The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0063096_Technical Correction_20050720NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNINO COVER SHEET NC0063096 Holly Springs 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 Technical Correction Instream Assessment (67b) Speculative Limits Environmental Assessment (EA) Document Date: July 20, 2005 This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any content on the reYerse side ofwA7 —fir,- — Q - 1 Mr. Richard G. Sears Town of Holly Springs P. O. Box 8 Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540 Dear Mr. Sears: Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director Division of Water Quality July 20, 2005 Subject: Town of Holly Springs NPDES Permit No. NC0063096 Utley Creek WWTP Wake County The permit for the Utley Creek WWTP that was issued on February 25, 2005 contained an error in the effluent and monitoring requirements for the flow of 2.4 MGD. The total phosphorus load corresponding to 2.4 MGD is 3,653 lbs/yr. The permit listed a total phosphorus load of 2,664 lb/yr which is the load corresponding to a flow of 1.75 MGD. The effluent page for 2.4 MGD is included with the correction, please replace this page in your permit. If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699- 6714). Unless such demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding. Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required. If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Teresa Rodriguez at telephone number (919) 733-5083, extension 553. Sincerely, cc: Central Files USEPA Region 4 Raleigh Regional Office/Water Quality Section Leo Green, P.E. Construction Grants and Loans Section EAST NPDES Unit Files No t hCarolina Aaturallj North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone (919) 733-5083 Customer Service Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX (919) 733-0719 1-877-623-6748 An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper P. Permit NC0063096 A. (3) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS (2.4 MGD) Beginning upon expansion beyond 1.75 MGD and lasting until expiration or until discharge from the facility is removed from Utley Creek, the Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below: ,. _.. .. ...: .. .. it ..:. •.. T� rx- Kl?C °�.*ZL A'c J . 4�:%6r,�°c,.-�wid+t �7:"�t+ ..� a G� �S. �,e" t ..F L "f. .' y,+� YI "i�WA re ".� ... '... F .. - .i.Y''`'a<x 7 : .Y: t�^ ai.,...� �' a '. � 4 Ty�� .ex�,a wtY�.3 7 Rt- �'i � �J.t iiF .� .;t�• "� «.e v r `�.i. -et, t p. ,- 'fir rw�c�; 9� x�. A'!•r .v:: p J."��.- r`*.: i'. �: .�". i:�s-7"�.��.t'yS.. r. `°"'',, r.i.,.:. S ��n, �?�� 0 E4 '. O , Gi. f r• ALyS�". _{ +.i')-!17 f ij'� �{�f.. i! `Y. r r ^s se M�1\ i7�j' r 13 " .y ,�b..ciC•Ca.2�S�.t x s t•. •' v ,•af ^di a w.1FlJ t� i �a'i.:Y-•:i 1�4�....� dt .ls N�Ty '"s. 1?:' .� i :c .,h5 �} ice` v'a t 1 � „�..:* ds ,cFiEA.t' Ai�'' r� i y g .. Q. A. t53Ti �R •��j -. r, Y ; .,p Y .,..r S i �% •C+ a �1 - = 'Y ((,t,. 1 "i �Yi sg,.v �. M1�tc`�k. .. i7 �«d��Y .L`w..4� v %e...� .. S 5•i '"t�� „i= 'Y�'� y e �gV' 'i a� I��i:..._.... f.�+riY�Yx+� ee •&• i "SSW_ ..- ei '.'��.' .� - liar i iY L LXi •l: ti i. in �?Y�£i�sc.i. f s ��y -Y--V. �, �� ' Sam ,1e �, �� fir. k i pie;. ! j } y .4:. . 'j a/YV '''l Yi�i'ix .._ � :..�sL _rem; ,,]� '1r._.. ileac• ...� � J f slx. t !(� � ��":i1. !�Grti ia.� Flow 2.4 MGD Continuous RecordingInfluent or Effluent BOD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 — October 31)2 5.0 mg/L 7.5 mg/L Daily Composite Influent and Effluent BOD, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 - March 31)2 10.0 mg/L 15.0 mg/L Daily Composite Influent and Effluent Total Suspended Solids2 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Daily Composite Influent and Effluent NH3 as N (April 1— October 31) 1.0 mg/L 3.0 mg/L Daily Composite Effluent NH3 as N (November 1 — March 31) 2.0 mg/L 6.0 mg/L Daily Composite Effluent Dissolved Oxygen3 Daily Grab Effluent pH4 Daily Grab Effluent Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200/100 ml 400/100 ml Daily Grab Effluent Temperature 0C Daily Grab Effluent Total Residual Chlorines 17 µg/ L Daily Grab Effluent Conductivity Daily Grab Effluent Total Nitrogen (TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N)6 43,800 lbs/yr Weekly Composite Effluent Total Phosphorus? 3,653 lbs/yr Weekly Composite Effluent Total Copper Monthly Composite Effluent Chronic Toxicity$ Quarterly Composite Effluent Notes: 1. See A. (4) for instream monitoring requirements. 2. The monthly average effluent GODS and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal). 3. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentrations shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L. 4. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units. 5. Total Residual Chlorine shall be monitored only if chlorine is added to the treatment process. 6. For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NO3-N + NO2-N, where TN is total nitrogen, TKN is total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and NO3-N and NO2-N are nitrate and nitrite nitrogen, respectively. TN load is the mass quantity of total nitrogen discharged in a given time period. See condition A. (5) of this permit. 7. See condition A. (5) of this permit. 8. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 90% with testing in February, May, August and November (see A. (6)). There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. Modified 7/2005 SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING PERMITTED FLOWS TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS 6/30/05 UTLEY CREEK WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT Date Entered Last Updated Development Phase Date Mailed to State Date Received Permit Permit No. Approval Permit Flow Lots C.O.'s % Buildout H.S. Permitted Flow Not Tributary ("Paper Flow") DENR's "Permitted Flow Not Tributary" 3/28/2000 3/15/2005 Trotters Bluff 2 4/22/1999 W00018671 4/19/2000 5,610 22 25% 4.208 4,488 Sunset North Condos WQ0017010 6/22/1999 1,530 Holly Glen Town Homes WQ0017344 9/14/1999 2,359 3/28/2000 Holly Springs Commercial Center 9/27/1999 WQ0017412 9/22/1999 - -3,800 �- - 50% 1,900 1,900 4/20/2000 Salem Creek Business Park 3/15/2000 4/27/2000 WQ0018296 4/20/2000 18,000 10 10% 16,200 16,200 4/3/2001 Avant Acres, Townhomes at 4/11/2001 5/2/2001 WQ0019921 6/8/2001 7,905 31 50% 3.953 3.955 6/21/2001 3/15/2005 Holly Glen Subdivision 8 7/20/2001 WQ0020320 9242001 13,005 51 80% 2,601 4,552 Holly Glen Subdivision 9A 6/28/2002 7/26/2002 W00021550 7/22/2002 8,670 34 0% 8,670 8.670 3/15/2005 Windcrest 1,246 8/2/2002 9/4/2002 W00021673 8/30/2002 53,040 208 80% 10,608 34,476 8/192002 3/15/2005 Autumn Park Subdivision 8/82002 9/24/2002 WQ0021711 9202002 49,470 194 41% 29.187 36,113 8/19/2002 8/13/2004 Autumn Park Townhomes Public 8/8/2002 9242002 W00021712 9/20/2002 12.750 50 20% 10,200 10,200 3/27/2003 Windcrest 5 1222003 2/2612003 W00022285 2/20/2003 15,045 59 0% 15,045 - 3/26/2003 3/152005 Braxton Village 5 & 6 1/24/2003 3/24/2003 WQ0022308 3/19/2003 31,875 1 5 29% 22,631 28,688 3/27/2003 Wilco Hess Outten 2/72003 4/152003 W00022365 4/8/2003 887 1 887 0 3/26/2003 Brackenridge Offsite Sanitary Sewer 2/7/2003 3/242003 WQ0022401 3/19/2003 1,020 4 1,020 1,020 Sunset Ridge Phase 5A WQ0022403 3/12/2003 2,249 8/20/2003 3/15/2005 Newbury Park 6/27/2003 6/13/2003 WQ0022860 7/242003 23,040 32% 15,667 23.040 3/15/2005 9 8/19/2003 9/11/2003 WQ0023031 9/5/2003 13 280 52 10% 11,934 13,260 10/82003 3/15/2005 Sunset Oaks 1 10/3/2003 11/13/2003 WQ0023242 11/42203 23,970 94 60% 9,588 20,375 11/14/2003 The Moors at Holly Ridge 10/24/2003 12/3/2003 W00023311 11/26/2003 7,395 29 0% 7,395 - 12/12/2003 11oUy Springs High School 12/12/2003 1/5/2004 W00023407 12/314003 25t,500 0% 25.500 25,500 12/182003 3/15/2005 Hunter Glade Subdivision 12/18/2003 1/8/2004 WQ0023451 1/72004 11,520 29 8% 10,598 11.520 Cobble Ridge Phase 2 W00023590 3/82004 2,805 8ibteway Extension WQ0023662 3/25/2004 3,060 Sunset Ridge North 5C 3/15/2004 4/27/2004 W00023735 4/14/2004 7,140 28 7,140 7,140 2/24/2004 Sunset Lake Road Shopping Center 2/19/2004 4/19/2004 W00023758 4/12/2004 9,857 0% 9,857 9,857 4/23/2004 3/15/2005 Westcott Subdivision 5 4/23/2004 6/17/2004 W00023857 6/10/2004 10,200 40 40% 6,120 10.200 522003 10/1/2004 Avant Glen 2 5/10/2004 10/1/2004 W00023984 9/27/2004 3,570 14 0% 3,570 3,570 5/24/2004 Windcrest 4 5/21/2004 6/17/2004 WQ0023970 6/2/2004 9,180 36 0% 9.180 9,180 Sunset Oaks 10A 6/16/2004 7/16/2004 WQ0024062 7/8/2004 9,690 38 32% 6,589 9,690 7/16/2004 Sunset Ridge North 5B 6/16/2004 7/16/2004 WQ0024064 7/122004 8,925 35 8,925 8.925 ParksldeYlUage Phase 2 8/162004 7/16/2004 WQ0024066 7/12/2004 5,610 22 09'. 5,610 5,610 8/13/2004 10/1/2004 Bridgewater 7/16/2004 9/20/2004 WQ0024188 48,920 184 46,920 46,920 8/132004 9/102004 rho Arbor EV Holly Glen 7/16/2004 9/10/2004 WQ0024189 9/92004 510 2 510 510 8/132004 9/15/2004 Windcrest 3 8/102004 9/142004 WQ0024220 9/92004 23,970 94 0% 23,970 23,970 8/13/2004 9/15/2004 Scot's Laurel 8/122004 9/14/2004 W000242333 9/13/2004 36,720 144 0% 36,720 36,720 8/13/2004 8/21/2004 Sunset Ridge North 7A 8/122004 9212004 W00024234 9/172004 12,240 34 12,240 8,670 10/1/2004 10/1/2004 Braxton Village 7 & 8 9/7/2004 9/28/2004 W00024339 9/202004 22,695 89 - 22,695 22,695 11/8/2004 11/8/2004 Sunset Oaks 5A 10/14/2004 11/5/2004 WQ0024485 10/26/2004 5,355 21 0% 5,355 5,355 11/30/2004 Carrington Estates (Formerly Sunse Bluffs) 10/26/2004 11/29/2004 W00024552 11/182004 14,025 55 0% 14,025 14,025 1/21/2005 1/21/2005 Savannah East Townhomes 1/21/2005 12.240 48 0% 12,240 2/24/2005 2/24/2005 Wescott 6 2/242005 WQ0024939 3/8/2005 10,455 41 0% 10,455 10.455 562.314 1.918 449,913 489,452 A WWTP Permitted Capacity 1,750,000 9Pd B Average Measured Flow (this month to date) 921,200 gpd C Atlocated (paper) Flow 449,913 gpd D (A•B-C=) Available Flow 378,887 _ gpd WW005,050221KOW5630.051Pormitted Flows condensed 1 Michael F. Easley, Govemor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director Division of Water Quality April 26, 2005 Mr. Richard G. Sears, Mayor Town of Holly Springs P.O. Box 8 Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540 Subject: NPDES Permit Adjudication — Steps Forward Permit NC0063096 Town of Holly Springs Wake County Dear Mayor Sears: Your consultants and members of my staff have met several times in the past few months to discuss the future of Holly Springs' wastewater needs and the ultimate elimination of the town's discharge to Utley Creek. I appreciate the in-depth analysis of future flows that was shared with the Division. Joining the Western Wake group in a collective effort to address the problems associated with wastewater treatment and disposal is an expensive and complex undertaking. This Division endorses this Regional concept and believes that the town will benefit from the cooperative effort between the multiple stakeholders. The Division believes that it is in Holly Springs' best interest to keep the phased flow of 1.75 MGD in its recently issued permit. Your consultants have advised that this represents the hydraulic capacity of the existing wastewater treatment plant. As long as this page remains in the permit, it gives the town flexibility to increase flows to 1.75 MGD while maintaining the option to enter a Special Order by Consent (SOC) for other permit parameters. In the event actual flows to the plant exceed 1.5 MGD prior to completion of the town's upgraded and expanded facility, then the plant should be able to meet permit limits for all parameters with the exception of nutrients (total nitrogen and total phosphorus). If this situation occurs, the Division would be willing to enter into a SOC to allow flows up to 1.75 MGD without the need to comply with the specific limits for nutrients contained in the permit. In terms of the continued permitting of sewer extensions, the Town of Holly Springs, through their consultants, presented some compelling evidence that additional flow reductions should be allowed. The town's consultants presented information based on population projections and past water use records that indicate that the available volume of flow should be sufficient to sustain the projected growth of the town until such time as the proposed wastewater treatment facility is constructed and placed into operation. It is further understood that Holly Springs' expanded wastewater treatment facility may be operational prior to the completion of the Western Wake Regional System. In the event this situation occurs and the Holly Springs' discharge to Utley Creek exceeds the 1.75 MGD permit limit, the Division will again consider a SOC or appropriate permit conditions to allow the continued, but greater, discharge to Utley Creek. Please understand that issuance of the above SOC's, if required, will not in any way relieve the town of its obligation to operate its wastewater treatment facilities responsibly and in accordance with the appropriate standards and procedures established by this Division. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above information, please contact Dave Goodrich at (919)-733-5083, extension 517. Sincerely, Alan W. Klimek, P.E. cc: Eastern NPDES Unit N°oYtltCarol Raleigh Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section b atura!! North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center 512 N. Salisbury St. Phone (919) 733-7015 Customer Service Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX (919) 733-2496 1-877-623-6748 An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper Holly Springs WWTP UTLEY CREEK WWTP DESIGN SUMMARY BERATING TO 1.75 MGD GENERAL AVERAGE DESIGN FLOW PEAK FACTOR PEAK DESIGN FLOW PTU AVG FLOW OD AVG FLOW PTU Peak Flow OD Peak Flow rater data in the yellow cells only Criteria: Results 1,750,000 GPD 1,215 GPM 2.5. 4,375,000 GPD 3,038 GPM 375,000. GPD 260 GPM 1,375,000 GPD 955 GPM 937,500 GPD 3,437,500 GPD ANAEROBIC ZONE (single basin) LENGTH 104.0 WIDTH .24.0 DEPTH 7.67, note: inv in 316.0, bottom=308.33 VOLUME, FT3 19,144. VOLUME, GAL 143,200 (Less than 156,000, limited to Inv. In elev) MIXER POWER 20.0: HP 1.04 HP/Kcf Detention, Qa Detention, Qp PTU STRUCTURE 1.96 Hours 0.79 Hours SWD ;16 0': FT Diameter, ft Area, sf Vol CF Vol gallons TOTAL AREA 100.00. 7,854.0 SF 125,663.7 939,965 DIGESTER 34.00 907.9 SF 14,526.7 108,660 OUTER AREA 6,946.1 SF 111,137.0 831,305 Degrees % Vol Volume CF Gallons AB-1 136.0 37.8% 41,985 314,048 AB-2 136.0 ; 37.8% 41,985 314,048 SH :.32.0 8.9% 9,879 73,894 missing: degrees CLARIFIERS 56.0 15.6% 17,288 129,314 360.0 minimum air required for mixing use 15.0 cfm/1000cf air required Digester 218 SCFM SH 148 SCFM AB-1 630 SCFM AB-2 630 SCFM 1,626 SCFM rated blower capacity , each Blowers On 2.0 ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS 820 SCFM 1,640.0 SCFM Davis -Martin -Powell & Associates W WTP.DESIGN.xts 1 of 3 t Holly Springs WWTP NOTE: AB-1 will be used to treat 0.375 MGD of the total flow, as will the clarifier section the remainining compartments will be used for sludge digestion/storage. Typical BOD in 322 mg/L BOD Loading 4,700 Lb/day volume (total) 1,604,340 gallons (AN, OD, AB-1) Loading 21.9 Ib/1000 CF 20.0 Recommended Oxidation Ditch (Carrousel) volume 1,147,092 gallons (total, take off plans) Average Qa 1,375,000 GPD • Detention, Qa 20.0 hours BOD loading 3,693 lb/day Loading 24.1 Ib/1000 CF l 0 -' PTU, Only AB-1 Volume Average Qa Detention BOD loading Loading 314,048 gallons 375,000 GPD 20.1 hours 1,007 lb/day 24.0 Ib/1000 CF/k / D — 5 FINAL CLARIFIER #1, #2 (IN PTU) Quantity 2.0 Each Surface Area 540 SF Each Surface Area 1,080 SF Total Weir Length 92.0 Ft, Total SWD 16 0' ft Eff Volume 129,314 gallons Qa Qp 375,000 GPD 937,500 GPD OVERFLOW RATE AVERAGE 347 gpd/sf PEAK 868 gpd/sf (assume 23' each, double sided) check weir loading AVERAGE 4,076 gpd/sf PEAK 10,190 gpd sf 1' check solids loading rate MLSS 3,500`, mg/L AVERAGE 10,946 0.42 Ib/sf/hr PEAK 27,366 1.06 Ib/sf/hr Clarifier Detention at Qa Detention time 497 minute, or FINAL CLARIFIER #3 Qa 1,375,000 Qp 3,437,500 Units 1.00 ea weir dia 70.00 ft area 3,848.4 sf weir length 219.9 ft SWD 15.0 ft Eff Volume 431,796 gallons Recommended 400.0r 36,800 gpd max 1,000.0` 92,000 gpd max 10,000.0.. gpd/LF (ref only) (in aeration zone) 0.6 -1.25 Ib/sf/hr 1.8 Ib/sf/hr 8.3 hours Davis -Martin -Powell& Associates W WTP-DESIGN.xls 2 of 3 Holly Springs WWTP OVERFLOW RATE AVERAGE 357 gpd/sf PEAK 893 gpd/sf check weir loading AVERAGE 6,253 gpd/sf PEAK 15,631 gpd/sf check solids loading rate MLSS 3,500 mg/L AVERAGE 40,136 0.43 Ib/sf/hr PEAK 100,341 1.09 Ib/sf/hr Clarifier Detention at Qa Detention time 452 minute, or Recommended 400.0 1,539,379 gpd max 1,000.0 3,848,448 gpd max 10,000.0. gpd/LF (ref only) (in aeration zone) 0.6 -1.25 Ib/sf/hr 1.8 lb/sf/hr 7.5 hours NOTE: clarifer flow rates and detentions are very similar, operation should be consistent EFFLUENT FILTERS Treat entire WWTP Flow Qa 1,215.3 gpm 1,750,000 GPD Qp 3,038.2 gpm 4,375,000 GPD Davco Filters Surface Area Typical Loading Typical Flow Aqua -Aerobic Filters Surface Area Typical Loading Typical Flow Total Typical Qa At revised Qa At revised Qp 173.0 ' SF gpm/SF 346.0 gpm 60..0 SF 0` , gpm/SF 720.0 gpm 1,535,040 GPD 2.28 gpm/SF 5.70 gpm/SF note from plans 498,240 GPD note from plans, 9' x40' 1,036,800 GPD NOTE: proposed filter loading is higher that normal, but excessively high. More frequent backwash will be necessary to maintain performance. DISINFECTION Trojan UV 3000, single channel NOTE: Manufacturer advised system is adequate if lamps are replaced at least every 18 months Davis -Martin -Powell & Associates W WTP-DESIGN.xIs 3 of 3 THE TOWN OF IloDy Springs P.O. Box 8 128 S. Main Street Holly Springs, N.C. 27540 www.hollyspringsnc.us (919) 552-6221 Fax: (919) 552-5569 Mayor's Office Fax: (919) 552-0654 April 1, 2005 Alan W. Klimek, Director Division of Water Quality, NCDENR 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 RE: Petition for a Contested Case Hearing Dear Mr. Klimek, Enclosed please find the Petition for a Creek WWTP locate in Holly Springs, NC0063096, filed today April 1, 2005 Hearings. If you have any questions, JS:jmb Enclosure RECEIVED OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL APR 2005 John Schifano Town Attorney Direct Dial (919) 557-2917 Fax (919) 567-1472 John.schi fano@.hollyspringsnc.us ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES .R: Clec rk 4) Oiy of �� 2d�, Contested Case Hearing for the Utley North Carolina, permit number at the Office of Administrative please do not hesitate to contact me. • Sincerely, John Schifano STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF•WAKE IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS THE TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS A North Carolina Municipal Corporation PETITIONER, v. THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY RESPONDENT. PETITION FORA CONTESTED CASE HEARING I hereby ask for a contested case hearing as provided for by North Carolina General Statute § 150B-23 because the Respondent has: The Respondent issued an amendment to an NPDES Permit for the Petitioner's Wastewater Treatment Plant, received by Petitioner on March 9, 2005, which contained certain environmental and monitoring requirements not contained in neither the original NPDES permit nor the draft revision of the amended permit. In doing so, the Respondent has exceeded its statutory and regulatory authority and jurisdiction, acted erroneously, failed to use proper procedure, acted arbitrarily and capriciously and failed to act as required by rule and law. Petitioner respectfully requests that the Respondent revoke or modify the amendment to NPDES Permit No NC0063096 for the Utley Creek WWTP located in Holly Springs, North Carolina, dated February 25, 2005, and received by the Petitioner March 9, 2005, leaving in place and intact the permit (NC0063096) as issued on January 31, 2003. (4) Because of these facts, the State agency or board has: _X_ deprived me of property; ordered me to pay a fine or civil penalty; or _X_otherwise substantially prejudiced my rights; (check at least one from each column) X exceeded its authority or jurisdiction; X acted erroneously; X failed to use proper procedure; X acted arbitrarily or capriciously; or X failed to act as required by law or rule. AND (5) Date: April 1, 2005 (6) Your phone number: (919 ) 557-2917 (7) Print your full address: Town Hall, 128 S. Main Street (PO BOX 8), Holly Springs, NC 27540 (street address/p.o. box) (city) (state) (zip) (8) Print your name: John P. Schifano, Attomey for Petitioner (NC Bar No 29430) (9) Your signature: You must mail or deliver a COPY of this Petition e State agency or board named on line (3) of this form. You should contact the agency or board to determine the name of the person to be served. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that this Petition has been served on the State agency or board named below by depositing a copy of it with the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage affixed OR by delivering it to the named agency or board: (10) ALAN W. KLIMEK, Director Division of Water Quality, NCDENR (11) (name of person served) (State agency or board listed on line 3) (12) 512 N. Salisbury Street. Raleigh NC 27604 (1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617) (street address/p.o. box) (city) (state) (zip code) COPY TO: William G. Ross, Jr. , Secretary NCDENR, 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601, Via US Mail (13) This the iS day of ,2065" (your signature) When you have completed this form, you MUST mail or deliver the ORIGINAL AND ONE COPY to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714. H-06 (11/99) On January 31, 2003 DWQ issued NPDES Permit No.NO0063096 to the Town of Holly Springs which contained specific effluent limits and monitoring requirements for both a 1.5 MGD discharge and a 2.4 MGD discharge. More specifically, this Permit did not include Monthly Average Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen and/or Total Phosphorus for the 1.5 MGD discharge; however, Monthly Average Discharge Limit for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus of 6.0 mg/1 and 0.5mg/1 respectively, were established for the 2.4 MGD flow. On October 13, 2004, DWQ issued a Draft NPDES Permit (No.NC0063096) to the Town of Holly Springs for review and comments. This Draft Permit included effluent limits and monitoring requirements for a 1.5 MGD discharge, an intermediate (RE -RATE) discharge of 1.75 MGD and a final discharge of 2.4 MGD. More specifically, this Draft Permit did not identify Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus for the 1.5MGD flow but did specify Monthly Average Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus for the !.75 MGD (Re - Rate) and 2.4 MGD flows. These limits were established as 43,800 lbs/year and 0.5mg/1 respectively. On February 25, 2005 and against the Town's wishes, DWQ issued a Final NPDES Permit (No. NC0063096) which included effluent limits and monitoring requirements for a 1.5 MGD discharge, an intermediate (RE- RATE)discharge of 1.75 MGD and a final discharge of 2.4 MGD. More specifically, this Final Permit did not identify Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen or Total Phosphorus for the 1.5 MGD flow but did specify Monthly Average Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus for the !.75 MGD (Re -Rate) flow to be 43,800 lbs/yr and 2664 lbs/yr respectively; and did specify Monthly Average Effluent Limits for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus for the 2.4 MGD flow to also be 43,800 lbs/year and 2664 lbs/yr respectively; obviously, there are inconsistencies in these computations. These are identified in the following table: Leo ,6AsL -7,6de-A ‘1017 I 1",(4_,, f ((NV /ice ili �(L DATE FLOW (MGD) TN TOTAL PHOSPHOROUS Conc. (mg/1) Pounds Conc. (mg/1) Pounds 1/31/2003 1.50 ---- ---- ---- ---- 2.40 6.) 43,800 * 0.5 3,653 * 10/13/2004 1.50 ---- ---- ---- ---- 1.75 8.22* 43,800 0.5 3,653 * 2.40 6.0 * 43,800 0.5 3,653 * 2/25/2005 1.50 ---- ---- ---- ---- 1.75 8.22 * 43,800 0. * 2,664 - 2.40 6.0t. 43,800 ..• 2,664 c i * Computed (not shown in Permit Limits) The Final Permit issued on February 25, 2005 also contains Monthly Monitoring Requirements for Copper. This requirement was not addressed in the Draft Permit issued on October 13, 2004; therefore should not have been included in the Final Permit absent the Town's opportunity to comment. Background Reference is made to my e-mail to Alan Klimek dated 1/18/05, a copy of which went to Mark McIntire, wherein we ask that certain conditions contained in the Draft Re -rate Permit be addressed prior to issuance. The reason for the request was we felt the re -rate permit had, at that time, become a moot issue in light of the ongoing discussions with your Director and others in DWQ relating to the Town's decisions to go to the Western Wake Regional Outfall upon its completion. Obviously, our request was somehow overlooked since now the Permit has been issued without the Division addressing our concerns. You will also recall that negotiations were underway with the Director, simultaneous with the re -rate request, that were leading to issuance of an SOC to the Town, at the appropriate time, for a continued discharge into Utley Creek for flows and other permit parameters that could ultimately be in excess of present Permit limits. The appropriate time mentioned above, is understood by Holly Springs to be the time at which the West Wake outfall to the Cape Fear is completed and Holly Springs is connected thereto. All of this effort is in accordance with the discussions we have been having with your Director and others. In view of the above, we respectfully request that DWQ withdraw, rescind and/or otherwise void the recently issued Re -Rate Permit if, for no other reason than to address the obvious error in the TP mass limits as pointed out above. The window of time for which the Town has for filing a Petition for hearing on this matter closes on April 9, 2004. If the time required by your staff to adequately address and respond to our request will extend past that date it may be best for the Town to file the Petition in order to keep the doors open. Of course, this is not to be viewed as an adversarial action by the Town only as a means to provide additional time for everyone to thrash through the details. Please advise. Leo Green Original Message From: John Schifano[mailto:john.schifano@Hollyspringsnc.us] Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 9:48 AM To: Ed Powell; Leo Green; Stephanie Sudano; Carl Dean; Charles Simmons; Thomas Tillage; Amy Moore Subject: Petition for Contested Case Importance: High Attached is the contested case petition for the permit modification. Please review the paragraph beginning "The Respondent issued..." It only needs to be a general complaint about why we are requesting review, not very detailed. Please let me know immediately if you have tremendous heartburn. I would like to file and serve today (Friday), so please acknowledge your receipt and indicate if you will be commenting. Thank you. John P. Schifano Town Attorney Town of Holly Springs 919-557-2917 john.schifano@hollyspringsnc.us Website: www.hollyspringsnc.us [Fwd: Holly Springs NPDES Re -rate 1.50 MGD to 1.75 MGD] Subject: [Fwd: Holly Springs NPDES Re -rate 1.50 MGD to 1.75 MGD] b''t '% 461' _ From: Mark McIntire <Mark.McIntire@ncmail.net> .A4 . Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 10:57:12 -0500 To: Dave Goodrich <Dave.Goodrich@ncmail.net> CC: Alan Klimek <alan.klimek@ncmail.net> (Ic 09 623 6'2 G Dave, Clever of Leo to exclude you from the distribution as he knows you're more aware of what we've said to these folks in the past than anyone. I'm certainly going to need you to weigh in on this. I just reviewed the final permit from Teresa and have it in my office. We'll hold of signing until we've had a chance to discuss it. Mark Original Message Subject:Holly Springs NPDES Re -rate 1.50 MGD to 1.75 MGD Date:Tue, 18 Jan 2005 22:10:45 -0500 From:E. Leo Green <elg@greeneng.com> To:Alan Klimek <alan.klimek a,ncmail.net> CC:Mark McIntire <Mark.McIntire@ncmail.net> Alan, As we discussed today, on October 13, 2004 the NPDES Unit issued a Draft Permit to Holly Springs for a flow re -rate from 1.50 MGD to 1.75 MGD which contained a Total Nitrogen limit of 43,800 Ibs/year (8.22 mg/I) and a Total Phosphorus limit of 0.5 mg/I. There had been no limit for these two parameters at the previous 1.5 MGD flow only a weekly/monthly, Summer/Winter monitoring requirement. Upon receipt of this Draft the Town immediately commented on the limits pointing out that no plant improvements are planned to accommodate this additional flow and requested that the "monitoring only" requirements remain in force for this incremental increase in flow. Upon checking with Teresa Rodriguez today I was told that the Final Permit had been drafted and sent up for signature with no change to the Nitrogen and Phosphorus limits. Please recall our earlier conversations with you and your staff and subsequent correspondence wherein we were advised that "if the Town is willing to move all of their discharge to the Cape Fear" you would work with them such that they would only need to meet the interim nutrient limits assigned to the Western Wake folks for a Cape Fear discharge. Further, on December 15, 2004 Dave Goodrich provided speculative effluent limits for the Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management Facility -Cape Fear discharge which included a Table of Effluent Characteristics for Holly Springs which included the following limits: Flow- 8.0 MGD, TN- 400 lb/day (6 mg/I) and TP - 133 lb/day (2.0 mg/I). 1� 1 of 2 1/20/2005 10:50 AM [Fwd: Holly Springs NPDES Re -rate 1.50 MGD to 1.75 MGD] M We do not believe that it was ever the Division's intentions to require Holly Springs to construct interim improvements at their Utley Creek facility to provide a higher degree of treatment than those necessary to meet the ultimate Cape Fear discharge requirements; therefore, we respectfully request that the "monitor only" conditions of the Town's present Permit stay in effect throughout the time required for the Utley Creek Facility upgrade and ultimate discharge to the Cape Fear at which time the limits as specified above will be met. I trust that we will be able to resolve this issue prior to the issuance of the Re -rate Permit. I will be in Raleigh early tomorrow afternoon and will be glad to stop by your office, if necessary, to discuss this matter further. Please advise. Thanks, Leo Green 2 of 2 1/20/2005 10:50 AM