NC0063096_Speculative Limits_19980713

NPDES DOCUMENT :CANNINO 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
Meeting Notes
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
July 13, 1998
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any -
content on the re-srerse side

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 13, 1998
Ms. Stephanie Sudano, P.E.
Town Engineer
Town of Holly Springs
P.O. Box 8
Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540
AtwirA
NCDENR
Subject: Speculative Limits for Utley Creek WWTP
NPDES No. NC0036096
Town of Holly Springs
Wake County
Dear Ms. Sudano:
This letter is in response to your request for speculative effluent limits for a possible expansion at the
Utley Creek wastewater treatment plant. This plant currently has a permit to discharge 1.5 MGD of
treated domestic wastewater to Utley Creek in the Cape Fear River Basin in Wake County. You
requested speculative limits at 4.88 MGD to reflect a 20-year flow projection. We have reviewed the
request and provide the following response with the enclosed speculative limits.
The speculative limits presented here are based on our understanding of the proposal and of present
environmental conditions. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) cannot guarantee that it will issue the
Town an NPDES permit to expand its discharge of treated wastewater into waters of the State. Nor can
we guarantee that the effluent (imitations and other requirements included in any permit will be exactly as
presented here. Final decisions on these matters will be made only after the Division receives and
evaluates a formal permit application for the Town's proposed discharge.
Environmental Assessments of New Projects and Expansions
Please be aware that you will have to evaluate this project for environmental impacts before applying for
a permit modification. Anyone proposing to construct new or expanded waste treatment facilities using
public funds or public (state) lands must first prepare an environmental assessment (EA) when
wastewater flows (1) equal or exceed 0.5 MGD or (2) exceed one-third of the 7Q10 flow of the receiving
stream. DWQ will not accept a permit application for a project requiring an environmental assessment
until the Division has approved the EA and sent a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) to the state
Clearinghouse for review and comment.
The Environmental Assessment should contain a clear justification for the expanded flow. It should
provide a comprehensive analysis of potential alternatives to expansion, including a thorough evaluation
of non -discharge alternatives. Nondischarge alternatives to expansion, such as spray irrigation, water
conservation, and inflow and infiltration reduction are considered to be environmentally preferable to a
surface water discharge. Sharing a common effluent line to the Cape Fear River or allowing Cary to treat
some of the future flow need to be thoroughly investigated and documented.
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

Holly Springs 11/26/97 request
Speculative Limits
Page 2
In accordance with the North Carolina General Statutes, the preferred alternative must be the practicable
waste treatment and disposal alternative with the least adverse impact on the environment is required to
be implemented. If the EA demonstrates that the project may result in a significant adverse effect on the
quality of the environment, you must then prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. Mary Kiesau of
the Water Quality Planning Branch can provide additional information regarding the requirements of the
N.C. Environmental Policy Act. You can contact Ms. Kiesau directly at [phone], ext. 567.
Speculative Effluent Limits
Based on the available information, tentative limits for the proposed discharge to Utley Creek at 2.5
MGD are attached. The speculative limits are explained below.
Speculative Effluent Limits
Flow Limits. The flow will be limited to 2.5 MGD in order to hold the total nutrient load to Utley Creek
at existing evels. The total nutrient load is based on effluent data from May 1996 to September'1997.
Actual nutrient loads may be reduced based on differences between actual loads and permitted loads.
At present, insufficient nutrient data exists to allow for any expansion above the 2.5 MGD level. The
Division will consider expansions above 2.5 MGD if the request is accompanied by additional data and
flow justification.
Nutrients: Total Phosphorus, Total Nitrogen. Due to the accumulation of nutrients, excessive algal
growth, and eutrophication problems in the receiving stream, limits for nutrients are recommended.
Monthly limits for Total Phosphorus and Total Nitrogen are 0.5 mg/land 6.0 mg/l.
BOD5 and NH3-N. The 5/1 limits for these parameters were based on the waste assimilating capacity of
tt ii ceiv ni g stream at low flow conditions and BAT for this size facility. This is a reduction from the
previous 5/2 limits at the permitted 1.5 MGD flow.
TSS. The limits for total suspended solids are standard for secondary treatment of municipal wastewater.
Fecal Coliform, pH. The limits for fecal coliform bacteria and pH are derived to protect water quality in
the receiving stream.
I trust this response offers sufficient guidance for the Town's proposed treatment plant expansion. If you
have any additional questions about these limits, feel free to contact Steve Pellei at [phone],
extension 516 or me at extension 517.
Sincerely,
AWL
David A. Goodrich
Supervisor, NPDES Unit
Water Quality Section
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Point Source Branch
Central Files
NPDES Unit Files

A (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS speculative limits Permit No. NC0063096
During the period beginning upon expansion above 1.50 MGD TO 2.50 MGD and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s)
serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIRL E TS )
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type\
1-:
ample
Location'
Flow
2.50 MGD
Continuous„--i
Recording
L
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 - October 31)2
5.0 mg/l
7.5 mg/I
Daryl l
,,.v
prOppsite
E,
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 - March 31)2
10.0 mgll
15.0 mgli
Da
Iy
�#Cppmposite
B,
Total Suspended Residue2
30 mgll
45 mg/l
Daily.
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N (April 1 - October 31)
1.0 mg/I
Da
lyi
Composite
E
NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31)
2.0 mg/1
\
Dal y-
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
`'
E
/
3/Week
Grab
U, D'
Chlorophyll -a
�'v..I
Weekly'
Grab
D
pH4
71Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
;..-400 4100 nil
1
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
"C
200 /: 00 rre�al;
4 0 h 100 m1
l-�'
3/Week
Grab
U, D'
Temperature
"C
L-� ;
� ��" '
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
_� �
1
3lWeek
Grab
U, D'
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
'`I
6. mg/l -
Weekly5
Composite
E
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
,1
-::
Weekly5
Grab
U, D
Total Phosphorus k .,.
J
0.5 mg/I --
Weekly5
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Weekly5
Grab
U, D
Total Residual Chlorine8 ?
17 pg/l
Daily
Grab
E
Conductivity,..
Daily
Grab
E
Conductivity "
3lWeek
Grab
U, D'
Chron' xi ity;8'r` /
1;,:
Quarterly
Composite
E
Note r
Sarft locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream in the pool formed immediately upstream of the instream flow weir, D - Downstream on the existing dam
s cture in a location so as to avoid contact between the ground and the sample bottle.
1 Upstream and Downstream samples of Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature, Fecal Coliform, and Conductivity shall be collected three times per week during the
months of June through September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
2 The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3 The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall no be less than 6.0 mg/I.
4 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
5 Effluent and Instream monitoring for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorous shall be conducted on the same day.
6 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 90%; February, May, August, and November, See Part III, Condition F.
7 Chlorophyll -a shall be monitored weekly during the months June through September, during the remaining months of the year, no monitoring is required.
8 Total Residual Chlorine shall be monitored only if chlorine is added to the effluent.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
/etivtl,
AT'%
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 30, 1998
Mr. Thomas Tillage, Director of Public Utilities
Town of Holly Springs
PO Box 8
Holly Springs, NC 27540-0008
Subject: Pretreatment Program Development
Town of Holly Springs WWTP (NPDES # NC0063096)
Wake County
Dear Mr. Tillage:
Mr. Danny Smith of the Division of Water Quality's Raleigh Regional Office and Ms. Melanie Bryson of the
Division's Central Office Pretreatment Unit met with you on January 26, 1998, to begin development of a
pretreatment program for the Town of Holly Springs. The following requirements and milestone dates were
established for program development. Please refer to the NC Comprehensive Guide for Pretreatment Programs
for assistance.
1. Letter requesting modification of NPDES permit and check in the amount of $400 (modification fee)
to be submitted to the Division's NPDES Unit at Division of Water Quality/NPDES Unit, PO Box
29535, Raleigh, NC, 27626-0535; Copy letter to Pretreatment Unit at same address (Comprehensive
Guide, Ch. I);
2. April 3, 1998: Default Headworks Analysis (HWA) to be submitted to the Division. The Division is
willing to assist the Town of Holly Springs in completing this default HWA. Please call Melanie
Bryson at 733-5083, ext. 595, to schedule a date and time to do this (Comprehensive Guide, Ch. 5);
3. May 1,1998: Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO), SUO checklist, and attorney's letter due to the Division
(Comprehensive Guide, Ch. 2);
4. May 1, 1998: A copy of Holly Springs' .Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) to be submitted to the
Division (Comprehensive Guide, Ch. 3)
5. June 1, 1998: Holly Springs should develop a Short Term Monitoring Plan (STMP) and submit it
to Division for approval; STMP should include total phosphorous and total nitrogen in addition to the
other pollutants of concern (POCs) listed in Chapter 4 of the Comprehensive Guide (Comprehensive
Guide, Ch. 4);
6. ,July 1, 1998: Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) should be developed and submitted to the Division
for approval; The Division recommends that the ERP be reviewed by Town Council, though it does
not have to be formally adopted like the SUO (Comprehensive Guide, Ch. 8)
7. August 1, 1998: SUO formally adopted by Town Council by this date; Please send the Division a
copy of the Council meeting minutes noting the SUO was officially adopted.
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

Thank you for your cooperation with the Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or concerns, please
feel free to call me at [phone] (ext. 595).
Sincerely,
=- UV,U
Melanie Bryson, E.I.T.
Pretreatment Group
MDB:Hol1Sp.Prog
Cc: Central Files
NPDES Unit
Melanie Bryson, Pretreatment Unit
Danny Smith, Raleigh Regional Office
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

cet
pfA'-'4' 'to
�J lown of Holl 5 ri
� Town of Ho I I Sri
�t .�,, Y P nJs
t,
1, i ff,,
It)e- cw vwecr sweet. Ttpicoui
tux p-eva.4' aU ttm
Mr. David A. Goodrich
NPDES Group Supervisor
NCDEHNR-DWQ
PO Box 29535
Raleigh.. NC 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
Engineering Department
November 26, 1997
ij" 0
PONT
Mayor
Gerald W. Holleman
Commissioners
Parrish Womble
Ken Martin
George Kimble
Bob Kapel
Edison Perkins
Thank you for meeting with us on November 19 to discuss the Town of Holly
Springs' pending NPDES Permit request. Holly Springs has remained one of the three
fastest growing municipalities in North Carolina for the past five years. As you can see,
it is critical for our community to continue to move forward as quickly as possible with
the permitting process so that we can begin construction on the next expansion of our
current facility in the year 1999/2000. This letter is to summarize our meeting and to
tormally request speculative limits for our proposed discharge.
First. Iet me thank you and your staff's timely and continued assistance to our
community in obtaining our current 1.5 mgd discharge and construction permits. I look
forward to working with you on this next incremeni of expansion.
I appreciate the clear direction that you and your staff were able to provide for us
at last week's meeting. We more clearly understand your direction for us to plan for
expansion of our existing treatment facility (at its current location) instead of at a new
location. We also understand that you prefer a request for expansion more in line with
our original 4.88 mgd request, as opposed to our more recent 6 mgd request. We
understand the environmental concerns which you have expressed and will plan our
expansion accordingly.
At our meeting, you outlined the following issues and requested that we address
them in an EA amendment to supplement our discharge application:
128 South Main Street • Post Office Box 8 • Holly Springs, NC 27540 •919/552-6221

(e 1 •
Page 2
Mr. David A. Goodrich
November 26, 1997
• Request speculative limits for the proposed expansion for inclusion into the EA
amendment;
• In the EA amendment:
■ Provide additional documentation for flow justifications/population
projections/service areas;
■ Provide additional information including timing and obligations for CP&T,'s
proposed development of property surrounding Harris Lake;
• Investigate participation in the proposed Cary "discharge outfall" to the Cape
Fear River.
For your information, after our meeting I did initiate conversations with the Town of
Cary to determine the location of, and schedule for, Cary's proposed discharge outfall
to the Cape Fear River. I will pursue information on this alternative for
consideration, and for inclusion into, the revised Environmental Assessment.
At our meeting, we also discussed a tentative time frame for t its permitting
process, which is outlined below:
December 1. 1997
March 1, 1998
*April 1, 1998
*May 1, 1998
June 1, 1998
June 1, 1998
September 1. 1998
October 1, 1998
December 1, 1998
--December 1, 1998
rianuary 1, 1999
Submit our Request to DEHNR Staff for Speculative
Limits
DEHNR Staff Review & Response to Request
Additional information provided by Town (if required)
DEHNR provides Speculative Limits
Town submits modified EA
Town submits EA to Clearinghouse
Town receives Clearinghouse Comments
Town submits Revised EA
FONSI Issued
Town Submits Discharge Application for DEHNR
Approval
DEHNR issues Discharge Permit
*These two steps may not be necessary.
Plea:;e advise if you see any problems with this schedule as outlined above.

Page 3
Mr. David A. Goodrich
November 26, 1997
Finally, as the first step in the process outlined above, I am formally requesting
speculative limits for a 4.88 mgd discharge expansion at the location of the current
Utley Creek Wastewater 'Treatment Plant.
Again, thank you for you and your staff's assistance with this process. Please
telephone me at 557-3935 or e-mail me at SLSUDANO [e-mail] if I may
assist you in any way with our request.
Sincerely,
Stephanie L. Sudan, P.E.
Town Engineer
SLS/lra
Cc: Gerald W. Holleman, Town Administrator
William U. Lee, Assistant Town Administrator
Ford Chambliss, The Wooten Company
Laurie Gengo, Sanford Holshouser Law Firm
1O31R

11111 /77
4.1trilowd4 > Lir_ am 5-ter /4/,' 1411.7.: rK:70
11044.61rjr JAJI-rE-4:69T-
k,ri avdifile;
5.2_07 ) CI) gka. dti,v nieL 6
*kw > Air /041.5-s7??7,),7 topiwzi,
iCeirbky c,
15-7ivaki
au4oe51k7 7 /4c--
/eve(of 4e/ /i6O
••••••.,-
ti4e 04411 Ii(11 kf///4 /x--4rkfAi;e: cv/felL?
.15-14647
Vt.v 4#7 tVt/1 r`
k6) 4(ft4//fq
e
41/ 146,
P&d11/7r0) Ftru
7, /R
461AI ,wtt
ecr At;
Z.21Ame- FriNI•l/c.‘ I / .51-/c/AA '77
/)._/
/friK)!; ()&it/,51"gefe Tletgr; C. 5-/ii4
(crefe0 ktigora 8.t447L iNee° 27L nr, /-4,f/v (7"4
elit4 - 1.44117 ffb 14,
• 1-7( '; 41/ 17) Qtfil (1/- /. 4, rik „, ?Pik•
3 't
• --IP' (AT tivt pd/
v
1 -P,4' .1.1t//f714C7j. •

ss.
el/44/44v_ holt e(641 44,5
fit Lvticir 4,1 utoW/6#1-
%4f4'z14'

F�c
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, .
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
September 4,1997
Ms. Stephanie Sudano, Town Engineer
Town of Holly Springs
Post Office Box 8
Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540
EDIEF—INI ll
--r\\-kb k
vw`r
dc\o-
Subject: Town of Holly Springs
Utley Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
NPDES Permit No. NC0063096
Wake County
Dear Ms. Sudan:
In accordance with recent discussions with staff of the Water Quality Section, this response is
intended to address your questions regarding short term and long term wastewater management
options for the Town of Holly Springs. Please accept our apologies for our delay in responding to
your concerns.
Short term options for the town are somewhat limited due to the nature and characteristics of
the current receiving stream, Utley Branch. As you are aware, the receiving stream is rather
limited in its ability to assimilate oxygen consuming wastes and there are documented
eutrophic conditions downstream in Harris Lake. There is some limited opportunities for
expansion, however, advanced treatment and nutrient removal will be required as a result of
the above mentioned concerns. Considerable efforts could be undertaken to derive specific
thresholds and exact assimilative capacities but we are reasonable comfortable that advanced
treatment would still be the end result of considerable time, effort and financial resources.
Careful consideration has also been given to the potential relocation of the discharge to the
mouth of White Oak Creek. This option does not provide any significant advantages over the
existing discharge location in Utley Creek. Actually, Utley Creek may provide some benefits
in minimizing the delivery of nutrients to Harris Lake and may serve as a buffer to exacerbating
further eutrophic responses.
Both of these stream discharge options potentially result in eutrophic effects to either the
Harris Lake arms or the lake itself. A relocated discharge to the main body of the lake, or the
lake channel if one exists, may be a viable long term solution but this option will require
extensive monitoring and development of a sophisticated lake model. This would involve
significant time, effort and financial resources.
One long term option, preferred by the Divison of Water Quality, that should be given careful
consideration is the potential elimination of the discharge altogether and cooperation in a
regional wastewater management system.
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

In closing, it appears that some limited opportunities exists for an expansion without any
additional water quality monitoring or modeling but the Town must be reasonable in its flow
rate projections and associated request for an increase. We understand that some of this work is
currently underway and look forward to working with you on this matter in the near future.
If we can be of any assistance, please contact Mr. Donald Safrit, P.E., Assistant Chief for the
Point Source Branch, at [phone], ext. 519.
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Point Source Branch
Central Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
DEHN R
September 3, 1997
Ms. Stephanie Sudano
Town Engineer
Town of Holly Springs
P.O. Box 8
Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540
Subject: Holly Springs WWTP
Utley Creek Discharge and Instream Monitoring Requirements
NPDES Permit No. NC0063096
Wake County
Dear Ms. Sudano:
I am writing concerning your inquiry about instream monitoring for the Town of Holly
Springs. At this time, the DWQ will not require any additional monitoring to that
contained in your current NPDES permit. However, the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) does have concerns about Utley Creek.
In 1996, DWQ reviewed a request for the Town of Holly Springs' WWTP expansion up
to 1.5 MGD at the existing location on Utley Creek. The Town also informed DWQ
that future expansions were needed up to 4.88 MGD. At that time the Division informed
the Town that additional expansions above the 1.5 MGD will need a calibrated model for
Utley Creek. The Town was informed that additional monitoring for the modeling
analysis would be needed on Utley Creek.
In July, 1996, DWQ's Raleigh Regional Office investigated an algal bloom and fish kill
on Utley Creek downstream of the Holly Springs outfall. A small pond approximately
0.5 mile downstream of the discharge contained an algal bloom. Approximately 1.5
miles downstream of the pond, a fish kill (100-200 Crappie and Sunfish) was
documented and dissolved oxygen values ranged from 0.2 mg/1 to 0.5 mg/l. According
to the regional office personnel, the algal bloom/fish kill was likely the result of a 3 week
dry, hot period during which the effluent from Holly Springs' discharge comprised the
majority of the Creek's flow. This dry period was followed by 2-4 days of heavy
thunderstorms which allowed the large quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus, which had
been accumulating in the pond, to become available to algae in the photic zone thereby
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

triggering a bloom. Large amounts of this algal biomass was observed downstream of
the pond which staff believe contributed to the oxygen demand.
Another site visit took place on July 15, 1997 since stream flows were low and DWQ
wanted to collect some nutrient data in the pond and downstream in the impoundment
where the fish kill occurred last year. During the site visit a massive bloom of blue-green
algae was evident downstream of the Town's discharge in the pond and in the creek
upstream of the impoundment. A chlorophyll a sample was collected in the pond, and
the concentration exceeded the standard.
Since the major issue in Utley Creek is nutrients, a modeling analysis for oxygen
consuming wastes will not be performed at this time. The impoundments and algal
blooms will cause violations in the assumptions of our one dimensional, steady-state
model, and DWQ believes the Town's resources will be better spent in reducing nutrients
in the discharge and reviewing other potential alternatives. Therefore, instream
monitoring in preparation for a dissolved oxygen modeling analysis will not be needed.
Any expansion at the WWTP will require advanced tertiary limits for oxygen -consuming
wastes and state-of-the-art nutrient removal.
The DWQ believes that Utley Creek is not a good site for a discharge due to the low
flows, nutrient issues and proximity to Harris Lake, but there may not be any other viable
alternative in the near future. However, the Town should continue to pursue other long
term solutions such as sharing an outfall with the proposed Cary Westside wastewater
treatment plant and other regional alternatives that may involve the Town of Apex. In
addition all long and short term wastewater disposal needs should examine opportunities
for conservation, reuse and land application.
The proposed discharge site at the mouth of Utley Creek was also reviewed for an
alternative outfall location. Since this site is located in the White Oak arm of Harris
Lake where flushing is minimal, it was not considered a viable option for a wastewater
discharge. Therefore, DWQ will not further consider this location as an option for Holly
Spring's WWTP discharge.
Please give Ruth Swanek a call if you have any comments or questions at 733-5083,
extension 503.
Sincerely,
Don Safrit, Assistant Chief
Water Quality Section
cc: Steve Tedder
Dave Goodrich - P&E
Andy McDaniel - IAU
Central Files
Thomas Tillage - Holly Springs, ORC

Page 1
Note for Andy McDaniel
From: Carla Sanderson
Date: Wed, Jul 23, 1997 8:48 AM
Subject: Holly Springs WWTP
To: Steve Tedder
Cc: Andy McDaniel; Dave Goodrich; Don Safrit; Ruth Swanek
Steve -
I have been informed that the Town has been calling you about the proposed expansion of its
WWTP. We (IAU) have been looking at this situation and trying to figure out what the next
step will be.
Last year when the Town requested an expasnion from 0.5 to 1.5 MGD, we granted this
expansion with advanced tertiary limits and additional nutrient monitoring instream and in
the effluent The EA that was submitted also had a flow of 4.8 MGD for long term future
needs. At that time, we told the Town that a more intensive modeling analysis would need to
be performed in order to determine how much BOD the creek could handle - we also told
them that nutrient limits would be likely at that flow.
In July, 1996 the RRO investigated an algal bloom and fish kill downstream of the Holly
Springs discharge. According to the RRO the algal bloom and fish kill was likely the result
of a 3 week dry, hot period where the discharge comprised most of the creek flow (Utley
Creek has a a low flow stat of 0.1 cfs). The dry period was followed by 2-4 days of heavy
rain which allowed the large quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus, which had been
accumulating in the pond to become available to algae in the photic zone thereby triggering a
bloom. Large amounts of this algal biomass were observed donwstream of the pond which
staff believe contributed to the oxygen demand.
Andy, Ed Williams and I went out to Utley Creek again last Tuesday, July 15th, since stream
flows are low and we wanted to collect some nutrient data in the pond and downstream
where the fish kill occurred last year. We have some pictures ready now to show you, but
we are still waiting on the nutrient data. Stephanie Sudano has been calling me and would
like to know how to proceed at this point.
At this time IAU feels uncomfortable requesting any additional data for a modeling analysis,
since the creek is overburdoned with nutrients and calibration would be very difficult.
Therefore, we would like to meet with you and discuss options for the Town.
Thanks.

()Hi cit..
chtfidiA: rci liptils 071'45P
Rrjo.'dtk: WA. itnd,ufitik
{fit N3pm we clisrAt/u( 4A. flow
int*t ►siavt 4iu1 ism.
DN rl h/ jZGo d -144 rtit rta,
Arro`,/ 4- 0 avfilaAr, awuw200,41/* ("' D.1? A460
101A
DO: g '5
Tory= 0 /
w
irj0
reot-io c)24f.
5
as rk,cd_ -
lerA-��-�a•T
O D 7 aJ
/ON = 10,3
a = as
.off ipia
16. T'svrA-10,,07/
60 - q,a
eb
7 O
j r�C

0.7
0.6
0.5
2 0.4
0
L
cu
N0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Holly Springs WWTP (NC0050342)
Waste Flow (MGD)
Jan '94-May '97
•
♦
♦ ♦♦4
• • ♦ •
♦ •• ♦♦♦ ••
•4,
♦ •♦�i •♦•♦• ��•♦
•
• ♦4 .*•.• ••
-
• •♦• ♦ •
h♦�♦� • •► ♦ ♦ •♦ •
♦• • ♦ •♦ ♦ ♦ �► •• ••
♦ **#
• •• • ♦
••
•
Oct-93 Dec-93 Mar-94 May-94 Aug-94 Oct-94 Jan-95 Mar-95 May-95 Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96 Nov-96 Jan-97 Apr-97 Jun-97
Date

Percent DO Saturation
200.0
180.0 -
160.0 -
140.0
120.0 -
• •
•
•
•
• •
• ••
• • *
• ••
100.0
•4*
••
•
80.0 -
60.0
40.0 -
20.0 -
Percent DO Saturation in Utley Creek
Downstream Monitoring Site
Jan '94-May '97
•
•
•
• • •
• • #
•
•
110% Saturation
•
• •• # • •
• •
••
0 • A10 *
• . •••
v.O •• • *• e •
• . •• • •• • • •
• • • • • 46# •e.
• • • • 0*
0 • • • e• * •
•
••
•• •
• • • ••
0.0 elv • • •
Oct-93 Dec-93 Mar-94 May-94 Aug-94 Oct-94 Jan-95 Mar-95 May-95 Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96 Nov-96 Jan-97 Apr-97 Jun-97
Date
•
•
•
•
• • •
•
•
• • *
• # •
14* ••
• • 441.* •
* •• • 0# #.
• **
•• ••
• 4# • •
• • th, •
• *
•
•
•
•
•

1.8
1.6
E 1.2
0
1
0
c.j 0.8
a
F-
0.6
0.4
♦
Instream Total Phosphorus Concentration
Utley Creek
June '94-Sept '96
•
■
■
■ ■
■
■
0.2 —m■--i ■ ■
■
■ _ ■
■ •
R -■ If MI
■ ■
■ ■■
If ■
■
■ ■■
■
E ■■MIIIIP Ills
♦ • ♦
• • ♦ ♦♦
• •i••♦ • ♦,
IN
■
■ �♦
♦••
•• •♦t A.
May-94 Jul-94 Oct-94 Dec-94 Mar-95 May-95 Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96
Date
• Up TP
(mg/L)
■ Dwn TP
(mg/L)

Effluent and Instream Total Phosphorus Concentration
Holly Springs WWTP (NC0050342)
Utley Creek
■
■
■
:/ � IP ■�
• •
1 • •
9111
May-94 Jul-94 Oct-94 Dec-94 Mar-95 May-95
Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96 Nov-96
Date
Up TP (mg/L)
• Dwn TP (mg/L)
Eff TP (mg/L)

40 -
35
30
J
a) 25
E
0
• 20
a)
c)
c
0
z 15
I-
10
5
0
May-94
Effluent and Instream Total Nitrogen Concentration
Holly Springs WWTP (NC0050342)
Utley Creek
■
■
• 116■
■ ■
• ■_
■
■-•
■
MI ■
■ •• • NI■ Z
11.111 al■ , rid ■ ■
•
Jul-94 Oct-94 Dec-94 Mar-95 May-95 Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96 Nov-96
Date
®Up TN (mg/L)
• Dwn TN (mg/L)
Eff TN (mg/L)

25
20
E • 15
c
0
4-
0
c
o • 10
z
1-
0
Instream Total Nitrogen Concentration
Utley Creek
June '94-Sept '96
■
■
■ ■
■ 1
■,■
■■
■
■
■ i. ■ ■
■ ■ m
■ ■ lir ■
• ■r
■ ■ Eh■ ♦
■ ♦
_4 ■ i
fro ■
O♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦�N♦
0• ♦♦ � ♦ 0•♦00 •
Jul-94 Oct-94 Dec-94 Mar-95 May-95 Aug-95 Oct-95 Jan-96 Mar-96 Jun-96 Aug-96
Date
May-94
♦ Up TN (mg/L)
• Dwn TN (mg/L)

40
30
J
a)
E
_
0
71
L
o 20
0
U
Z
H
m
z
w
10
• 15.6
Holly Springs WWTP (NC0050342)
Effluent Total Nitrogen Concentration
♦ 14.5
• 35.6
♦ 33.8`,
• 25.3
• 29.32
♦21
♦4.3
0
Jun-94 Aug-94
• 0.86
Nov-94 Jan-95
Apr-95 Jun-95
♦03
Sep-95
Date
Nov-95 Feb-96
Apr-96 Jul-96
8
Sep-96 Dec-96

Effluent TP Concentration (mg/L)
5
Holly Springs WWTP (NC0050342)
Effluent Total Phosphorus Concentration
♦4.72 ♦4.7
4 ♦4
3
♦2.7
• 2.1
2 ♦2
1
0
♦ 1.22
• 2.5
• 2.34
♦ 1.
Jun-94 Aug-94
Nov-94 Jan-95
Apr-95 Jun-95
Sep-95
Date
Nov-95 Feb-96
Apr-96 Jul-96
Sep-96 Dec-96

Town of Holly Springs
Engineering Department
From the desk of STEPHANIE L. SUDANO, P.E. Date: //5rn
caupbt AwL,..,
4A,f,
f
k
M•
Sit 1S 097`
Vi A t ALM
SECTION
128 South Main Street, PO Box 8, Holly Springs, NC 27540T
Telephone:: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

TOWN OF HOLLY SPRINGS
•- -
OAK 4'
. at/
• '..--",-,----.---;----;i-::-75'7511(--'_. ___---`--2--:7,- .------= -.
i ':,,. ''.--- ::::::-i-------,•_--,....„-----(;
,‘• "-----';'))r------,,----,-\ ,---...--:----;;J( f f(
, i • 17-,-----",iii,-&)) 1, fi'N__Is
\ .„ ..
.1. \ ' '• \ :)\;:;:-./.---'..\--r<rif,r--------------7—H_D ! y)/
j.
)\ •
'„-:?? • ),-1
---
....,,,,,,,,...:„,
r-' \\\4"\--..A.•
'11--------
)
N ^ / • • .
j‘PROPOSED 5.0 MGD
DISCHARGE LOCATION SCALE:1'1=1000'

\4.

Algal Bloom Report Status
Location
Waterbody
Date
County
River basin
Sub basin
Station #
Species
Chlorogonium euchlorum CHL
Scenedesmus quadricauda CHL
Oscillatoria tenuis CYA
Collector
E. Williams
Below town of Holly Spring's discharge
[UTLEY CREEK POND (HOLLY SPR P.)
107/15/97
IWAKE
ICPF
17
IUTLEY-1
Elev. surface pH present?
Elev. surface DO present?
Observed Fish Kill?
Algal Biovolume
Algal Density
Chlorophyll -a
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
ves. 10.3 s.u.
'yes, >20mg/1 >200 % Saturat.
no
8968 mm3/m3
5312 units/ml
4 7 ug/1
9.00 mg/1
0.60 mg/1
A massive bloom of blue-green algae was evident during sampling Utley Creek Pond, below the
town of Holly Springs WWTP. Samplers also collected a bloom further downstream at the wildlife
impoundment. Both samples contained the same species composition and were dominated by the
filamentous cyanophyte (blue-green), Oscillatoria tenuis. The pond directly downstream of the
WWTP contained higher bloom levels according to the chlorophyll a values. The chlorophyll a
values for the pond and wildlife impoundment were 47 and 21ug/1, respectively. Likewise, the very
high level of nutrients was slightly diminished at the impoundment, downstream where TN and TP
measured 6.4 mg/1 and 0.47 mg/l, respectively.
Tr V►"-?(-)vrt1 Wkev i
Dominant Algal Species
Class BioVol % BioVol Density % Density
110 1.2 1,118 21.0
274 3.0 1,258 23.6
8,011 89.3 2,062 38.8
Family Statistics
Family
Number
BioVolume
% Biovolume
Density
% Density
Cyanophyceae
1.0
8,011.0
89.3
2,062
38.815
Bacillariophyceae
4.0
215.7
2.4
314
5.921
Chlorophyceae
4.0
741.4
8.2
2,935
55.263
Algal Bloom? El Yes ❑ No ❑ N/H ❑ Undetermined

Ptpirtd
k-13 ,0
T/U 1,9
Q ',
V - y
_7_' r
7 u5 y,
Cc� r
pkuekv u?rt
,I H3 ,o/
T
Ai0)6 5.6
TP .�
CUB- i nA i 7
(AA. Corvic4) c;)._
I

Page 1
Note for Carla Sanderson
From: Ruth Swanek
Date: Thu, Jul 17, 1997 11:06 AM
Subject: RE: Holly Springs
To: Andy McDaniel
cc: Carla Sanderson
Andy - I had not talked to Carla about your trip yet.
I agree from a technical standpoint with you. However, I am afraid that our technical
arguments may falter to political whim. Dave indicated (now I have not talked to Tedder) that
Tedder thinks they have no alternative (I believe tying onto Cary's new outfall is an option,
just not a politically attractive one), and may push for outfall to White Oak Creek if that may
be better discharge site.
I also agree that having Holly Springs monitor more than current permit requirements in
Utley Creek will not result in better modeling analysis.
If they expand with TP of 1 and TN of 6, how will expanded load compare to existing load?
(I think Tedder may ask that question and we should be prepared to answer).
From: Andy McDaniel on Thu, Jul 17, 1997 10:56 AM
Subject: RE: Holly Springs
To: Ruth Swanek
Cc: Carla Sanderson
Ruth, .
If you have not heard from Carla, both the pond and Utley Creek proper below the discharge
was pea green. DOs in the pond ranged from 18 mg/1 to off the scale (ie > 20mg/L). pH in
the pond was approx. 10 SU. Downstream on Utley Ck you could not see the water -the
surface was completely covered in algae.
From a water quality stand point I don't think we should accept that a discharge is inevitable.
We have collected field data documenting fish kills and repeated algal blooms which, in my
opinion, should be used to strongly encourage Holly Springs to connect to Cary. I
understand that politics plays a big roll in this permit but I feel that we would be violating our
antidegradation policy if we permitted an expanded discharge in the Utley Creek watershed.
Therefore, I'd propose that we start off taking this tack (no more flow) and see where it leads
us. If the politics over ride us then we should definitely pursue BAT limits for nutrients.
As Steve B said in our meeting a couple of weeks ago, we (or at least he) knows what any
model will predict out there. More data would be great for advancing our case but I'm not
sure what question a "study" would be designed to answer when we are already seeing
severe impacts to the stream at a relatvely low average wasteflow (-0.3 MGD) compared to
the 4 or 6 MGD that is proposed.
From: Ruth Swanek on Thu, Jul 17, 1997 9:48 AM

Page 2
Subject: RE: Holly Springs
To: Andy McDaniel
I wouldn't request a rush job. I have a feeling they will be getting a permit (either to Utley
Creek or to White Oak Creek), but we can probably push the nutrient limits issue. If pictures
show algal blooms, we should probably get them made into prints as well as slides.
My concern is that we have been telling Cary that they have to pump to below Buckhom, and
they cannot discharge to Jordan watershed. Jordan does have worse water quality than
Harris, but if I were Cary, I may say that DWQ is not being consistent.
From: Andy McDaniel on Thu, Jul 17,1997 9:41 AM
Subject: RE: Holly Springs
To: Ruth Swanek
Cc: Carla Sanderson
I just got off the phone with Ed Williams (ESB) who took us to sample Utley Creek. He
said that it would be a couple of weeks before the chlor-a and nutrient samples would be back
from the lab. However the photos should be ready tomorrow.
Would it be appropriate (or useful) for us to request a rush job be done on those samples? I
think the photos and our DO measurements would be enough but its always nice to have hard
chlor-a and nutrient numbers. I also think that we should have the slides converted to prints
to show Tedder.
From: Ruth Swanek on Thu, Jul 17, 1997 9:33 AM
Subject Holly Springs
To: Andy McDaniel; Carla Sanderson
Cc: Steve Bevington
Dave and Don informed me that Holly Springs is calling Tedder. Apparently, Tedder will
want to meet next week on this, and he may want a study plan by then as well.
We need to sit down and discuss your site visit when Carla gets back.
Carla - this may come up in Don's staff meeting on Tuesday.

of #4 I ly
eitvic
g.t, 16.6;4 51 )497
lotv7P -hew:
Tep 10
Zug
leeiltd �
4
ia id q.arct
�- (i-ni, .
r)V...V 4_?___Md
1-4SPh'1 pordced. 60 "lendcL
qie ° 0 Ci9rd __DO W to nirt
)'51 ga°t ig 0 L o-3
o'
3
PlAt4AoAry s0
197
3. o. 4&)
OVA
,aoPm4-9rpOok)huAk-f—
ISrmo 100
fat w '4
1 D P

NC DEM 1JQ ENVSCI Fax:[phone] Jul 24 '97 14:14 P.01/04
• Algal: Bloom Report Status
Lomtion
Waal -body
Date
County
River basin
S ub basin
Station #
Collector
Is. W
Below :own of Hotly Spring's discharge Elev. suiface.pH pmsent? is notrepoetcd s.u.
. F.lev: siuiaceDOpresent? I not re, tee 96 Saturat
'UT.C:EY CREEK POND (HOLLY:SpP PO.: •
ObseivedFislz.Kill?.• I no
,'..AlgalBiovol'ume _- 806a mm3hxt3:' yJ
Aig&1Density:' 5312 units/m1 • .� 1.4kr
haRT } ' , ; : :blot :Sampled ug/1
CPF .. _ Chlorophyll. -a::
I., ;.._• ',,Total Nitrogen; . L a lab mg/1
I V iEY-1 '' ,. • •t Total •Pitosphoras at:lab mgn
A tni-ssive.bloom,oibluelreetalgae was evident.
durj g sempli"ng#.Jtley: Creek Rood; below the
town of Holly;'Springs wl,v7p,c, Samplersalso.collected a bloom•downstieam•at'the..wiliilife
impotutdment:. Botb•samples'contained:thesame: species'coimposidon.and'were dominated by the
filamentous cyanophyte (biue-green):Os cen .s. •
Species
Chlcrogonium euchicrum
Scenedesmus quadrlcauda
Oscillatoria tenuis
Fernfly
Cyancphyceae
Bacillariophyceae
Chlorophyceae
Doriii><i i�it Axgal: 'Spe4ies.`
L
:'BiaVal ,%.'BioVol ' Oens9ty pia Density
• ; Z;. '1•,1h8 21.0
• 3,0 • 5,•382 23.6
•99:3• 22.8 8'86 38.8
.$ioV.Olu ie:
.: S,d11::0
Alga[ Bloom? NI.ltes
i 6 - 74310 6 ,ac.c ,mil ! cj rAi
Dp a:
A-0'
215,7:
• : 74iE4.
2',-9 3 5
unfdeterin•inea..
0st It! Fax •t4ote :`. .'7071.'
Ta, ar14Sa d,2 '
• % Density:
338, 815

Station: UTLEY-1
Waterbody: UTLEY CREEK POND (HOLLY SPR POND)
Date: 7/15/97
Collection by Class BioVol. % BioVol. Density % Density
Bacillariophyceae
Navicula cryptocephela 8.4 0.0 34.9 0.6
Cyclotella species 3 8.8 0.0 104.8 1.9
Nitzschia acicularis 10.3 0.1 139.7 2.6
Melosira varians 188.0 2.0 34.9 0.6
SUM of Bacillariophyceae 215.7 2.4 314.5 5.9
Chlorophyceae
Pandorina charkowensis 63.1 0.7 34.9 0.6
Chlorogonium euchlorum 110.7 1.2 1118.3 21.0
Scenedesmus quadricauda 274.4 3.0 1258.1 23.6
Chlamydomonas species 293.0 3.2 524.2 9.8
SUM of Chlorophyceae 741.4 8.2 2935.7 55.2
Cyanophyceae
Oscillatoria tenuis 8011.0 89.3 2062.0 38.8
SUM of Cyanophyceae 8011.0 89.3 2062.0 38.8
Total 8968 5312

ir
Algal Bloom Report Status
Collector
E. Fleek
Location (Utley Creek Pond (Holly Springs Pond)
Waterbody
Date
County
River basin
Sub basin
Station #
UTLEY CREEK (HOLLY SPRINGS PON Q
07/11/96
WAKE
CPF
30607
UTLEY-1
Elev. surface pH present? I yes, 9.8 s.u.
Elev. surface DO present? fres, 16.3 mg/1, 193 % Saturat.
Observed Fish Kill? I yes
Algal Biovolume I 38480 mm3/m3
Algal Density I 15902 units/ml
Chlorophyll -a 1 550 ug/l
Total Nitrogen I 4.70 mg/1
Total Phosphorus ( 0.87 mg/1
A massive bloom of blue-green algae occurred in conjunction with a fish and mussel kill in a pond
in Holly Springs, below the town of Holly Springs' waste water discharge. A visible bloom of
lime -green water, floating flecks and filaments, and a blue surface film was present at the time of
sampling. This rainbow of colors can be attributed to the cyanophyte, Oscillatoria tenuis, which
comprised 95% of the algal biovolume. This species is very common and widely distributed in N.C.
in lakes, ponds and is most often present in spring and summer.
Astronomical levels of chlorophyll a, total nitrogen and phosphorus were found in the pond.
Downstream in Utley Cr, total nitrogen (5.3 mg/1), and total phosphorus (1.3 mg/1) were even
higher than concentrations in the pond.
Species
Osciliatoria tenuis
Dominant Algal Species
Class
CYA
BioVol % BioVol Density % Density
37,247
Family Statistics
96.7 • 95.6
cc m �`►u' 5203(
zro
Family 1 Number
BioVolume
% Biovolume
Density
% Density
Cyanophyceae
1.0
37,247.7
96.7
15,203
95.604
Dinophyceae
1.0
583.4
1.5
174
1.098
Cryptophyceae
1.0
649.0
1.6
524
3.296
Algal Bloom? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A ❑ Undetermined

Location
Waterbody
Date
County IWAICE
Algal Bloom Report Status
Collector
BELOW HOLLY SPRINGS WWTP
K. Lynch
'UTLEY CREEK (HOLLY SPRINGS PON D
I06/13/96
River basin ICPF
Sub basin 17
Station # lUTLEY-1
Elev. surface pH present?
Elev. surface DO present?
Observed Fish Kill?
Algal Biovolume
Algal Density
Chlorophyll -a
Total Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
I Not
I Not
not sampled
not sampled % Saturat.
S.U.
no
Quantitative mm3/m3
Quantitative units/nil
Not Sampled ug/I
not sampled mg/1
not sampled mgn
An algal bloom was visible in the Holly Springs Pond below the town of Holly Spring's WWTP. The bloom
consisted of prolific growths of filamentous algae, surface blooming phytoplankton and duckweed (Lemna species).
The bloom was washing out of the pond and flowing downstream into Utley Creek. Remnants of the bloom could
be seen rafted up in slow places in the creek. The filamentous algae consisted of growths of the green algae,
Oedogonium species (Chlorophyceae).
Oedogonium is always aquatic and is usually found in small permanent bodies of water. Oedogonium is a
common green alga which often proliferates in the spring. The filaments begin growing attached, but often break off
becoming free-floating and form cottony mats near the water's surface. On smooth substrate, Oedogonium will form
simple holdfasts, whereas on rough surfaces, branched holdfasts are formed. As the algae ages, it appears yellow -
green in color. Oedogonium is commonly found on old rushes or cattail stalks.
Floating algae or phytoplankton were also collected. High numbers of the green colonial alga, Scenedesmus
quadricauda maximus, were found in the pond. Scenedesmus consists of colonies of 2, 4 or 8 fusiform, crescent or
oblong cells. This genus is probably more widespread than any other fresh water algae. Often small pools or
aquariums are densely populated and discolored by this genus. Visibly floating on the surface was a bloom of
Euglenophytes which consisted of the alga, Trachelomonas species (Euglenophyceae). Members of the
Euglenophyceae are often found in organically enriched waters. Trachelomonas are free swimming unicellular
phytoplanktors. Species of Trachelomonas can be found throughout the year usually in fresh water ponds and lakes.
The Town of Holly Springs has requested an expansion of their WWTP to 6MGD and to relocate to the
mouth of Utley Creek. •

WLA Entry Screen
NPDES No: NC0063096
Facility: HOLLY SPRINGS/UTLEY CREEK WW
Stream: UTLEY CREEK
Major/Minor (1/2):
Facility Status: E
% Domestic: 100
Stream Class:
County: WAKE
Subbasin: 030607
Regional Office: Raleigh Regional Office
Permit Status:
% Industrial:0
Effluent Limits
Flow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3-N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Toxicity Testing:
Toxicity Limits:
0.25
16
9
6
30
200
6-9
Chronic
0
Ceased?
Active
Modeler: MDS Request #: 5592
Tracking Information
Date Received:
Date Approval Form Sent:
Date Approval Form Returned:
Date WLA Finalized:
Awaiting Information:
2/19/90
2/22/90
4/16/90
4/16/90
Flow Information
Drainage Area (Sq. Mi.):
Average Flow (cfs):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
30Q2: (cfs):
0.73
0
0
0
0
Comments:
EXISTING LIMITS / LIMITS COULD CHANGE AS RESULT
OF STUDY
Recommend Removal (Y/N):
Limits Change Next Permit (Y/N) N
WQ/EL:
More Limits (Y/N):
N
to-t-E �;5 V.1 LQ� i ��-rnti�-� a�`ri• `� e �ke s� *e SS aZ
`Aua, -C: Le. s . 1...o i� de w lure
Nsso., e,1 Lusk

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 26, 1997
Ms. Stephanie Sudano
Town Engineer
Town of Holly Springs
P.O. Box 8
Holly Springs, North Carolina 27540
vT5VA
iiif
DIEl-INJF
Subject Holly Springs WWTP
Utley Creek Discharge and Instream Monitoring Requirements
NPDES Permit No. NC0063096
Wake County
Dear Ms. Sudano:
I am writing concerning your inquiry about instream monitoimg for the Town of Holly
Springs. In June, 1996, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) reviewed an Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the Town of Holly Springs' WWTP expansion up to 1.5 MGD at the
existing location on Utley Creek. At that time effluent and instream data were reviewed
and it was determined that a potential for localized nutrient related problems exist in Utley
Creek and a portion of Harris Lake. In order to get a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) the EA contained a requirement for mitigative measures which included additional
monitoring of the creek to determine adverse impacts from nutrients. In addition, the
expansion up to the 1.5 MGD would be designed to easily add nutrient removal facilities in
the future if needed.
In July, 1996, DWQ's Raleigh Regional Office investigated an algal bloom and fish kill on
Utley Creek downstream of the Holly Springs outfall. A small pond approximately 0.5
mile downstream of the discharge contained an algal bloom. Approximately 1.5 miles
downstream of the pond, a fish kill (100-200 Crappie and Sunfish) was documented and
dissolved oxygen values ranged from 0.2 mg/1 to 0.5 mg/l. According to the regional
office personnel, the algal bloom/fish kill was likely the result of a 3 week dry, hot period
during which the effluent from Holly Springs' discharge comprised the majority of the
Creek's flow. This dry period was followed by 2-4 days of heavy thunderstorms which
allowed the large quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus, which had been accumulating in
the pond, to become available to algae in the photic zone thereby triggering a bloom. Large
amounts of this algal biomass was observed downstream of the pond which staff believe
contributed to the oxygen demand.
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

Per the requirements in the EA, the DWQ would like the Town of Holly Springs to gather
additional instream nutrient data during the summer months ( June through September) on
Utley Creek and in Harris Lake (at the mouth of Utley Creek). This data will be used to
evaluate the need for nutrient controls at the 1.5 MGD facility. Instream data locations and
parameters will be as follows:
Location 1) Downstream on Utley Creek just before the mouth of the Creek
2) In Harris Lake in the White Oak Arm near Utley Creek
Parameters Nitrogen Series (TKN, NO3 + NO2) (mg/1)
Total Phosphorus (mg/1)
Chlorophyll a (ug/1)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1)
Temperature (Degrees C)
Frequency 2 per month to be coordinated with other instream sampling and
effluent sampling.
Locations are marked on the attached map. It may be beneficial to coordinate sampling
trips with CP&L and/or our Environmental Sciences Branch to locate a good site for
monitoring.
The monitoring requirements outlined in this letter are meant to assess the water quality
conditions of Utley Creek at the current permitted waste flow. The data collected will not
be used to assess the feasibility of an expanded discharge (above 1.5 MGD) at this time.
Further discussions concerning the Town's recent request for an expansion of the Holly
Springs WWTP will take place at the meeting tentatively scheduled for July 8th, 1997 at the
Archdale Building in Raleigh. Please contact Carla Sanderson at 733-5083 (extension 506)
if you have any questions or comments concerning this matter.
Sincerely,
Don Safrit, Assistant Chief
Water Quality Section
Attachment
cc: Steve Tedder
Dave Goodrich - P&E
Andy McDaniel - IAU
Debra Owen - ESB
Central Files
Thomas Tillage - Holly Springs, ORC

_4097 buy RJA/Q5
y er ryert{ o,.-
6eptpl-kitiouti - /* A wig, tea 4. t/.
t rif,5uPRAJO I :5 (Vi f AwiLiiob 6615t h ciiiitibwo G evivi7 /7
49tei4 14, 08,Eck-
• 4‘,404144- Lille i Vit / ld 6k eon ✓cv{a- b
afia-
469
urineru a l /W W /a
• &ale(%ki174dIJ + LA-AIDfiw
(ilir�h�J Akr Ym,
- [lg. 4roo
- /tOp wlGlSeS
Agt twolo CP w4 tricy
r/eseM rens.
�ou�r�2y CgicE�xrG�
STEPHANIE L. SUDANO, P.E.
TOWN ENGINEER
Town of Holly Springs
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
P.O. Box 8 Holly Springs, NC 27540 PHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
alsvcfww, M ricdncf, Alf. he{-

•11' /1.-2
/6' V. /i-L--/ 1-7 v r
.177 5(4)
Ftr611-42. 71-ke cr"' ph.fc-kr
•
1714,(ror
„
( -
(=',7,..)--37/---c:/-
jfte
(f- rilif(5-ricAtfly ( /Y-cfeA(b`()
1-490 t,L
°'5"1/ 4,#1 pekt
—
1,ft/g/r
L_
&In
;-4,2-c-C 014 CeW le( i-ti(
A*0-
ppte.c. 44.1.46.ely t 1' A ppepelio
„
v I 1
evect/ ‘&4

ACTIVATED SLUDGE PROCESS
EXTENDED AERATION
CASE 1
CASE 2 j TYPICAL RANGE I Page
Ili
Given
0 (gpd) .
1.000.000
1.500,000
var.
Irdl. BOD5 [So] (mg/) .
300
300
110 -400
p109
EffL BOD5 [S] (mg/1) -
5
5
0- 30
Intl. TKN (NH3-N if TKN not avail) [No] .
2 5
2 5
20 - 8S
p109
Effl. NH3-N [N] .
1
1
0-10
EO Volume (gal) -
250,000
250.000
var.
Reactor Volume (gal) -
1.150,000
1.150.000
var.
Clarifier Volume (gal) -
26.366
26.368
var.
Clarifier Surface Area (sf) -
4,418
4,418
var.
Clarifier Weir Length (if) .
235
235
var.
Dlgostor Volume (gal) .
300.000
300,000
Operating Elevation (ft) -
370
370
Worsed Case Air Temp. (F) .
3 2
3 2
Assumptions (Complete Mix)
MCRT (day)...
22.0
22.0
20-30
p550
MLSS (mg/l) -
4.000
4,000
1,500-5,000
p550
RAS, WAS (mg/l) -
10,000
10,000
8,000-25,000
p774
kd -
0.05
0.05
0.025-0.075
p394
f (BODS/BODI) -
0.68
0.68
0.45-0.68
p535
EQUALIZATION TANK
EO tank Vol./taw -
Alr Req'mts (CFM) -
AERATION TANK
25%
313
17%
313
> 25%
p470
Working Calculations
# BOD5 / 1000 CF -
16.0
✓
24.0
"-- 10.2S
p550
MLVSS (mg/I) .
3,200
✓
3,200
- - 80% MLSS
p550
HRT (hours) .
27.6
L
18.4
18-36
p550
F/M .
0.08
-
0.12
" 0.05-0.15
p550
U -
0.08
0.12
E (%) -
98.33
98.33
85.95%
p548
Y (mass cells/mass BOD5) .
Y (obs) -
1 1 S
0.57
,
0.79
0.38
0.4-0.8
0.23 - 0.63
p394
Qwaste ave. (gpd) .
16,727
21.818
Or/0 ave. -
0.45
0.45
0.25-1.0
p550
Px calc (#/d) -
1,,395TT`.
1,395.1
by kinetics
02 (CBOD removal, #/d) -
3,274
6,892
includes SF.2.0
02 (NH3 removal, #/d) .
1 ink
2.738
includes SF-2.0
Total 02 (Biological removal.#/d) -
175.11 6
`
9,656
includes rosid of 2
p536
Air Requirements - Diffused Air
Vr, 4--
tr.D , will . Stv4 - Transfer Eff. (%) .
d_0`.+
7.
1 0
5-10
p595
Air (w/Nitrtfication, CFM) .
1.877
3.543
p536
Air (w/out Nitrification, CFM) -
1,201
2,529
p536
-
Actual Air Required, w/nit, CFM .
8;9S
'3 y
-9754448
4-no Raz_ oxk.t.,
Max of mix/bio
p573
Actual Air Required, w/o nit. CFM -
3075
SW5
Max of mix/bio
Standard Alr. wink. CFM -
3'212
31702
Calc. based on Act.
Standard Alr. w/o nit. CFM -
31
3'L*-T2
Calc. based on Act.
Air Requirements - Surface Aerator
Standard 02 Saturation, mg/L -
14.57
14.57
M&E, Table E-2
p1259
02 Solubility Correction Factor, F -
1.0
1.0
p572
Standard 02 Transfer (lb 02/hp-hr) a
3.0
3.0
2-5
p572
Field 02 Transfer (lb 02/hp-hr) .
2.78
2.78
p572
Horsepower for 02 transfer, hp .
6 5
65
Mixing hp/1000 ft"3 -
1.00
.
1.00
0.75-1.5
p573
Horsepower for mixing, he -
154
V
154
AEROBIC DIGESTER
% solids in .
1.00
1.00
< 2.5
p774
% solids out -
2.00
2.00
< 2.5
p774
Vol Req'd (gal) -
334,545
490,909
for 30 days
02 req'd (lb) biol..
3209
3209
2.3/# sol
p837
Transfer Eff. % -
5.0
5.0
5.0 - 10.0
02 req'd (CFM) biol.-
2561
2561
02 req'd (CFM) mixing -
895
802
p837
TOTAL AIR REQUIREMENTS
EO+Rctor+Digest, w/nit. (CFM) -
EO+Rctor+Digest, w/o nit. (CFM) -
Act Air Provided (CFM) -
Act Alr Provided (CFM) -
6,086
6,086
6.575
6.086
All Blowers
Irgst blower out
Project: Holly Springs Utley Creek WWTP
Date: 21-Apr-97
ver. 4/18/97 SDP
ref: Metcalf 8 Eddy. 3rd Ed.
Standard
Actual
Elevation (ft) -
0
370
Temperature (F) .
6 8
3 2
Temperature (C) -
20
0
Suction Pressure (PSIA) .
14.7
14.2
Barometric Press. (PSIA) -
14.8628
Relative Humidity (%) -
3 6
10
Sat. VP of water (PSI) -
0.3391
0.08859
Air Density (ib/ftA2) -
0.075
0.082
CLARIFIER
Hydraulic detention time (hr) .
0.6
0.4
>3
Overflow Rate (gpd/sf) -
226
340
400-800
Weir Loading Rate (gpollf) .
4255
6383
<10,000
Solids Flux (#/hr-st) .
0.31
0.47
0.2-1
Prepared by: SDP and MDM

Town of Holly Springs
Engineering Department
February 18, 1997
Mr. David A. Goodrich, NPDES Supervisor
State Engineering Review Group
NCDEHNR-DWQ
PO Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Request for Authorization to Construct
Town of Holly Springs, Wake County
NPDES No. NC0063096
Dear Mr. Goodrich
WA/0
c-c0-501'
-
Mayor
Gerald W. Holleman
Commissioners
Parrish Womble
Ken Martin
George Kimble
Bob Kapel
Edison Perkins
We hereby request that an Authorization to Construct be issued for a new 1.0 MGD wastewater
treatment facility expansion to be built on the grounds of the existing 0.5 MGD Utley Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant. A new NPDES permit establishing a flow rate of 1.5 MGD has been issued. Enclosed is
the application fee of $200, payable to NCDEHNR. The following items will be submitted, under separate
cover, by our engineer, The Wooten Company:
1. Three sets of Detailed Plans and Specifications
2. Design Calculations
3. Hydraulic Profile (included in plans)
4. 8%z X 11" Flow Schematic
If you should have any questions, please contact me at (919) —3935.
- .1}% 6SIk
a.
Sincerely,
Stephanie L. Sudano, P.E.
Town Engineer
SLS/lra
Enclosure
cc: John Ellis, Finance Director
10133
128 South Main Street • Post Office Box 8 • Holly Springs, NC 27540 • 919/552-6221