
x
This facility is currently implementing a
Please include the following conditions:
Program Development
Phase I due / /
Phase II due / /
Additional Conditions
(attached)
pretreatment program.
X
Program Implementation
Additional Conditions
(attached)
IGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USERS' (SIGs) CDNTRIBUTIONS
SIU FLAW - TOTAL:
- CDMPOSITION:
OTHER:
TEXTILE:
a, 0S
6 Oa
msD
MGD
MGD
MC D
MGD
MGD
MGD
HEADWORKS REVIEW
PASS
PARAMETER ;THROUGH
;ALLOWABLE DOME51'iC
O,b� 0.01
0,50
o, oa
DAILY LOAD IN LBS/DAY ACTUAL
PERMITTED INDUSTRIAL % REMOVAL
0 , 01? Q,00 92
D. +g7? 7.6
0,0a 0. 31.25"
0.32 0,03
0,0 0,03
o, a6a6
D.osO
0,67 0,31�g
0.03 0,0a
O,o'
O.aI 0,01
0,00oLl. 0,0004
1
cJ
RECEIVED: I / / E /,' KREVIE ED BY:
Ly_J
0, 0 f 3
0;D0 50
j V
0,67
5,00
0, 00
5`11 '
513 44-
4
11U
RETURNED : / / (/92:-
(6.°
; 360
131