NC0023906_Special Order by Consent_19970922

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNIN`i COVER SHEET
NC0023906
Wilson — Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Crly Z'One-4/'
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
September 22, 1997
This; document is printed cork reuse paper - ignore any
content on the relirerste side

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Mr. Russell P. Brice, Manager
Hominy Creek WWMF
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brice:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
September 22, 1997
Resources
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Relocation of Downstream Sampling Point
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Special Order by Consent 95-21
Wilson County
We have reviewed your request dated June 30, 1997 to relocate the downstream sampling
point from Contentnea Creek at NC 58 to Contentnea Creek at Highway 222. The Division has no
objection to this relocation, and the City may begin sampling at this location effectively immediately.
Attached are the amended Attachment A sheets which reflect this change. Please replace
the current Attachment A sheets to SOC 95-21 with these sheets.
If you have questions concerning this notification please contact Steve Mitchell at 919-571-
4700 ext. 237.
cc: Bob Sledge
Jackie Nowell
wilson.rel
Sincerely,
J y Garrett
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
©TERW
10)
aid 2 6 199/
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101 * Raleigh, NC 27609
Voice [phone] * FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

ATTACHMENT A
Page 1 of 3
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim (November 1-March 31 )'.
During the period beginning on
the permittee is authorized to
shall be limited and monitored
Effluent Characteristics
Requirements
Flow
BOD, 5Day, 20°C **
Total Suspended Residue **
NHI as N
Digsolved Oxygen (minimum)
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus ****
Chronic Toxicity *****
Effluent Characteristics
Conductivity
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
Lead
Cyanide
Mercury
***
the effective date of the Order and lasting until March 1, 2000,
discharge from outfall serial number(s) - 001. Such discharges
by the permittee as specified below:
Discharge Limitations
Other Units
Monthly Avg.
12.00 MGD
12.0 mg/1
30.0 mg/1
8.0 mg/1
200.0/100 ml
(Specify)
Weekly Avg.
18.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
400/100 ml
Discharge Limitations
Other Units (Specify)
Daily Maximum
27.0 ug/1
5.3 ug/1
0.013 ug/1
Measurement
Frequency
Continuous
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Quarterly
Monitoring
Sample *Sample
Type Location
Recording I or E
CompositeE,I,U,D
Composite I,E
Composite E
Grab E,U,D,X
Grab E,U,D
Grab E
Grab E,U,D,X
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Frequency Type Location
Daily Grab U,D,X
Monthly Composite E
Monthly Composite E
Monthly Composite E
Weekly Composite E
Weekly Grab E
Weekly Composite E

ATTACHMENT A
Page 2 of 3
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim (April 1 -
October 31)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the Order and
lasting until March 1, 2000, the permittee is authorized to discharge
from outfall serial number(s) - 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Flow
BOD, 5Day, 20°C
Total Suspended
NH as N
Digsolved'Oxygen (minimum) ***
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus ****
Chronic Toxicity *****
Conductivity
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
Lead
Cyanide
Mercury
**
Residue
**
Other Units (Specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg.
12.00 MGD
8.0 mg/1
30.0 mg/1
8.0 mg/1
12.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
200.0/100 ml 400/100 ml
Daily Maximum
27.0 ug/1
5.3 ug/1
0.013 ug/1
Frequency
Continuous
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Quarterly
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Weekly
Weekly
Weekly
Type Location
Recording I or E
CompositeE,I,U,D
Composite I,E
Composite E
Grab E,U,D,X
Grab E,U,D
Grab E
Grab E,U,D,X
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Grab U,D,X
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Grab E
Composite E

• . Jr
Page 3 of 3
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at Old Blackcreek Road',.D-Downstream
at SR 1606.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three
times per week during May, June, July, August, and September and once per week during the remaining
months of the year.
X Additional instream monitoring consisting of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and Conductivity
shall be performed upstream of the discharge and downstream at SR 1606, SR 1622, SR 1628, and Hwy
222 three (3) times per week May thru September and once (1) per week October thru April.
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
*** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 7.0 mg/1.
**** Compliance shall be based upon a quarterly average of weekly samples.
**** See Part III, Condition F, Chronic Toxicity P/F at 90%
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and
shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
ATTACHMENT A
Page 2 of 3
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim (November
1 - March 31)

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 11, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michelle Suverkrubbe
THRU: Ruth SwanekQ��
Carla Sanderson
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell 41°'‘
SUBJECT: Comments on Caldwell County/US 321 Corridor 201 Wastewater Facilities
Planning Study and Environmental Assessment
The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the subject documents and have no
significant comments. The 201 plan includes correspondence from the Division where
speculative limits for the future expansions of the City of Lenoir's Lower Creek and
Gunpowder Creek WWTPs, the Granite Falls WWTP and a proposed Regional plant have
been addressed. The plan includes improvements to the existing wastewater treatment
facilities in order to comply with the more stringent limits.
It should be noted that Table 5.2.1 Speculative Effluent Limits on page 21 of the
201 planning document appears to contain some typographical errors regarding flows and
limits for Granite Falls and the proposed Regional Plant. The summer and winter flows for
Granite Falls should be 1.9 MGD instead of 1.8 MGD. The summer NH3-N limit for
Granite Falls should be 2.9 mg/1 instead of 2.0 mg/l. The summer and winter flows for the
proposed Regional Plant should probably be 3 - 6 MGD, rather than the 3.6 MGD that is
listed.
cc: Rex Gleason
Central Files
WLA File

JUL 07 '97 12:19PM
P.1/3
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
ATA
HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH REGIONA4 OFFICE
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 10 , Raleigh, NC27609
Phone: [phone] P4X:919/571-4718
FACSIMILE
You should be receiving 5 pages (including cover sheet).
If you do not receive all pages, please contact sender at 919/571-4700_
TO:
FROM: f'h t o h
ORGANIZATION: SUBJECT!
FAX NUMBER: DATE: i q Imo° 7Z.
MESSAGE:
'
Do �v h.el�� ✓a��ernr ►. -t
pve /sa— vf
l �x
CG(xb o ti
(Tie. � F (: i LUG, t,&)r Licn

• JUL 07 '97 12:19PM
P.2'3
CITY OF WII
norik Carolina
INGCJRPORAYCO 1040
27894-0010
Wastewater Management Facility
CERTIFI ED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
SON
Ms. Judy Garrett
NCDEHNRlDWQ
Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
Subject: lnstream Monitoring of Contentnea Creek
Location 5. NC Highway 58
NPDES PermitNC0023906 - EMC SOC'WQ 951-21
City of Wilson
June 30, 1997
Dear Ms. Garrett:
The SOC entered into by the City of Wilson (City) requires that instream monitoring be conducted
at one upstream and four downstream locations. The downstream location at NC Highway 58 is extremely
dangerous for City personnel. After being told by the monitoring technician of several close calls with
speeding vehicles, I ask Dathan Shows, Safety and Risk Management Coordinator for the City to visit the
site and recommend safety procedures personnel should follow while taking the sample.
Currently, two employees are required for this job. The vehicle must park in the North bound lane
on the bridge. Safety cones are put out and one employee flags trz,ffic in the North bound lane behind the
vehicle while the other stands in front of the vehicle and takes the required sample. Meanwhile, vehicles
are passing by in the South bound lane at 55 mph and better. Some vehicles refuse to obey the flagman
and swerve around the cones into the South bound lane without st pping. There is no other access to the
creek in this area.
Mr Shows recommends that an alternative sampling toe tiun that would ant present a danger to
our employees while performing this work be sought. Attached isl, the memo with his comments.
This is a request to have Location 5 Contentnea Creek t NC 58 as described in EMC SOC WQ
95-21dated March 26, 1997 be changed to Contentnea Creek at ighwny 222. The Hwy. 222 location is
probably less than two•miles upstream from the bridge at Hwy. 5 .
P.O. BOX 10, WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894.0010 P)1:[phone] FAX:[phone]
EOUAL OPPORTUNITY J AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER

• 4 JUL 07 '97 12:20PM
Judy Garrett
Hwy. 58 Sampling Location
Page 2
Your immediate attention to this request would be apprec
this location three times per week.
Sincerely,
Russell P. Brice
Manager, Hominy Creek WWMF
cc; Charles W. Pittman, III
James P. Cauley, III
Dathan C. Shows
ated. The City is required to sample at

Front: <[e-mail]>
Organization: DEM Water Quality
To: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 26 Jim 1997 13:48:02 EST
Subject Wilson/Hominy Creek WWTP & Boiling Springs
Cc: [e-mail],
[e-mail]
Priority normal
Jay - My apologies for delay in getting you comments on the subject WWTP
improvement projects. As you are aware, the EMC acted to send revised
rules to public notice for the Neuse NSW strategy. The revised rules
propose to require existing dischargers not part of a coalition to meet
TN mass limits based on 3.5 mg/1 concentration AND 1995 permitted flow.
Within the coalition, the group of dischargers would be given the option
to meet a total load based on the group's 1995 load to the system and
reducing that by 30%. Either option is likely to require facilities to
implement technology that would meet better than a 6 mg/1 concentration.
Particularly as this is a proposed expansion. Further, legislation is
under consideration in the General Assembly that would establish a
technological nitrogen limit (currently set at 4 mg/1 in the draft
bill). Based on the expected levels of discharge projected in the
report, the system may be able to meet the proposed NSW TN requirement
as part of a coalition (101 tons/year of TN projected to be discharged,
approximately 4.7 mg/1). However, if Wilson were to elect not to
participate, I am uncertain as to whether the system would accomplish
the proposed requirements.
On stormwater, in the development of the draft NSW documents, we have
found that increased urbanization will likely result in increased
concentrations of TN in stormwater, unless actions are undertaken during
the planning and design to reduce the nitrogen loading. The existing
state stormwater programs to date have focused on sediment issues
associated, with increased rates of runoff generally seen as the level
of impervious surfaces increases in a watershed. Therefore, Wilson
should commit to re-evaluating their stormwater program implementation
for the ability to adjust it to reduce the TN load coming from the
urbanizing areas and to expand it to areas not currently covered (non
water supply watershed areas). The report currently states that Wilson
proposes a "comprehensive stormwater management plan", without any
clarification of the intent of the program.
On Boiling Springs - we have no comment. Coleen

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 25, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Reginald R. Sutton
THRU: Ruth Swanek C-c
Carla Sanderson(r)
FROM:
Jacquelyn M. Nowell
SUBJECT: Response to Comments of Wilson -Hominy Creek WWMF 201 Facility
Plan Amendment
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the subject document for responses to
our February 25th comments. As a point of clarification, it should be noted that on page
2-21, the document states that no speculative limits were received for metals because
"current NCDWQ regulations" allow a review when the NPDES application is received.
While we are allowed to review all information on the NPDES application when
determining final NPDES limits, the reason we do not provided speculative limits for
metals is a standard operating procedure that was implemented by DWQ due to resource
constraints. All other reviewed information in the document is acceptable and we have no
additional comments.
cc: Judy Garrett
WLA File

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michelle Suverkru . be
FROM: Coleen Sullin
SUBJECT:
February 26, 1997
Wilson's Hominy Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
NPDES Permit # NC0023906, Wilson County
Environmental Assessment
00
(-(c
I have reviewed the subject document. In the mitigative measures discussion, stormwater management
control measures of the city were presented as an offset to the increased nutrient inputs from nonpoint
source loadings generated from the change in land use associated with the expansion. Limited discussion
was included in the document on the "city's" stormwater management program or how the program will be
focused to address stormwater impacts associated with the increased growth. Further discussion should
be provided on the city's programs and measures planned to strengthen any existing programs to address
nutrients, in addition to sediments.
Reuse of the wastewater effluent as a means to mitigate the impact from the additional load to the Neuse
River, was discussed very briefly. While minor reductions are only predicted associated with the reuse
option being considered (irrigation on a golf course in the vicinity of the wastewater treatment plant), given
the finding by the Commission that the Neuse River currently is overallocated for nutrients, any reduction
should be seriously pursued. Reuse through land application would result in the nutrients being used by
grasses on the golf course and thus result in a load reduction to the river. Continued efforts should be
made by Wilson to pursue reuse applications.
If you have any questions concerning the above comments, please call me at extension 550.
cc: Ruth Swanek
Permit Files

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 25, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michelle Suverkrubbe
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell
THRU: Don Safi -it
Ruth nek .C5
Carla Sanderson
SUBJECT: Wilson -Hominy Creek WWMF 201 Facilities Plan Amendment
Upgrade and Expansion
NPDES Perinit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
The Instream Assessment Unit (IAU) has reviewed the subject document and find
it to be satisfactory. There is only one additional comment that we would like to have
included on the record. IAU sent.a response regarding speculative limits for Wilson's
expansion to 14 MGD to Mr. Russell Brice in early January of this year. Attached you find
a copy of the response forwarded to him. The letter includes speculative limits for the
oxygen consuming parameters and also contains the interim plan for updating the Nutrient
Sensitive Waters strategy in the Neuse River. There were no speculative limits given for
metals since current IAU procedure aI.lows those parameters to be reviewed when the
formal NPDES permit application request for expansion is received by DWQ.
We would also like to update the City of Wilson on the progress of the draft NSW
strategy. The Division of Water Quality is currently revising the draft nutrient sensitive
waters (NSW) strategy for the Neuse Rive4asin based on comments we received during
the public comment period. Based on these comments, we are reviewing the possibility of
including mass based nitrogen limits in the NODES permits instead of the concentration
limits currently proposed. Annual nitrogen loading limits based on an effluent total
nitrogen concentration of 3-4 mg/I and 1995 permitted flow may be included in the final
strategy. For example, a 10 MGD facility would receive annual TN loading limits based on
the following equation:
TN load limit (lb/yr) = (10 MGD)*(3.5 mg/1 TN)*(8.34)*(365) = 106,500 lb/yr
This annual load limit would be assigned in lieu of the monthly average TN limit of
6 mg/I proposed in the current draft rules. Since these lower concentrations will be used to
assign limits in terms of annual load and not monthly concentration limits, we do not expect
that major differences in facility design would result from changing the current draft rules
to annual loading requirements.

Memo to Michelle Suverkrubbe
page 2
The General Assembly is also examining the possibility of requiring dischargers in
NSW waters to install best availahle nitrogen removal technology. Wilson may wish to
review any proposed legislation that would impact point sources.
Please contact me if there are additional questions.
Attachment
cc: Judy Garrett
Central Files
WLA File

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
January 29, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michelle Suverkrubbe
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell
THRU: Don Safrit
Ruth Swanek
Carla Sanderson
SUBJECT: Wilson -Hominy Creek WWMF 201 Facilities Plan Amendment
Upgrade and Expansion
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
The Instream Assessment Unit (IAU) has reviewed the subject document and find
it to be satisfactory. There is only one additional comment that we would like to have
included on the record. IAU sent a response regarding speculative limits for Wilson's
expansion to 14 MGD to Mr. Russell Brice in early January of this year. Attached you find
a copy of the response forwarded to him. The letter includes speculative limits for the
oxygen consuming parameters and also contains the interim plan for updating the Nutrient
Sensitive Waters strategy in the Neuse River. There were no speculative limits given for
metals since current IAU procedure allows those parameters to be reviewed when the
formal NPDES permit application request for expansion is received by DWQ.
Please contact me if there are additional questions.
Attachment
cc: Judy Garrett
Central Files
WLA File
op_ prt(te 4Stz s i
t ttSovt

•
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 3, 1997
EEF-1NJR
Mr. Russell Brice
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, N.C. 27984-0010
Subject: Wilson -Hominy Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
Dear ce: 12"1"a
Your recent request for speculative effluent limits for the expansion of the Wilson
WWTP from a design flow of 12 MGD to an expanded flow of 14 MGD has been
completed by the staff of. the Technical Support Branch. In order to receive final permit
limits, a formal application will have to be submitted to the Division's Permits and
Engineering Unit. Per North Carolina's anti -degradation policy (15A NCAC 2B.0201
(c)(1)), each application for an NPDES permit or NPDES permit expansion to discharge
treated waste will require documentation of an effort to consider non -discharge alternatives
pursuant to North Carolina Regulation 15A NCAC 2H.0105 (c)(2).
The Wilson WWTP discharges to Contentnea Creek, a tributary to the Neuse River.
The slow moving nature of Contentnea Creek results in low instream dissolved oxygen
(DO) concentrations during critical conditions (i.e. warm weather / low flow periods).
Substandard DO (below 5 mg/1) concentrations have been documented at all three NCDWQ
(North Carolina Division of Water Quality) ambient stations located in Contentnea Creek,
(i.e. near Lucama, at Hookerton, and Grifton). A calibrated modeling analysis performed
by the Research Triangle Institute, and field observations have indicated that the
assimilative capacity of the lower Contentnea Creek is compromised. However, it should
be noted that swamp systems in North Carolina have DO levels below normal conditions
and at times below 5 mg/1 naturally. Therefore, it is uncertain whether the Wilson WWTP
discharge is causing additional decreases in DO.
Based on available information, the tentative limits at 14 MGD for conventional
constituents are:
Summer Winter
BOD5 (mg/1) 5 10
NH3-N (mg/1) 2 4
TSS (mg/1) 30 30
Dissolved Oxygen 7 7
Fecal Coliform (#/100m1) 200 200
pH (SU) 6-9 6-9
Chlorine (1.41) 18 18
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Letter to Mr. Brice
-page 2-
It should be noted that the summer NH3-N limit is based on protecting Contentnea
Creek against instream toxicity. North Carolina is evaluating all NPDES dischargers for
ammonia toxicity following the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance to
protect the waters for an instream criteria of 1 mg/l in the summer and 1.8 mg/l in the
winter, under 7Q10 flow conditions.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is now recommending chlorine limits and
dechlorination for all new or expanding dischargers proposing the use of chlorine for
disinfection. An acceptable level of chlorine in your effluent is 18 µg/1 to ensure protection
against chronic toxicity. The process of chlorination/dechlorination or an
alternate form of disinfection, such as ultraviolet radiation, should allow the facility to
comply with the total residual chlorine limit.
The DWQ has drafted an interim plan to update the Nutrient Sensitive Waters
(NSW) strategy in the Neuse River Basin. The final rules could be adopted by the
Environmental Management Commission in April 1997. Below is a summary of the
requirements that would affect the City of Wilson wastewater treatment plant if the plan is
adopted as currently drafted. These requirements need to be addressed in the alternatives
analysis necessary for this proposed expansion.
Association Members
• Dischargers may form an Association. If such an Association is formed, total loadings
for nitrogen (Ms/year) will be developed for the Association as a whole. The
Association may then trade allocations of loading among the members to meet the
established target or pay a fee for loading above their allocated amount. If the
Association does not meet its annual loading targets, a flat rate for nutrient loading
above the target must be paid for the implementation, (including administration) of best
management practices for agricultural activities, wetland restoration, or urban
stormwater programs. Existing, new, and expanding discharges equal to or greater than
0.500 mgd will have a total phosphorus limit of 2 mg/l.
Non -Association Members
• If an Association is not formed or an expanding facility chooses not to join the
Association, expanding dischargers will be required, upon completion of construction,
to comply with a monthly average total nitrogen limit of 6 mg/1 and a monthly average
phosphorus limit of 1 mg/l. Dischargers will be required to offset their additional
nutrient loads by funding nonpoint source control programs approved by DWQ. This
offset funding will be applied to nonpoint source control programs approved by the
DWQ, (e.g. agricultural cost share programs, wetland restoration, urban cost share
programs, etc.). Nitrogen and phosphorus loads shall be offset at the rate of 110
percent of the cost to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) designed to reduce
that same loading created by the new or expanding discharge. This payment will be
required to be received prior to permit issuance and will be good for the five year term of
the permit.

Letter to Mr. Brice
-page 3-
Summary
Neuse River Basin Point Source Management Plan for Facilities Below Falls Dam
Phosphorus Nitrogen.
Association Member t
Expanding Facility (? 0.5 mgd) 2 mg/1 * Association
Non Association Member
New & Expanding Domestic /
Municipal Facility 1 mg/1 ** 6 mg/1**
No Association Formed
New & Expanding Domestic /
Municipal Facility 1 mg/1** 6 mg/1**
1 All wastewater dischargers below Falls Lake Dam will have the option of forming
an association to reduce nutrients through a trading program as an agreement with
the Division.
Quarterly Average Limits
** Monthly Average Limits
DWQ recommends that the options outlined in this draft interim strategy, (including
but not limited to biological nutrient removal processes) be reviewed in the alternatives
analysis. If you would like to discuss general provisions of this strategy, please feel free to
contact Ruth Swanek at [phone], extension 503. If the facility wishes to expand
before final approval of NSW strategy, then limits for nutrients will be 6 mg/1 TN and 1
mg/1 TP.
The request did not indicate whether any of the expansion wastewater would have
any industrial constituency, therefore this aspect could not be evaluated. If there is any
industrial flow, there is the possibility that effluent limitations or monitoring for toxicants
or metals could be added to the permit upon further evaluation.
DWQ continues to implement a basinwide water quality management initiative. The
schedule for reissuing the Neuse River Basin is set for 1998. The plan will attempt to
address all sources of point and nonpoint pollutants where deemed necessary to protect or
restore water quality standards. In addressing interaction of sources, wasteload allocations
may be affected. Those facilities that already have committed to high levels of treatment
technology are least likely to be affected.

Letter to Mr. Brice
-page 4-
Final NPDES effluent limitations will be determined after a formal permit
application has been submitted to the Division. If there are any additional questions
concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Ruth Swanek (ext. 503) or Jackie Nowell
(ext. 512), of my staff at [phone].
cerely, /
onald L. Sa
Assistant Chief
Water Quality Section
DLS/JMN
cc: Judy Garrett
Michelle Suverkrubbe
David A. Nailor, P.E., Hazen and Sawyer
Central Files
WLA File
upport

Wilson WWTP Spec Notes jmn
Contentnea Creek C Sw NSW 12/6/96
030407
Facility is requesting spec limits for expansion form 12 MGD to 14 MGD. Contentnea
Creek has flow but is a swampy stream with very low slopes, because of its hydrography,
it has been difficult to model with the Level B and Qua12E modeling tools. Since we are
unable to accurately model the system, our BPJ for this expansion is to assign the
existing tertiary limits of 5/2/7 and 10/4/7. Chlorine limits of 18 ug/1 will
be given. A chronic toxicity limit at 90% is also required. Summer and winter
NH3 limits to protect against toxicity are 1 and 1.9 mg/1, respectively. However,
Division procedure dictates that NH3 limits of 2 and 4 mg/1, be given since
they are technologically achievable. This is a basic renewal of existing
limits for the expansion flow.
A review of instream data from stations located on the Contentnea Creek. There was only
1 substandard DO value at the station at Highway 301 above the Wilson WWTP in July
1995, a 4.8 mg/1 value. At station near Wilson, (unsure whetther this is above or below
WWTP), the six reported substandard DOs range from 2.2 (6/11/96) to 4.4 mg/1 (7/25/95).
At the station near Stantonsburg, below the Wilson plant substandard DO values range
from 4 to 4.8 mg/l (in 7 & 8/95 and 6/96). At station near Snow Hill, only in 7/95 were
two values slightly below the standard recorded.
Regarding the nutrient issues of Contentnea Creek and the Lower Neuse River basin, I
copied a portion of a lettter that Farrell sent to Snow Hill when they requested an
expansion. It was a portion of the interim plan for the NSW strategy. If this is too much
for this letter can delete and reduce it.

Wilson WWTP
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (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 0.1 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
1.3 7Q10 (CFS)
14 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
21.7 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
94.35 IWC (%)
18.02 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)
1.3
14
21.7
1.0
0.22
94.35
1.05
1.3
14
21.7
1.8
0.22
94.35
1.89
NC0023906
11 /26/96

HAZEN Ali
D SAWYER
Environmental Engineers & Scientists
October 22, 1996
------ / .05 cAzo rdA.—--
Mr. Don Safrit
N.C. Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 29535 Ci�
1-25--
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: City of Wilson, NC
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES Permit Limits
H&S No. 3008
Dear Mr. Safrit:
Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.
4011 WestChase Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27607
919 833-7152
Fax: [phone]
The City of Wilson is planning to expand the existing Hominy Creek
Wastewater Management Facility from its current permitted capacity of 12 mgd
to a capacity of 14 mgd. The discharge limits for the current capacity are
contained in the NPDES permit for the facility (Permit No. NC0023906). In order
to evaluate facilities required for the proposed expansion, we are hereby
requesting speculative limits for the NPDES permit for the expanded flow of
14 mgd. The discharge location will be unchanged from the current discharge
point.
Please let us know if any additional information is required. We will look
forward to your reply.
Very truly yours,
HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C.
David A. Nailor, P.E.
Principal Engineer
DAN/bpr
cc: Mr. Don Cordell
Mr. Ron Taylor
Mr. Russell Brice
New York, NY • Armonk. NY • Woodbury. NY • Upper Saddle River. NJ • Detroit, MI • Raleigh, NC • Charlotte. NC • Fairfax VA • Hollywood, FL • Boca Raton, FL • Fort Pierce, FL • Gainesville, FL • Sarasota, FL • Miami, FL

contentnea.instrm
STATION #
STATION #
DATE
TEMP
DO
NH3
TKN
NO2-NO3
TP
@ Hwy 301
J6764000
NEU084H
12/12/94
11
@
1 1 .6
@
0.3
K
0.31
@
0.05
K
0.05
@
J6764000
NEU084H
01 /19/95
9
@
10.7
@
0.3
K
0.55
@
0.12
@
0.1
@
J6764000
NEU084H
02/13/95
1
@
13
@
0.3
K
0.25
@
0.45
@
0.08
@
J6764000
NEU084H
03/13/95
9
@
9
@
0.3
K
0.34
@
0.25
@
0.18
@
J6764000
NEU084H
04/11 /95
14
@
9.8
@
0.3
K
0.35
@
0.13
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
05/11 /95
19
@
8
@
0.3
K
0.35
@
0.05
K
0.12
@
J6764000
NEU084H
05/25/95
22
@
6.2
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
06/14/95
20
@
6.8
@
0.3
K
1.09
@
0.23
@
0.16
@
J6764000
NEU084H
06/25/95
22
@
6.2
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
07/18/95
25
@
6.4
@
0.3
K
1.28
@
0.05
@
0.15
@
J6764000
NEU084H
07/25/95
25
@
4.8
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
08/08/95
25
@
5.4
@
0.3
K
0.87
@
0.07
@
0.13
@
J6764000
NEU084H
08/21/95
25
@
6.2
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
09/15/95
22.5
@
6.8
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.06
@
0.08
@
J6764000
NEU084H
09/25/95
17
@
8.8
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
10/11/95
18
@
7.4
@
-4 0.3
K
0.5
K
0.21
@
0.11
@
J6764000
NEU084H
11 /28/95
7
@
12.6
@
< 0.3
K
0.5
K
0.4
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
12/13/95
2
@
12.2
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.25
@
0.08
@
J6764000
NEU084H
01/16/96
6
@
13
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.43
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
02/15/96
6
@
13.4
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.55
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
03/12/96
5
@
14
@
0.3
K
0.51
@
0.35
@
0.09
@
J6764000
NEU084H
04/09/96
8
@
11.4
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.38
@
0.07
@
J6764000
NEU084H
05/14/96
1 5
@
10.2
@
0.3
K
1.01
@
0.24
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
05/22/96
15
@
9.6
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
06/11 /96
25
@
8
@
0.3
K
1.19
@
0.26
@
0.06
@
J6764000
NEU084H
06/18/96
22
@
7.8
@
@
@
@
@
J6764000
NEU084H
07/10/96
27
@
8.4
@
0.3
K
0.74
@
0.06
@
0.07
@
J6764000
NEU084H
07/15/96
23
@
9.2
@
@
@
@
@
Page 1

contentnea.instrm
STATION #
STATION #
DATE
DO
NH3
TKN
NO2-NO3
TP
TEMP
nr Wilson
J6890000
NEU088
12/12/94
11
@
6.2
@
0.3
K
0.66
@
0.78
@
0.23
@
J6890000
NEU088
01/19/95
9
@
9.6
@
0.3
K
0.2
K
0.26
@
0.14
@
J6890000
NEU088
02/13/95
0
@
10.6
@
0.3
K
0.37
@
0.78
@
0.12
@
J6890000
NEU088
03/13/95
9
@
8.6
@
0.3
K
0.36
@
0.28
@
0.18
@
J6890000
NEU088
04/11 /95
12
@
7.6
@
0.3
K
1.07
@
0.94
@
0.11
@
J6890000
NEU088
05/11 /95
19
@
6
@
0.3
K
0.74
@
0.51
@
0.16
@
J6890000
NEU088
05/25/95
23
@
5.2
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
06/14/95
21
@
5.8
@
0.3
K
1.21
@
0.26
@
0.19
@
J6890000
NEU088
06/25/95
22.5
@
5.8
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
07/18/95
25
@
4
@
0.36
@
1.36
@
1 .1 1
@
0.23
@
J6890000
NEU088
07/25/95
26
@
4.4
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
08/08/95
23
@
3
@
0.5
@
1 .42
@
3.75
@
0.22
@
J6890000
NEU088
08/21/95
22.5
@
5
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
09/15/95
22
@
3.4
@
0.3
K
1.25
@
3.66
@
0.16
@
J6890000
NEU088
09/25/95
18
@
8
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
10/11/95
18.5
@
6.4
@
0.3
K
0.71
@
0.22
@
0.14
@
J6890000
NEU088
11 /28/95
9
@
11.8
@
0.4
@
0.9
@
0.71
@
0.1
@
J6890000
NEU088
12/13/95
3
@
14.2
@
0.3
K
0.79
@
0.35
@
0.1
@
J6890000
NEU088
01/16/96
6
@
11.4
@
0.3
K
0.71
@
0.54
@
0.08
@
J6890000
NEU088
02/15/96
7
@
14.2
@
0.39
@
0.9
@
0.66
@
0.09
@
J6890000
NEU088
03/12/96
5
@
12.8
@
0.3
K
0.88
@
0.45
@
0.1
@
J6890000
NEU088
04/09/96
8.5
@
10.8
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.4
@
0.07
@
J6890000
NEU088
05/14/96
16.5
@
9.2
@
0.3
K
0.96
@
0.97
@
0.15
@
J6890000
NEU088
05/22/96
16
@
9.6
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
06/11/96
23
@
2.2
@
2.85
@
5.33
@
1.17
@
0.41
@
J6890000
NEU088
06/18/96
21
@
3
@
@
@
@
@
J6890000
NEU088
07/10/96
26
@
7.2
@
0.3
K
1.09
@
0.08
@
0.07
@
J6890000
NEU088
07/15/96
23
@
6.9
@
@
@
@
@
Page 2

contentnea.instrm
STATION #
STATION #
DATE
TEMP
DO
NH3
TKN
NO2-NO3
TP
nr Stantonsbrg
J7210000
NEU096
12/12/94
9
@
9
@
0.3
K
0.5
@
0.83
@
0.1
@
J7210000
NEU096
01/19/95
9
@
8.2
@
0.3
K
0.2
K
0.29
@
0.14
@
J7210000
NEU096
02/13/95
1
@
11.4
@
0.3
K
0.42
@
0.73
@
0.12
@
J7210000
NEU096
03/13/95
9
@
7.8
@
0.3
K
0.2
K
0.37
@
0.16
@
J7210000
NEU096
04/11/95
14
@
6.2
@
0.3
K
0.73
@
1.01
@
0.11
@
J7210000
NEU096
05/11/95
19
@
5.2
@
0.3
K
0.41
@
0.49
@
0.17
@
J7210000
NEU096
05/25/95
24
@
5.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
06/14/95
20
@
5.6
@
0.3
K
1.16
@
0.3
@
0.18
@
J7210000
NEU096
06/25/95
22
@
5.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
07/18/95
24
@
4
@
0.3
K
1.1
@
0.52
@
0.23
@
J7210000
NEU096
07/25/95
25
@
4.2
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
08/08/95
23
@
4.8
@
0.3
K
0.67
@
0.85
@
0.23
@
J7210000
NEU096
08/21/95
24
@
9.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
09/15/95
21
@
5.2
@
0.3
K
0.71
@
1.33
@
0.16
@
J7210000
NEU096
09/25/95
17
@
7.4
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
10/11/95
19
@
5.2
@
0.3
K
0.66
@
0.16
@
0.11
@
J7210000
NEU096
11/28/95
8.5
@
11.2
@
0.3
K
0.69
@
0.64
@
0.08
@
J7210000
NEU096
12/13/95
2.5
@
13.2
@
0.3
K
0.69
@
0.45
@
0.09
@
J7210000
NEU096
01/16/96
6
@
11.2
@
0.3
K
0.75
@
0.73
@
0.08
@
J7210000
NEU096
02/15/96
8
@
12.8
@
0.3
K
0.56
@
0.69
@
0.08
@
J7210000
NEU096
03/12/96
6.5
@
11.6
@
0.3
K
0.67
@
0.43
@
0.1
@
J7210000
NEU096
04/09/96
9
@
10.6
@
0.3
K
0.51
@
0.38
@
0.07
@
J7210000
NEU096
05/14/96
15
@
10.2
@
0.3
K
0.75
@
0.85
@ 1
0.16
@
J7210000
NEU096
05/22/96
16
@
9.8
@
@
@
@
1
@
J7210000
NEU096
06/11/96
23
@
4
@
2.92
@
6.5
@
1.34
@
0.4
@
J7210000
NEU096
06/18/96
23
@
5.2
@
@
@
@
@
J7210000
NEU096
07/10/96
26
@
7
@
0.3
K
1.22
@
0.19
@
0.06
@
J7210000
NEU096
07/15/96
22
@
6.8
@
@
@
@
@
Page 3

contentnea.instrm
STATION #
STATION #
DATE
DO
NH3
TKN
NO2-NO3
TP
TEMP
@ Snow Hill
J7330000
NEU099
12/12/94
9
@
10
@
0.3
K
0.37
@
0.54
@
0.14
@
J7330000
NEU099
01/19/95
1 0
@
9.2
@
0.3
K
0.33
@
0.46
@
0.16
@
J7330000
NEU099
02/13/95
2
@
12.4
@
0.3
K
0.37
@
0.77
@
0.11
@
J7330000
NEU099
03/13/95
8.5
@
7.6
@
0.3
K
0.32
@
0.56
@
0.12
@
J7330000
NEU099
04/11/95
14
@
8.2
@
0.3
K
0.56
@
0.62
@
0.12
@
J7330000
NEU099
05/11/95
1 7
@
7
@
0.3
K
0.56
@
0.58
@
0.25
@
J7330000
NEU099
05/25/95
22
@
6.4
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
06/14/95
20
@
5.2
@
0.3
K
1 .05
@
0.35
@
0.26
@
J7330000
NEU099
06/25/95
21
@
5.4
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
07/18/95
24
@
4.8
@
0.3
K
1 .1 1
@
0.19
@
0.25
@
J7330000
NEU099
07/25/95
25
@
4.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
08/08/95
23
@
5.2
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.83
@
0.21
@
J7330000
NEU099
08/21/95
22
@
7.8
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
09/15/95
21
@
6.4
@
0.3
K
0.57
@
0.91
@
0.16
@
J7330000
NEU099
09/25/95
17.5
@
7.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
10/11/95
1 8
@
5.4
@
0.3
K
0.59
@
0.14
@
0.1
@
J7330000
NEU099
11/28/95
8
@
11
@
0.3
K
0.55
@
0.63
@
0.08
@
J7330000
NEU099
12/13/95
2.5
@
11.2
@
0.3
K
0.57
@
0.37
@
0.11
@
J7330000
NEU099
01/16/96
6
@
11.6
@
0.3
K
0.54
@
0.73
@
0.08
@
J7330000
NEU099
02/15/96
6.5
@
13
@
0.3
K
0.5
K
0.83
@
0.07
@
J7330000
NEU099
03/12/96
5.5
@
12.2
@
0.3
K
0.77
@
0.59
@
0.1
@
J7330000
NEU099
04/09/96
8.5
@
10.8
@
0.3
K
0.53
@
0.66
@
0.11
@
J7330000
NEU099
05/14/96
1 6
@
8.6
@
0.3
K
0.88
@
0.67
@
0.19
@
J7330000
NEU099
05/22/96
15.5
@
9.4
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
06/11/96
23
@
5.8
@
0.3
K
0.68
@
0.81
@
0.16
@
J7330000
NEU099
06/18/96
21
@
6.6
@
@
@
@
@
J7330000
NEU099
07/10/96
26
@
7.2
@
0.3
K
0.77
@
0.72
@
0.17
@
J7330000
NEU099
07/15/96
22
@
6
@
@
@
@
@
Page 4

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
MEMORANDUM
October 29, 1996
To: Jackie Nowell
Jill Hickey
Through: Ken Schuster Y"
Judy Garrett i
From:
Steve Mitchell 7i41\--
Subject: Wilson SOC
As part of the date change\modifications requested by the City of
Wilson, the stream monitoring requests contained in the SOC were
viewed by the City as duplicating the current efforts undertaken by
the Neuse Basin Association.
This is definitely not the case. The Association collects samples
twice a month in the summer and monthly during winter. The
collection of data for the approximation of the zone of oxygen
depletion is for data three times a week in summer and once weekly
in winter.
The wastewater treatment plant collects daily water samples for
Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and Conductivity upstream of outfall
at Contentnea Creek on Old Black Creek Road (#1) and downstream of
outfall at SR 1606 (#2). Data is collected at the creeks stations
located at SR 1622 and Highway 58 (#3 and #5 respectively) by the
Neuse Association. The measurements collected by the Association
can be assimilated into the data base and used to complete 2 (c) of
the SOC. To make the use of this data more feasible, I also
recommend that the months comprising summer and winter be altered
to match the Association's.
Suggested SOC Sampling Locations
Parameters: Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Conductivity
Frequency: 3/wk April thru October, 1/wk November thru March
Locations: 1) 100 ft upstream of discharge
2) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1606
3) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1622
4) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1628
5) Contentnea Creek @ NC Hwy 222
Lower Neuse Basin Association Sampling Locations
Parameters: All

Frequency:
Locations:
2/mo May thru September, 1/mo October thru April
5) Contentnea Creek @ US Hwy 301
6) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1622
7) Contentnea Creek @ NC Hwy 58
Therefore, the RRO recommends:
Parameters:
Frequency:
Locations:
Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Conductivity
3/wk May thru September, 1/wk October thru April
1) WWTP's upstream location on Old Black Creek Road
2) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1606 (WWTP's downstream)
3) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1622
4) Contentnea Creek @ SR 1628
5) Contentnea Creek @ NC Hwy 58
cc: RRO w/out attch
enfors\wilson.enf\station

_rrson
.roads
22 1.2
sa
O
Bockhorn
Crossroads
1197
1121 3
Stour
Crossroads
.9
1122
5
.2 d
111/
r
Moores
Crouroads
N n0
/
Aycock ".r
Crossing 1.14t
3/i-�tt,r� %WI/ LJyr
® a�5 !„L 1Jlra W',Tj
DtJ .J rt l--\
114t
Nome
1121.
Si. Roos
ch.
r.
Lamm
Crossroads
0
1122
Scab
1170 0
1169
� J
• N5,oAt
z�
t73SGr / 1?-6,
0
WILSON
142Lh
{.'A .61
11i .7
BLACK
CREEK
1412
142i 1227.
J
.6
0
I
12Z
4?L
PAS 1.
1444 • , ,s>
STANTOHSMJRG
0
t,
i
1
a

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
October 24, 1996
Mr. Russell Brice
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
Subject: Request for Speculative Limits
City of Wilson
NPDES No. NC0023906
Dear Mr. Brice:
AA
�EHNR
The Technical Support Branch received your request for speculative limits for the City of
Wilson on October 24. The project has been assigned to Jackie Nowell for review. It
normally takes approximately thirty days for the modeler to review the available water
quality information and draft a response.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact Ms. Nowell (ext. 512) or me (ext
503) at [phone].
Sincerely,
6,0cLuit
Ruth C. Swanek, Supervisor
Instream Assessment nit
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
David A. Nailor, P.E., Hazen and Sawyer
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Page 1
Note for Jackie Nowell
From: Jackie Nowell
Date: Thu, Aug 29,1996 8:37 AM
Subject: Wilson WWTP SOC/JOC
To: Carla Sanderson; Ruth Swanek
Steve Mitchell called yesterday and said that Wilson has requested a winter BOD5 limit of 12
mg/1 in the SOC ( rather than the previously requested 10 mg/1). I didn't recall that
summer/winter BOD5 limits had been requested, but I told him that since we were unable to
model the creek, we couldn't tell them they could not increase the SOC limit to 12 mg/1. Told
him that we were mostly concerned that Wilson should do the extensive monitoring that we
had requested, to determine what kind of impact the discharge was having on Contentnea
Creek. Said that he definitely agreed with that and they would probably give them the limits
they requested. I asked whether most of the sites would be accessible for the Town and he
said that since the sites were at road crossings, he did not anticipate them having any
problems.
He also said that it looked like the order would probably become a JOC.

Contentnea Creek Modeling Efforts
- Attempted to model a 16.7 mile segment from the Wilson WWTP to Stantonburg
WWTP. Wilson plant has a design capacity of 12 MGD, but is requesting SOC with
effluent limits for flow of additional 1.7 MGD, BOD5 and NH3. Because the segment has
low slopes ranging from 2.4 to 0.74 fpm, also a somewhat swampy area, the Level B
model is not the best tool to be used here. A QUAL2E model was done by engineering
firm in 1985, We are planning to update the QUAL2E with chemical/physical data collected
by ESB. Until that effort can be completed we are using the Level B model to try to
determine whether the additional flow of 1.7 MGD can be added to the Wilson WWTP.
The RRO is requesting SOC limits of BOD5 =8 mg/1 or 12 mg/1, NH3 limits of 8 mg/l.
(Existing limits are 5/2/7)
Model reach input:
REACH1 = 2.3 miles (from Wilson WWTP to mouth of Hominy Swamp trib)
slopel = 2.4 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 0.11 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 2 (guestimated)
REACH2 =6.2 miles (from Hominy Swamp trib to Black Creek trib)
slope2 = 2.1 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 0.42 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 3 (guestimated)
REACH3 = 0.5 miles (from Black Creek trib to Turner Swamp trib)
slope3 = 1.7 fpm
7QA runoff = 1.05 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
Q10 runoff = 6 (guestimated)
REACH4 = 2.7 miles (from Turner Swamp trib to Ivy Swamp trib)
slope4 = 1.7 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 1.05 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 6 (guestimated)
REACH5 = 5 miles (from Ivy Swamp trib to Stantonsburg WWTP)
slope5 = 0.9 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 2.65 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 8 (guestimated)
Headwater inputs:
7Q10 flow
1) Recent information from Hazen & Sawyer gave minimum release from Buckhorn
Reservoir as 1.4 cfs. Located several miles upstream of the Wilson WWTP.
2) Also used 7Q10 flow from low study done by ESB in August, 1995. Recorded flow of
5.9 cfs at US Hwy 301 just upstream of the Wilson WWTP.
3) Estimated average flow of 242 cfs based on the drainage area of the site, 242 mi2.
Downstream USGS station @ Hookerton had DA=733, QA = 770 cfs.

Contentnea Creek Modeling Efforts page 2
Model scenarios and results:
1) 7Q10 flow = 1.4 cfs
Qw =12 MGD,
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
DO=7
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 1.5 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 10.5 in Reach 4 ,
@ end of model DO=0.88
2) 7Q10 flow = 5.9 cfs
Qw = 12 MGD,
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
DO=7
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 2.5 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 12.7 in Reach 5 ,
@ end of model DO=0.66
3) 7Q10 flow = 5.9 cfs
Qw = 9.6 MGD, (avg. Qw for 95-96)
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
DO=7
Change Kd rate to 0.1 in all reaches
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 3.1 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 7.3, @ end of
model DO=1.63
Recommendation
8/5/96
Consultion with Ruth, Carla , and Juan: Review of Level B model results and 1987
QUAL2E shows that the Contentnea Creek system cannot be modeled with the current
tools in the Instream Assessment Unit. Updated reaeration data as collected by EPA and
DWQ's ESB in 1995 is comparable to data collected for the earlier model. 1987 model
results at various wasteflows bottomed out, ie DO went below 3 mg/1. It is felt that even
with some new assumptions for flow and other parameters, the results would be the same
for a updated QUAL2E. The swampy system of Contentnea Creek cannot be accurately
duplicated in the models that we have. It is recommended that if the JOC limits are given
for the Wilson WWTP that extensive instream monitoring be a condition of the Order. DO
levels that go below 3 mg/1 should be closely monitored because anoxic conditions instream
could be extremely detrimental to aquatic life.
saved on lbdata45. "wilsonjc". "wilsonkd"

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 25, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THRU:
Reginald R. Sutton
Ruth Swanek�?i
Carla Sanderson
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell
SUBJECT:
Response to Comments of Wilson -Hominy Creek WWMF 201 Facility
Plan Amendment
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the subject document for responses to
our February 25th comments. As a point of clarification, it should be noted that on page
2-21, the document states that no speculative limits were received for metals because
"current NCDWQ regulations" allow a review when the NPDES application is received.
While we are allowed to review all information on the NPDES application when
determining final NPDES limits, the reason we do not provided speculative limits for
metals is a standard operating procedure that was implemented by DWQ due to resource
constraints. All other reviewed information in the document is acceptable and we have no
additional comments.
cc: Judy Garrett
WLA File

MEMORANDUM
TO:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Ken Schuster
Judy Garrett
August 15, 1996
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell'y
THRU: Donald L. S
Ruth Swanek
Carla Sanderson
SUBJECT: Response to Instream Assessment Request
Wilson/Hominy Creek WWTP (EMC WQ # 95-21)
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
Summary and Recommendation
The Instream Assessment Unit (IAU) has reviewed the request for an instream
assessment for the Wilson WWTP. The Town is requesting a Special Order of Consent
(SOC) during improvements to the wastewater treatment plant and implementation of an
infiltration/inflow program. The existing design flow is 12 MGD. The total requested
SOC flow is 1,704,840 GPD, which includes excess inflow/infiltration (I/I) occurring at
the plant for a total SOC flow requested of approximately 14 MGD. Additional SOC limits
requested are BODS = 8 mg/1 and NH3 = 8 mg/1.
The Contentnea Creek is slow moving and characterized by low stream flows
representing a swamp like system. Review of current Level B model results, a QUAL2E
performed in 1987, and current reaeration field data collected by EPA, show that the
Contentnea Creek cannot be evaluated with a steady state one dimensional model. With the
very low slopes, low headwater flow, and the predicted velocities and reaeration rates, the
model predicted that at the requested JOC wasteflow and JOC limits, a DO minimum of 0
mg/1 would occur 1.5 miles downstream of the ou fall and would continue for 9 miles.
Given the most recently collected field data (velocities, reaeration,etc.) the IAU assumes the
results would be similar for a updated QUAL2E. The swampy system of Contentnea
Creek cannot be accurately replicated using the traditional DO modeling tools used by IAU,
and more sophisticated modeling approaches will need to be researched.
It is recommended that if the JOC limits are given for the Wilson WWTP, that
extensive instream monitoring be a condition of the Order. Instream monitoring
recommendations should be as follows:
Parameters: Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, Conductivity
Frequency: 3/wk in April thru October, 1/wk in November thru March
Locations: 1) 100 ft upstream of discharge_or at the Training Area for Heavy
Equipment Operators
2) Contentnea Creek @ SR1606
3) Contentnea Creek @ SR1622
4) Contentnea Creek @ SR1628
5) Contentnea Creek @ Hwy 222

Response to Instream Assessment for Wilson WWTP
Page 2
DO levels that go below 3 mg/1 should be closely monitored because anoxic conditions
instream could be extremely detrimental to aquatic life.
If you have any questions, please call me at 733-5083, extension 512.
cc: Dianne Wilburn
Steve Mitchell
Central Files
WLA File

Contentnea Creek Modeling Efforts
- Attempted to model a 16.7 mile segment from the Wilson WWTP to Stantonburg
WWTP. Wilson plant has a design capacity of 12 MGD, but is requesting SOC with
effluent limits for flow of additional 1.7 MGD, BOD5 and NH3. Because the segment has
low slopes ranging from 2.4 to 0.74 fpm, also a somewhat swampy area, the Level B
model is not the best tool to be used here. A QUAL2E model was done by en gineering
firm in 1985, We are planning to update the QUAL2E with chemical/physical data collected
by ESB. Until that effort can be completed we are using the Level B model to try to
determine whether the additional flow of 1.7 MGD can be added to the Wilson WWTP.
The RRO is requesting SOC limits of BOD5 =8 mg/1 or 12 mg/1, NH3 limits of 8 mg/1.
(Existing limits are 5/2/7)
Model reach input:
REACH1 = 2.3 miles (from Wilson WWTP to mouth of Hominy Swamp Crib)
slopel = 2.4 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 0.11 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 2 (guestimated)
REACH2 =6.2 miles (from Hominy Swamp trib to Black Creek trib)
slope2 = 2.1 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 0.42 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 3 (guestimated)
REACH3 = 0.5 miles (from Black Creek trib to Turner Swamp trib)
slope3 = 1.7 fpm
7QA runoff = 1.05 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
Q 10 runoff = 6 (guestimated)
REACH4 = 2.7 miles (from Turner Swamp trib to Ivy Swamp trib)
slope4 = 1.7 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 1.05 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 6 (guestimated)
REACH5 = 5 miles (from Ivy Swamp trib to Stantonsburg WWTP)
slope5 = 0.9 fpm
7Q10 runoff = 2.65 (taken from 1985 QUAL2E model report)
QA runoff = 8 (guestimated)
Headwater inputs:
7Q10 flow
1) Recent information from Hazen & Sawyer gave minimum release from Buckhorn'
Reservoir as 1.4 cfs. Located several miles upstream of the Wilson WWTP.
2) Also used 7Q10 flow from low study done by ESB in August, 1995. Recorded flow of
5.9 cfs at US Hwy 301 just upstream of the Wilson WWTP.
3) Estimated average flow of 242 cfs based on the drainage area of the site, 242 mi2.
Downstream USGS station @ Hookerton had DA=733, QA = 770 cfs.

Contentnea Creek Modeling Efforts page 2
Model scenarios and results:
1) 7Q10 flow = 1.4 cfs
Qw =12 MGD,
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
D(3=7
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 1.5 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 10.5 in Reach 4 ,
@ end of model DO=0.88
2) 7Q10 flow = 5.9 cfs
Qw =12 MGD,
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
DO=7
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 2.5 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 12.7 in Reach 5 ,
@ end of model DO=0.66
3) 7Q10 flow = 5.9 cfs
Qw = 9.6 MGD, (avg. Qw for 95-96)
BOD5=12 mg/1 (CBOD=24),
NH3 =8 mg/1 (NBOD=36),
DO=7
Change Kd rate to 0.1 in all reaches
DO Min. = 0.00 occurs @ Milept. 3.1 in Reach 2 and extends to Milept. 7.3, @ end of
model DO=1.63
Recommendation
8/5/96
Consultion with Ruth, Carla , and Juan: Review of Level B model results and 1987
QUAL2E shows that the Contentnea Creek system cannot be modeled with the current
tools in the Instream Assessment Unit. Updated reaeration data as collected by EPA and
DWQ's ESB in 1995 is comparable to data collected for the earlier model. 1987 model
results at various wasteflows bottomed out, ie DO went below 3 mg/1. It is felt that even
with some new assumptions for flow and other parameters, the results would be the same
for a updated QUAL2E. The swampy system of Contentnea Creek cannot be accurately
duplicated in the models that we have. It is recommended that if the JOC limits are given
for the Wilson WWTP that extensive instream monitoring be a condition of the Order. DO
levels that go below 3 mg/1 should be closely monitored because anoxic conditions instream
could be extremely detrimental to aquatic life.
saved on lbdata45. "wilsonjc". "wilsonkd"

****************************************************************
****************************************************************
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
WATER QUALITY SECTION
July 31, 1996
****************************************************************
****************************************************************
MEMORANDUM
To: Carla Sanderson
Technical Support Branch
Through: Ken Schuster, P.E.
Regional Supervisor
Through: Judy Garrett
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
From: Steve Mitchell
Environmental Scientist
Subject: Instream Assessment Request
Wilson\Hominy Creek WWTP
Proposed Special Order by Consent No. EMC WQ 95-21
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
Attached is a request for an instream assessment for the subject
facility. We are currently negotiating an SOC, which will
probably end up as a JOC, with the City due to noncompliance
with the effluent limits (BOD5 and NH3) contained in the NPDES
permit. The City will be implementing an infiltration/inflow
program to reduce excessive flows tributary to the system and
significant construction at the waste water facility. The
SOC\JOC will relax the BOD and ammonium limits, and the Town is
requesting that an additional 1,704,180 gpd of flow be allowed
to be connected to the WWTP. This will bring the total daily
discharge limit to 14 MGD.
If you have questions please call.

Request Form for Instream Assessment for SOC\JOC
Name of Facility: City of Wilson Subbasin: 03-02-07
NPDES Permit: NC0023906 County: Wilson
Design Flow:12.0 mgd Receiving Stream: Contentnea Creek
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Background Data :
A. Why is SOC needed? The City of Wilson has requested
an SOC due to consistent violations of BOD and NH3-N. The
City's WWTP consists of two mechanical bar screen, a manual bar
screen, two grit chambers, preaeration, three primary
clarifiers, biological phosphorus removal, three aeration
basins, five secondary clarifiers, three polishing ponds,
chlorination, post aeration, chemical feed facilities, and
aerobic digestors. The City has not managed the solids
handling program, causing excessive volumes of solids in the
polishing ponds and has just finished the removal of the
accumulated solids. In addition, several industrial upsets
have caused significant operational complications in the past
that have resulted in violations of the discharge effluent
limitations.
B. History of SOC requests: City submitted a SOC request
9/9/95. SOC was eventually returned due to lack of substantial
improvements to the facility.
1. Monthly Average waste flow prior to any SOC?
Period: 9306-9405 Avg: 7.9777 mgd
9406-9505 7.4127 mgd
9506-9605 9.5974 mqd
2. Previously approved SOCs:
Date: flow: 0 mgd
Total of previously approved SOC flow: 0 mgd
3. Flows lost from plant -flow: 0 mgd
4. Flows allocated but not yet tributary to the plant:
(P-4 approvals) None at this time.
5. Current SOC request flow: 1,704,180 gpd
6. Total Plant flow post-SOC flow: 13.704 mqd (14.0 MGD)
7. Is this an accurate flow balance for plant?
The flow meters within the waste water facility are
calibrated quarterly. Therefore these flow values
are believed to be accurate.
Instream Assessment Request

i
City of Wilson
Page 2
C. A copy of the data is attached for your review
(9306-9605).
CURRENT SOC REQUEST:
A. Request is for domestic or industrial waste? If it is
a combination, please specify percentages.
1,704,180 gpd 100 %
B. What type of industry? Composition of wastewater
unknown.
C. The region proposes the following SOC\JOC limits:
Monthly Avg. Weekly Max
BOD5 8 mg/1 12.0 mg/1
NH3 8 mg/1
Flow 12.0 mgd until completion of
improvements then 14.0 mgd
Toxicity: Chronic testing performed
quarterly at 90%.
D. What is the basis for these limits?
These are limits which the Raleigh Regional Office
staff and the City believe the WWTP can meet in the
interim, based on historical operation of the WWTP and the
necessary interruption of the treatment process required
during modification to the WWTP.

4 •
COUNTY OF WILSON
IN THE MATTER OF
NORTH CAROLINA
NPDES PERMIT
NO. NC0023906
HELD BY
THE CITY OF WILSON
1
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT
EMC WQ NO. 95-21
Pursuant to provisions of North Carolina General Statutes (G.S.) 143-215.2 and
143-215.67, this Special Order by Consent is entered into by the City of Wilson, hereinafter
referred to as the City, and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, an
agency of the State of North Carolina created by G.S. 143E-282, and hereinafter referred to as
the Commission:
1. The City and the Commission hereby stipulate the following:
(a) That the City holds North Carolina NPDES Permit No. NC0023906 for operation
of an existing wastewater treatment works and for making an outlet therefrom for
treated wastewater to Contentnea Creek, Class C-NSW waters of this State in the
Neuse River Basin, but is unable to consistently comply with the final effluent
limitations for BOD5 and NH3-N as set forth in the Permit. Compliance will require
preparation of plans and specifications for construction and operation of additional
treatment works.
(b) That noncompliance with final effluent limitations constitutes causing and
contributing to pollution of the waters of this State named above, and the City is within
the jurisdiction of the Commission as set forth in G.S. Chapter 143, Article 21.
(c) That the City desires to cause or allow the discharge of 1,704,180 gpd of additional
wastewater to the treatment works, and that the discharge of such additional
wastewater will not result in any significant degradation of the quality of any waters.
(d) That the City has secured financing or intends to issue revenue bonds for
financing of the planning and construction of treatment works which, when constructed
and operated, will be sufficient to adequately treat the wastewater presently being
discharged and the additional wastewater desired to be discharged, to the extent that
the City will be able to comply with final permit effluent limitations.
(e) Since this Special Order is by Consent, neither party will file a petition for a
contested case or for judicial review concerning its terms.

2
2. The City, desiring to comply with the permit identified in paragraph 1(a) above, hereby
agrees to do the following:
a) The City agrees to pay the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources the sum of $12,300.00 in full settlement of all violations of the
NPDES Permit prior to July 1, 1996. This includes Civil Penalties assessed for
violations of effluent limits in enforcement File No. LV 95-09 and $5089.46 for
violations of effluent limits that occurred after enforcement File No. LV 95-09.
(b) Provide the Raleigh Regional Office of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ), located at 3800 Barrett Drive, Raleigh, N.C. 27609, with a list of all additions
of flow under the City's Special Orders, and update this list each time flow is added to
the system.
(c) Undertake the following activities in accordance with the indicated time schedule:
1) On or before September 1, 1996, submit to the DWQ Raleigh Regional
Office, the City's proposed budgets for identification and reduction of
inflow/infiltration for the years covered by the Special Order by Consent.
2) Continue to implement the inflow/infiltration plan as submitted with the
City's application for this Order and submit annual progress reports beginning
January 1, 1997 and continuing each January 1 thereafter for the years
covered by the Special Order by Consent indicating the amount of work
completed, estimated gallons per day of inflow/infiltration eliminated and funds
expended.
3) On or before March 1, 1997, complete construction of the preliminary
treatment facilities.
4) On or before February 28, 1997, submit plans and specifications to DWQ,
Raleigh Regional Office for the construction of the following improvements
(hereinafter referred to as the "Improvements"):
i) Final Clarifier Improvements
ii) Effluent (Tertiary) Filters
iii) Plant Expansion to 14 MGD
iv) Facility for Total Nitrogen Removal
v) Sludge Removal Process Modification
5) On or before November 1, 1997, begin construction of the Improvements
after receiving DWQ approval of the plans and specifications and Authorization
To Construct.
6) On or before November 1, 1999 complete construction of the
Improvements.

3
7) On or before March 1, 2000, attain compliance with all final effluent
limitations contained in the NPDES Permit.
(d) Comply with all terms and conditions of the permit except those effluent limitations
identified in paragraph 1(a) above. See Attachments A & B for all monitoring
requirements and effluent limitations. The permittee may also be required to monitor
for other parameters as deemed necessary by the Director in future permits or
administrative letters.
(e) During the time in which this Special Order by Consent is effective, comply with
the interim effluent limitations contained in Attachments A and B. The following
reflects only the limitations that have been modified from NPDES requirements by this
Order:
Permit Limits Modified Limits (SOC)
Parameters Unit Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg, Monthly Avg.Weekly Avg.,
Winter/Summer
NH3-N mg/I 2/4
BODE mg/I 5/10 7.5/15
8
8 12
(f) No later than fourteen (14) calendar days after any date identified for
accomplishment of any activity listed in 2(b) above. submit to the Director of DWQ
written notice of compliance or noncompliance therewith. In the case of
noncompliance, the notice shall include a statement of the reason(s) for
noncompliance, remedial action(s) taken. and a statement identifying the extent to
which subsequent dates or times for accomplishment of listed activities may be
affected.
(g) Enforce the North Carolina State Building Code as it applies to Water
Conservation (Volume II -Plumbing, Chapter IX 901 General Requirements -Materials,
901.2 Water Conservation, and Table 901.22-Maximum Allowable Usage For
Plumbing Fixtures).
(h) Implement the pretreatment program as approved by the Director, including the
enforcement of both categorical pretreatment standards and local limits.
(i) The City will use forty percent (40%) of the revenue received from additional
one-half percent (1/2%) sales and use taxes levied during the first five fiscal years in
which the additional taxes are in effect and thirty percent (30%) of the revenue
received from these taxes in the second five fiscal years in which the taxes
are in effect for water and sewer capital outlay purposes or to retire any indebtedness
incurred for these purposes.
3. The City agrees that unless excused under paragraph 4, the City will pay the Director
of DWQ, by check payable to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, stipulated penalties according to the following schedule for failure to meet
the deadlines set out in paragraphs 2(c),(d),(e),and (f) or failure to attain compliance with the

4
effluent limitations/monitoring requirements contained in Attachment A.
Failure to meet a schedule date
Failure to maintain compliance with
any modified limit contained in the SOC.
Failure to achieve compliance with
limits at final compliance deadline
(March 1, 2000)
Monitoring frequency violations
Failure to submit progress reports
$100/day for the first 7
days; $500/day
thereafter
$1000/violation
$ 13,000 (single penalty)
$100 per omitted value
per parameter
$50/day for the first 7
days; $250/day thereafter
4. The City and the Commission agree that the stipulated penalties are not due if the City
satisfies the DEM that noncompliance was caused solely by:
a. An act of God;
b. An act of war;
c. An intentional act or omission of a third party
but this defense shall not be available if the act or
omission is that of an employee or agent of the defendant or
if the act or omission occurs in connection with a
contractual relationship with the permittee;
d. An extraordinary event beyond the permittee's control.
Contractor delays or failure to obtain funding will not be
considered as events beyond the permittees control; or
e. Any combination of the above causes.
Failure within thirty (30) days of receipt of written demand to pay the penalties, or challenge
them by a contested case petition pursuant to G.S. 150B-23, will be grounds for a collection
action , which the Attorney General is hereby authorized to initiate. The only issue in such an
action will be whether the thirty (30) days has elapsed.
5. In accordance with the provisions of G.S. 143-215.67(b) the Commission allows the City to
accept the additional waste specified below to its waste disposal system:
1,704,180 gpd of additional wastewater. The nature of the additional
flows is such that the waste characteristics do not exceed those
generally associated with domestic waste or are pretreated to domestic

5
strengths. Waste of greater than normal domestic strength may be
accepted if the parameter(s) that exceed normal domestic strength
wastewater are not those for which interim limitations have been
developed and it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
Director that the addition waste will not adversely affect the treatment
efficiency of the treatment system for any modified parameter or result
in the violation of any other permit limitation. All new and proposed
industrial waste tributary to the system must be controlled using all
needed mechanisms including but not limited to adoption and
implementation of industrial waste control and pretreatment
ordinances. No wastewater can be accepted which will add toxic
pollutants in quantities not generally associated with domestic
wastewater characteristics, unless the acceptance of the additional
wastewater can be supported through appropriate analyses acceptable
to the Director.
6. This Special Order by Consent and any terms, conditions and interim effluent limitations
contained herein, hereby supersede any and all previous Special Orders and Enforcement
Compliance Schedule Letters, terms, conditions, and limitations contained therein issued in
connection with NPDES Permit No. NC0023906. In the event of a NPDES Permit modification
or renewal, any effluent limitations or monitoring requirements contained therein shall
supersede those in Attachment A and B of this Special Order by Consent, except as modified
and contained in paragraph 2 (e) above.
7. Any Violation of terms of this Special Order by Consent, including paragraphs 2(c) and 2(f)
above and Attachments A and B shall terminate paragraph 5 of this Order and any authorized
additional waste not previously connected to the system shall not thereafter be connected until
the necessary sewerage system improvements have been completed and placed in operation.
8. Noncompliance with the terms of this Special Order by Consent is subject to enforcement
action in addition to the above stipulated penalties, including injunctive relief pursuant to G.S.
143-215.6C.
9. The permittee, upon signing the Special Order by Consent, will be expected to comply with
all schedule dates, terms, and conditions of this document.
10. This Special Order by Consent shall expire June 1, 2000.

.X ' Y
6
For the City of Wilson:
C. Bruce Rose, Mayor
Date
For the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission
Chair of the Commission
Date

ATTACHMENT A
Page 1 of 2
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim
During the period beginning on the effective date of the Order and lasting until March 1, 2000, the
permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number(s) - 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Other Units (Specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avq.
Flow 12.00 MGD
BOD, 5Day, 20°C ** & .2- 7 mg/1 I• .0 mg/1
Total Suspended Residue ** 30.0 mg/1 45.0 mg/1
NH as N 8.0 mg/1
Dissolved Oxygen (minimum) ***
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0/100 ml 400/100 ml
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus ****
Chronic Toxicity *****
Sample locations:
NCSR 1606.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three time
per week during June, July, August, and September and once per week during the remaining months of
the year.
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
*** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 7.0 mg/l.
**** Compliance shall be based upon a quarterly average of weekly samples.
***** See Part III, Condition F, Chronic Toxicity P/F at 90%.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and
shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Frequency Type Location
Continuous Recording I or E
Daily CompositeE,I,U,D
Daily Composite I,E
Daily Composite E
Daily Grab E,U,D
Daily Grab E,U,D
Daily Grab E
Daily Grab E,U,D
Monthly Composite E
Monthly Composite E
Quarterly Composite E
E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at
Old Blackcreek Road, D-Downstream at

EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim
During the period beginning on the effective date of the Order and
permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number(s)
Effluent Characteristics
Conductivity
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
Lead
Cyanide
Mercury
Discharge Limitations
Other Units (Specify)
Daily Maximum
27.0 ug/1
5.3 ug/1
0.013 ug/1
lasting until March 1, 2000, the
- 001. (Continued)
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Frequency Type Location
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Weekly
Weekly
Weekly
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
U,D
E
E
E
E
E
E

ATTACHMENT B
City of Wilson
Toxicity Testing Requirement
The effluent discharge should 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 *February, 1987) or
subsequent versions.
The target 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 City of Wilson shall perform quarterly monitoring using this
procedure to establish compliance with the toxicity requirements. The first test will be
performed within thirty days from the effective date of this Order. 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 Order will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the
appropriate parameter code. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the
following address:
Technical Services Branch
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
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 must be measured and reported if employed for disinfection of
the waste stream.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving
stream, this Order may be reopened and modified to include alternate monitoring
requirements.
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. Failure to submit suitable test results will constitute a
violation of Order conditions.

Vpr
rauL-t e_4680,1
7dw )eaVi-€ - 7dZPIti97e 7�,0G
r7/1/q6
- Wer51- kot Id lt,ti spa i--�
to; ffr&'Y2 g6(- - Co 144.4fru.a C�
YiniNg Lio or g Bob
i-13/(1
ct_d KIA601_
tratlit ,5-4044- to f•-)o-a`Lryl
Stp aJd;Pk.3) pti-?AJ IA, op it 1.(
atml-; kuAko u pkb

9c 9, 5-9 7.11 Y 6 .tie
Soc //7'oY/8o
1l.50/ 5 o
i
fir = — ($-) /o (w)
t13 z ()
-- /z
.Do - .7
n4,ddr 7
(,1.4 CC-
,U3
461
6/9s- t' .r/%
;oa C✓�.r✓
/ a $I F sitz
1Z (.lc
Alit 3 - g ,v/G%
G) ,: 8 o, o ,ucia
= 34 lloo3?5)
N(f 3 Jkui, fi. - 44.11"`%&
(pit fa c.)
S. ,4 b Lxi rP o. 3 75--A4 (�i 36 3 v
✓l — 4,5`) 126130
O. 0 (D /50 6
g/1.0 & (1° e.'5 zv ((etc(

nu0dw
v11V1a,14yol
' 15:10 uN
A71vt1{rv�
h
baerul
d1MM jl
d11nM`
Valb/MoOM
tb
Gam'
d-1MM Th. Aurae
"1•►1H
rhocvs
DC Nncu-
d1NM Vasa►FPw
OCIQSN V01frvLC
(be0)
d 1MM v113yna
Marrom
BA7D AbNVMa
ygAIV
T14j Mir*
• •�BWNV
T11M ONG
—v-6
n)•you.(vn3! yMn1V;a
'LO1Mora -ya fIW ShIh71M
021
a vo4 1111U
GT10�}.tlj
9 6 )
Gi13vilt a -aar/ �q/0OS. .
t 3ul nzla4�' iNp - I S
t- fiery UQ s-xs 44001 - IL
14) {. `'b'ar.MoC 14,3 1 41> ). kL?$0.9.43 LIT
SAD II•I
L� �•g
CV 9%
r(-'WiQ
Fxn'j
-21101,3C3-6

ATTACHMENT A
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim
Page 1 of 3
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
(April 1 - October 31)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the Order and
permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number(s)
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Other Units (Specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg.
Flow 12.00 MGD
BOD, 5Day, 20°C ** 8.0 mg/1 12.0 mg/1
Total Suspended Residue ** 30.0 mg/1 45.0 mg/1
NH as N 8.0 mg/1
Digsolved Oxygen (minimum)
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0/100 ml 400/100 ml
* * *
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus ****
Conductivity
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
Lead
Cyanide
Mercury
Daily Maximum
27.0 ug/1
5.3 ug/1
0.013 ug/1
Measurement
Frequency
Continuous
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Weekly
Weekly
Weekly
lasting until March 1, 2000, the
- 001. Such discharges shall be
Monitoring Requirements
Sample *Sample
Type Location
Recording I or E
CompositeE,I,U,D
Composite I,E
Composite E
Grab E,U,D,X
Grab E,U,D
Grab E
Grab E,U,D,X
Composite E
Composite E
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
U,D,X
E
E
E
E
E
E

ct
ATTACHMENT A
Page 2 of 3
Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - Interim (November 1 - March 31)
During the period beginning on the effective date of the Order and
permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall serial number(s)
limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations
Other Units (Specify)
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg.
Flow 12.00 MGD
BOD, 5Day, 20°C ** 12.0 mg/1 18.0 mg/1
Total Suspended Residue ** 30.0 mg/1 45.0 mg/1
NH as N 8.0 mg/1
Digsolved Oxygen (minimum)
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0/100 ml 400/100 ml
***
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO2 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus ****
Chronic Toxicity *****
Conductivity
Oil and Grease
Copper
Zinc
Lead
Cyanide
Mercury
Daily Maximum
27.0 ug/1
5.3 ug/1
0.013 ug/1
lasting until March 1, 2000, the
- 001. Such discharges shall be
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Frequency Type Location
Continuous Recording I or E
Daily CompositeE,I,U,D
Daily Composite I,E
Daily Composite E
Daily Grab E,U,D,X
Daily Grab E,U,D
Daily Grab E
Daily Grab E,U,D,X
Monthly Composite E
Monthly Composite E
Quarterly Composite E
Daily
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Weekly
Weekly
Weekly
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
U,D,X
E
E
E
E
E
E
0

Page 3 of 3
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at Old Blackcreek Road, D-Downstream
at SR 1606.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. 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.
X Additional instream monitoring consisting of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and Conductivity
shall be performed at 100 feet upstream of the discharge and downstream at SR 1606, SR 1622, SR
1628, and Hwy 222 three (3) times per week April thru October and once (1) per week November thru
March.
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed
15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
*** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 7.0 mg/1.
**** Compliance shall be based upon a quarterly average of weekly samples.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and
shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.