NC0023299_Wasteload Allocation_19900828

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 28, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dale Overcash
FROM: Ruth Snek '{ZLS
SUBJECT: Oakwood Land Development Corporation
Woodlake MHP
NPDES No. NC0023299
UT Polecat Creek (030609)
Guilford County
I have reviewed Oakwood Land Development Corporation's letter
of August 18 regarding the stream flow used in Woodlake MHP's
wasteload allocation. The item was addressed in item 3 of Mike
Scoville's memo of May 23 (attached).
If you have any questions or comments, please call Mike or me.

EDOAKWOOD
LAND DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION
A SUBSIDIARY OF OAKWOOD HOMES CORPORATION
Tom(51" n.
2225 SOUTH HOLDEN ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX 77013 • GREENSBORO, N.C. 27417-7013 • 919-292-7061
August 18, 1990
Mr. Dale Overcash
NPDES Permits Group
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Re: NPDES No. NC0023299
Woodlake Mobile Home Park
Guilford County
Dear Mr. Overcash:
AUG 2 _1 )s,.
v
PeR /TS,cr•'10M1,,c/?m
ic
We have not received a reply to our previous protest to the
draft effluent limits for our Woodlake S.T.P. We continue to
protest the stricter limits which we understand are the result
of the State classifying the receiving stream as having a 7Q10
and 30Q2 of 0.0 cfs.
We do not agree with the 0.0 cfs determination and would like
to know what actions are required by us to have this classifi-
cation reevaluated.
Sincerely,
OAKWOOD LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
H.G. Webb
Vice President
cc: Bill Piver
Richard Jenkins

%? r
LA•?�.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Winston-Salem Regional Office
June 6, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Dale Overcash i/
Supervisor NPDES Permits, WQ
THROUGH: Mr. M. Steven Mauney, Supervisor
Water Quality, WSRO n I- /
FROM: Mr. Arthur R. Hagstrom 1°f 9°
Environmental Engineer, WQ, WSRO
SUBJECT: Woodlake MHP's NPDES Permit
No. NC0023299 limit changes for
their new Permit that will become
effective May 1, 1994, Guilford County
It appears that Technical Services must address the
questions about the limits spelled out in the new permit
that may provide treatment and real economic problems for
the subject Permittee. The limits may force other options
on the park owner. The WWTP serves both Woodlake MHP and a
new subdivision now under development by Oakwood Land
Development called Greybridge Subdivision. The WWTP
ownership has been retained by Oakwood Land Development and
the Woodlake MHP has been sold to another owner. Treatment
service for the MHP is provided as part of the purchase
price. It is probable that the investments in these two (2)
developments will be adversely affected by the new limits.
ARH / vrn
Copy too :
Central Files
WSRO

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dale Overcash
THRU: Ruth Swanek BLS
Trevor Clements
FROM:
Mike Scoville ADS
May 23, 1990
SUBJECT: Draft Permit Comments of Oakwood Land Development Corporation
(NPDES No. NC0023299, Guilford County)
I have reviewed the comments of the Oakwood Land Development Corporation
regarding the draft NPDES permit for Woodlake Mobile Home Park, and offer
the following response:
1. The letter mentions that beginning May 1, 1994, the permit contains
just a daily maximum limit for NH3-N and no monthly average limit. I assume
this is true because NH3-N is limited as a toxicant, and that no monthly
average limit is applicable. If the Company wants, a monthly average NH3-N
limit of 1.0 mg/1 could be added to the permit, but the daily maximum limit
would still need to be met.
2. The permittee states that since their instream monitoring data show
little or no reduction of DO as a result of the plants discharge, they are
adequately protecting the environment and do not need more restrictive
effluent limits. Due to limited access, however, their downstream monitor-
ing site is only 300 feet downstream from their discharge, and is not in the
optimal position to capture the true impact of the discharge. Also, the
facility is currently operating at approximately half of their permitted
wasteflow. While the instream data show that there is currently a minimal
impact of the discharge immediately downstream, it does not necessarily mean
that the stream is adequately protected at design conditions and7Q10 flow.
3. The zero -flow values for the 7Q10 and 30Q2 were not arbitrarily
assigned, but estimated by USGS according to procedure. Technical Support
would be glad to re -assess the wasteload allocation upon receipt of informa-
tion that suggests a positive 7Q10. We would encourage the Company to com-
plete a flow study as they have mentioned, but they should be in contact
with USGS and Technical Support to assure that the study is valid and per-
formed according to standard procedure. The letter indicated that the pond
upstream of the discharge could possibly be used for flow augmentation dur-
ing low flow periods. This may be a possible solution if the facility would
agree to a minimum release requirement. It should be noted, however, that
the pond water would probably not be of high quality during low flow periods
due to high temperatures and little inflow.

4. Current Division policy for discharges to streams with 7Q10=0 and
30Q2=0 requires 1) that an engineering report evaluating alternatives to a
surface water discharge be submitted within 12 months of permit issuance,
and 2) effluent limits reflecting tertiary treatment and protecting against
ammonia toxicity become effective three years after permit issuance. These
requirements should not be changed. If the engineering report sufficiently
shows that there are no feasible discharge alternatives, the limits should
go into effect on May 1, 1994, as currently stated in the permit.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this issue, please feel
free to contact me.
cc: Central Files
Steve Mauney

7.tera. J Gixw
L.ANE DEVELOPMENT
WOOD
CORPORATION
A SJSSIDIARY OAKWOOD HOMES CORPORATION
(L ��,,,S�LLr4e
srzL411
2225 SOUTH HOLDEN ROAD • POST OFFICE BOX 77013 • GREENSBORO, N.C. 27417-7013 • 919-292-7061
May 18, 1990
Mr. Dale Overcash
NPDES Permits Group
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Re: NPDES No. NC0023299
Woodlake Mobile Home Park
Guilford County
Dear Mr. Overcash:
We have received the Division of Environmental Managements April 19th
"Notification of Intent" to reissue our NPDES permit for the Woodlake
Waste Water Treatment Plant. As requested, we have reviewed the draft
permit which was attached and find we have major concerns regarding the
proposed permit and the discharge limit requirements. In fact, it was
quite a shock when we examined the draft permit for its particulars. We
found that the proposed discharge limitation on NH3 as N for the period
beginning may 1, 1994 has a daily maximum but no monthly average for
either the summer or winter portions of the permit. Applying the ratio
obviously employed for the other discharge parameters, this would imply
that a monthly average of .75 mg/1 for summer and .9 mg/1 for winter would
be expected of us. We question the technical feasibility of this degree
of nitrogen removal on a consistent basis. We further question the need
for the low maximum daily limit shown.
We, as a corporation, recognize our responsibilities to protect the
environment. Your regional personnel are aware of the significant
investment that has been made at the Woodlake Waste Water Treatment Plant
over the past year to insure that we accomplish what is expected of us.
However, after reviewing the proposed limits, we feel we have no recourse
but to object to the% proposed permit for the period beginning May 1,
1994. Our primary objection is to the very stringent limitation on the
BOD5 - NH3 respectively. A review of our file data indicates that the
facility has met these limits, stringent though they are. Samples taken
from the receiving stream at the plant indicate little or no reduction in
the dissolved oxygen content of the stream due to the plant's discharge.
To us this would indicate that we are successful in our objective of
protecting the environment. Consequently, we fail to see a need for the
more restrictive limits for these two elements of the permit.

IV/AY 2 1iyJli
We believe that the basis for the proposed limits is faulty. in ,,;
technical staff has arbitrarily assigned 0 cfs flow to the jeceiving
stream, even for the 3OQ2. We do no believe that any credit whatsover was
given for the large body of water 100 feet upstream of the discharge point
which could, if required, be employed to provide flow augmentation during
dry conditions. Further, we have decided to embark on a comprehensive
area watershed survey to determine the area size and general
characteristics of the drainage basin available to the stream which serves
the plant. If our belief is correct, then the wasteload allocation
modelling does not accurately reflect the actual conditions of the stream
and discharge point relationship.
We have detected recently a general mood among some of the public and
their regulators to eliminate the small "package" wastewater treatment
plant. This may be a worthy objective, but until a feasible alternative
is available to our customers, we have to continue to strive, as we have
in the past, to provide them with a cost efficient operation while making
our best effort to protect the environment at the same time. This is not
an easy task, as you well know. Unrealistic and unnecessarily restrictive
effluent limits only complicate the situation for everyone.
Please advise us as to the required coarse of action we need to
undertake since we cannot accept the proposed permit with the limitations
as they are now proposed for the period beginning and following May 1,
1994.
Ree Hart, Jr.
Vi President - Real Estate
RHJ:pw

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0023299
PERMTITEE NAME: Oakwood Land Deav:124ment Corporation /
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 0.070 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 100 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 0 %
Comments:
STREAM INDEX: 17-11-( 1 )
RECEIVING STREAM:
Class: WS-III
PLOTTED
an unnamed tributary to Polecat Creek
Sub -Basin: 03-06-09
Reference USGS Quad: D19NE, Pleasant Gdn
County: Guilford
Regional Office: Winston-Salem Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 8/31/90 Treatment Plant Class: II
Classification changes within three miles:
Polecat Creek reverts to Class C at the Randleman Res. Dam - ca. 17.5
mi.
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Jule Shankli
3
(please attach)
Date: 2/19/90
Date: 3jC !etc)
ate: L3)7 /co
90
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
`NA. S
Z12o`go
6593
Drainage Area (mil ) j , ( 0
Avg. Streamflow (cfs) : I.Oo
7Q10 (cfs) 0,0 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 0, 0 30Q2 (cfs) 0.06)
Toxicity Limits: IWC 9 % Acute/Chroni
Ghron:c. (Ce r: o �aG�ln�aQ rir Iy
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters
Upstream
TeMca.rw'i-vot
Y
Downstream
r
O Fecal Co cm co-t1uc-iv17
Location 100 4, vesilf.640,
Location 300 4. 4 of ASl t,»4I1
Effluent
Characteristics
j,
CRC
--
Somme"-
w;nicr
SutMMi-C
w:n1u
BOD5 (mg/1)
1$
le
5
10
NH3-N (mg/1)
S.t0
1
1.8'
D.O. (mg/1)
6
6
6
6
TSS (mg/1)
30
30
30
30
F. Col. (/100 ml)
2.60
208
260
700
pH (SU)
6.9 6 - q
6-41
6-ei
I�er 5iwanda(4 1);,i15
4.4.1401 1 I(5- 0 a✓w 3
ion proccL 'cot' 1
0 Q 1 ° O) jccO rniAtAl
.1sckar3es I-. sirean
cemooxl o/d:se.tLare e
as sea.1t ws. vn 41
be o AA1 . Trod-re0.M
icrow{ on od e ,
MOAL+b r I, rtieu. rt M
as'z.1P.iipmA man
c
tl\4 Mav L... jr.ber
'situ" I.4y
ri oval 0.. 1;Scu.,
'.greeS, ,-,rg.f/A )
Ale. -inn, existinci
Fu .. sc�dult fie/
I:M:is (A) sl ld
4Pp1 far }ln {:r5+
M4.+ (B) skoul;
S yurs oc J �t
a49PLy. Pt( AIL+ Ski
r r.. a. ie,v✓%,:ck
d rfgt;IV GA
e inett,1 MCpor+
%.,:i . b(eatS %,I CO
t .'tiro 2 ^ron S c
Mpl.aAce.. 10)C«14-4
rrer.nit ,ssuaae&
+CS'' Is +a QJ.1ra
Comments: La' Tok%G
r5f. 3 yeays OA1Y.
..✓iJ .S1n6u d ( l IAA
hlonn! leter .Sh P 7b' .--12.4/ /6
5

N.G. Dept. NM)
FEB 281990
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM ---
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Status:
Receiving Stream:
Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Quad:
Wasteflow (mgd) :
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1) :
DO (mg/1) :
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal coliform (#/100m1):
pH (su) :
Toxicity Testing Req.: Chronic/Ceriodaphnia/Qrtrly
MONITORING
Woodlake Mobile Home Park
NC0023299
Domestic
Existing/Renewal
UT to Polecat Creek
WS-III
030609
Guilford
Winston-Salem
Jule Shanklin
2/19/90
D19NE
Drainage
Summer
Winter
Average
Upstream (Y/N): Y
Downstream (Y/N): Y
RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS
(A)
Summer Winter
0.07 0.07
15 18
5 10
6 6
30 30
200 200
6-9 6-9
are#1:
7Q1b:
7Q10:
flow:
30Q2:
Request No.:
5593
411 'D
MAR u 5 '1990
1.100 sq mi
0.00 cfs
0.00 cfs
1.00 cfs
0.05 cfs
(B)
Summer Winter
0.07 0.07
5 10
1 1.8
6 6
30 30
200 200
6-9 6-9
Location: 100 feet upstream
Location: 300 feet downstream
COMMENTS
Per standard Division procedure for discharges to streams with 7Q10=0
and 30Q2=0, recommend removal of discharge as soon as an alternate method
of waste disposal can be found. Instream monitoring requirement may be
dropped when the facility agrees, in writing, to a schedule for removal
of discharge. The existing limits (A) should apply for the first three
years of the permit, after which limits (B) should become effective.
Permit should require the facility to submit an engineering report within
12 months of issuance with plans for compliance. Toxicity test is to
address ammonia toxicity and should be required for the first 3 years
only. Recommend instream monitoring of temperature, DO, fecal coliform,
and conductivity.
L lfkr ,5hcikki tL° afrti fa facih _C(2ride,
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
�qo
Instream Assessment:
Regional Supervisor:
Permits & Engineering:
ALJ
D. Scoff
�ut.0 C. Ste.
Qpt fLott...t
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY:
Date:
Date:
Date:
MAR 2 8 1990
alga (90
3-l- o
Date: 31f%4.0

10/89
Facility Name Wookake. Mt) Ie. qoavle. Pay Permit # k/C(202319
CHRONIC TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity in any two consecutive toxicity tests,
using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is ql % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure
document). -The permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from
issuance of this perrnit.during the months of Feb, May , kug, Nov. . Effluent
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permittedfinaleffluent discharge below
all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Test data shall becompleteand accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. 'Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
permit.may be re -opened and modified to include altemate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failureto achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 • 0 <o cfs
Permited Flow _ 0.07 MGD Recommended by:
IWC% 100
Basin & Sub -basin 53c,60
Receiving Stream ur to Po feed Ctee k KeLd Sco
"County Guy fi o r d Date 2(20 o
**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at qi %, CD, May/ r�uj� Nou , See Part , Condition _.

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
March 21,1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dale Overcash
THRU: Ruth Swanek 1X5
Trevor Clements
FROM: Mike Scoville r
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit Conditions for Woodlake Mobile Home Park
NPDES No. NC0023299, Guilford County
WLA Request No. 5593
Woodlake Mobile Home Park discharges to a unnamed tributary to Polecat
Creek at a site where the 7Q10 and 30Q2 are both zero. In accordance to
Division procedure for handling domestic discharges to zero -flow streams,
the facility's limits should change three years after permit issuance (see
WLA for specific conditions).
As part of the implementation of the basin -wide permitting schedule,
this permit will again be renewed in April 1991. It is my understanding
that if the permit were to be issued at this time, it would possibly be for
less than a twelve month period. Therefore, per discussion with Don Safrit,
there is the likelihood that the Division will hold the permit and issue it
next April.
If the permit is held, the WLA is correct as is; the permit should be
drafted in the normal manner. If a one-year permit is issued this year, the
existing limits (A) should apply and the permit should include special con-
ditions requiring an engineering report within twelve months of permit issu-
ance and indicating to the permittee that the effluent limits will be chang-
ing in the near future.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please con-
tact me.

MD5
4410
u i -ro Mc cc,-1- C c- t L
hvilul -}"d 7.nrnjL so& wSRO , Rer` wc.
---
1
t,0t`-
1 C C�ta f' ,1 L�'M (J! -t 3 C i- J t -ii�rw i n 3
. Pr„$o
vv/if -rr l�c,� Of cri-
�,c.; �
Ycacs ) 7re
I
3 yes -CS.

INSTREAM SELF -MONITORING DATA
MONTHLY AVERAGES
Discharger: VV(oJ(okc MHP
Receiving Stream: +, Po(e,�af
Upstream Location: (Au up
Permit No.: NC00 23'a
Lcrxk Sub -basin: a 30601
Downstream Location
Upstream Downstream
DATE TEMP D.O. BODS COND
DEC-89 p %3TEMP D.O. BOD5 COND
7
NOV-89 1 R,i 0 13, 1
OCT-89._ IL( 7, r S
SEP-89 1 `t ?_ _
AUG-89 1� . 3 (Y.�) — Is( _�
JUL-.89 19 7, 2 _ 21 7, 2
JUN-89 Act g. Z 1l 7,Y
MAY-89 I o 1i g`Z
APR-89 . 9 7 t I q.Y
MAR-89 6 t� --�-_ 9,6
FEB-.89
to
DEC-.88 3 11, o- S �s rO
NOV-88ots.�
OCT-88 12 g,5 . q:H
SEP-88 i� - 13 8,7
AUG- 8 8 �' b 11 _
JUL-88- 21z - G (� 22 7.0
JUPi-88 1� —z� _ bay
MAY-88 l� 7 1e 6,3
APR-88 1I 4. 17 7.3
MAP.-88 6 3 ► fs-
FEE-88 � // 5 - 1 q. z
JAN-88 .3 q, g —.� 12, 7
DEC-87 3 rc�•o
s
NOV-87 ___I__ - 6 0o•q
OCT-87 !2 7.Z(Y�`, do 8.9
SEP-87 13 Si y
19 2,°� (z. o .. ab N 9 (N.3)
AUG-87 22 3 (�,
�,�) 2
JUL-87 2 1 a,oj Z 's (3'7
L
JUN-87 zo .7.0 ' (.z,�� 23 Sq ,�1 S)
MAY-87 zo `�, G CY, 3)
APR-7 5,J` (1,)�. lc/_,q
MAR-87 i Z �i,s
FEB-87 3 «�, .�_ 'V)
JAN-87 3 5.3
EC-86 td, 8 `I /t.2 D
NOV ___9__ ►o:7 6 9,-6
OCT-86 �� G.q
SEP-86 _Aao Op6;6 _ �6,C)
AUG-86 5,1 Z2 5,7(15) 2.0 S./(5.0)
JUL-86 � 2 s i
JUN-86 2 5',G(s,)j 23 s,r
MAY-86 11 9 9 (� S) 12. 6
I
APR-86U.)2 s.G .
MAR-86 9,9 (41) 10 5,14
FEB-86 --�-�-- S,2 (y,3) _a__,_ . S` 6
JAN-86 goS" 1 (y d) It s, 6
A Si 5 11 S Z_

cc: Permits and Engineeri (NPDES)
Technical Support
Guilford County Emergency Management
Guilford County Plan. & Dev. Dept.
Central Files
WSRO
•
MAR 2 2 1990
r CG.: 'i e -.< •.L
sr
Date March--;;;20, 1990
Page 1 of 4
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
County Guilford
NPDES Permit No. NC0023299
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION (Renewal and Name Change)
1. Facility and Address:
Oakwood Land Development Corporation's WWTP currently
serving Woodlake MHP and GreyBridge Subdivision and
located off Sheraton Park Road east of Randleman Road.
Mailing Address: Mrs. Barbara Norcom, Property
Management Director, 225 S. Holden Road (P. O. Box
77013), Greensboro, N.C. 27417-7013
2. Date of Investigation: March 13, 1990 (site) and March
17, 1990 (files)
3. Report Prepared by: Arthur R. Hagstrom, Environmental
Engineer, DEM, WSRO WQ
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
Richard Jenkins, Contract Operator 919-656-7100
Barbara Norcom, Property Management Director
919-292-7061..,
5. Directions to Site:
From the Jct. of I-85/40 and Randleman Road (Old US220)
go south on Randleman Road to Sheraton Park Road. Turn
left on Sheraton Park Road to the WWTP on the left at
the creek (approx. .5 mile).
6. Discharge Point - Latitude: 35° 58' 12"
Longitude: 79° 47' 43"
Elevation: 755 +/-
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicated treatment plant
site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No. D19 NE or USGS Quad Name Pleasant Garden,
N. C.
7. Size (land available for expansion and upgrading):
Over-all tract 50 to 100 acres. Adequate area
available for WWTP upgrade (3 to 5 acres currently
available).

Page 2 of 4
NC0023299
March 20, 1990
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included):
Graded to suit WWTP. Currently 1 to 3o,recently
regraded and graveled to a depth of 6" to several feet.
9. Location of nearest dwelling:
Currently greater than 1000'.
bring housing closer.'
10. Receiving stream or affected
Polecat Creek
a. Classification: WS-III
b. River Basin and Subbasin
River; 03-06-08.
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent
downstream uses: The downstream flows through
rural areas with increasing residential areas.
This stream is a water supply stream.
New developments may
surface waters: UT to
No.: Cape Fear/Deep
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. Type of wastewater: 100% Domestic
stiial
a. Volume of Wastewater: .070 MGD (Permitted) The
current flow level is approximately .039 MGD (12
month average).
b. Types and quantities of industrial wastewater:
N/A
c. Prevalent toxic constituents in wastewater:
Chlorine for disinfection.
d. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
in development approved
should be required not needed
2. Production rates (industrial discharges only) in
pounds: N/A
highest month in the last 12 months
highest year in last 5 years
a.
b.
3. Description of industrial process (for industries only)
and applicable CFR Part and Subpart: N/A

Page 3 of 4
NC0023299
March 20, 1990
4. Type of treatment (specify whether proposed or
existing):
Existing. The WWTP is being reworked in accordance
with an A to C issued June 23, 1987. Treatment tanks
are being re -arranged and repiped to allow treatment to
grow to the permitted flow. When completed, the system
will include an influent pump station, two (2) parallel
sides each having seven (7) 5,000 gallon aeration tanks
for 35,000 gallons and 70,000 gallons total,
clarification, tertiary filtration, aerated sludge
holding, a chlorination system (gas), flow measurement
and recording, and discharge line to the receiver
stream. The system includes a stand-by portable power
system.
5. Sludge handling and disposal scheme:
Aerated sludge holding tank the contract pumper to
Greensboro N. Buffalo WWTP.
6. Treatment plant classification: Class II WSRO
evaluation (41 points)
7. SIC Code(s) 6515
Wastewater Code(s) 08
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction
Grants Funds ('municipals only)? No
2. Special monitoring requests: None, standard limits.
3. Additional effluent limits requests: None, standard
limits.
4. Other: This facility serves two developments.
Woodlake MHP was sold to a new owner, but the WWTP
ownership was retained by Oakwood Land Development.
Oakwood apparently has been paid to provide treatment
forever as part of the purchase price. The Oakwood
Land Development Corporation's WWTP will also serve
their Grey Bridge Development and possibly other
development to enable their WWTP to be used up to its
rated flow.

Page 4 o4 4
NC0023299
March 20, 1990
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This WWTP has been operated satisfactorily based upon
CEI's an CSI's.
The WSRO recommends Permit re -issuance in accordance
with current DEM policies.
It is recommended that DHS comments be obtained
regarding this existing discharge into a water supply
stream.
6LAJ/,- Gszt
Signature of repgrt preparer
Water Quality Supervisor