NC0023868_Wasteload Allocation_19850806

Engineer Da a Rec.
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION 3I If o?
Date /.� , f ,
Facility Name: 0 ,('L � 11 �;- - e
Existing
Proposed O Permit No.: N G O d 01- 3 19 6 1� Pipe No.: D County:
Design Capacity (MGD): Industrial (% of Flow): Domestic (% of Flow):
Receiving Stream: 41)iU Class: �' Sub -Basin: Ci 2-
Reference USGS Quad: (Please attach) Requestor: Regional Office
(Guideline limitations, if applicable, are to be listed on the back of this form.)
Design Temp..
Drainage Area (mi2):
Avg. Streamf low (cfs):
7Q10 (cfs) 55 2 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) -13' Ll 30Q2 (cfs)
Location of D.O. minimum (miles below outfall):
Slope (fpm )
Velocity (fps): Kl (base e, per day): K2 (base e. oer day):
i-eY
Effluent
]
Characteristics
Nb nthly
Average
��01/41,
4vevcL
X
�.
/ J
5
.
Ori final o 'tio Comments:
s 1 tion O
i a 'on
Q c9
/ / �) Reviewed By: Date: 8S
" Prepared By: l G�-

Tf-, T©aineSTan, cr�`��s� W �rN 1tp�s PAijR
✓ V,la-r�3 '�° �s-.Q't,..r � -�'v-w /LZgue..tiCec� �' cnrU.,a,%C'.cQ'o-�' �� �� l�"1
o Av U

&W P_
0 Lit
_ ov a s 000 f .�
= oao?
r
M-
OON-
U
2�u7l

" ~ �
N RECEIVED
" ~ Reo'/p"�� NnC - D*^ m6���5
Facility Name
Type Of Waste
Receiving Stream
Stream Class
Bubb asin
County
Regional Office
Reouestor
Drainage Area (so mi)
7010 (cfs)
Winter 7010 (cfs)
3002 (cfs)
WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM
� BURLINGTON EAST WWTP
� DOMESTIC & TNDUSTRIAL
� HAW RIVER
� C
� 03O6O2
� ALAMANCE
� RRO
1 P&E
�
� 52
� 73^4
�
-----jut - vs- *$5---­
Division nf
Envirommcnlal Nlanmggymnt
Winston-Salem Reg office I
���nr
^^ w
c��
-------------------------
RECOMMENDED
FFFLUENT iJMTTS --------------------------
Wasteflow (mad)
12
12
5-Day BOB (mg/l)
12
24
Ammonia Nitrogen
(mg/l):
4
8
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/l):
5
5
PH (SU)
6-9
6-9
Fecal Coliform (/100ml):
1000
1000
TSS (mg/l)
30
30
H9 ug/l
^7
&)`l-
-----------------------------------
COMMENTS -----------------------------------
MONITORING REQUIRED FOR Al AND Zn
---------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------
FACILITY IS : PROPOSED ( ) EXISTING (w/) NEW ( )
LIMITS ARE : REVISION ( ) CONFIRMATJON ( ) OF THOSE PREVTOUSiY ISSUED
RECOMMENDED BY: : -DATF:
REVIEWED BY:
SUPERVISOR, TECH. SUPPORT --'--DATE :2/17�-`�`�
REGIONAL SUPERVISOR DATE
�
Approval is ( ^ ) preliminary
PERMITS MANAGER �--���[�-���,�'-����- -'---r!ATF

lb
A)66M 3 9� 8
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
July 11, 1984
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Steve Mauney
Winston-Salem Regional Office
FROM: Connie Heavener l-'
Technical Services
THRU: Randy Williams
Steve Tedder
SUBJECT: In -Stream Assessment
Eastside Burlington WWTP
Summary & Recommendations
The Eastside Burlington WWTP has requested an SOC in
order to add 26,000 gpd of domestic waste to its wastewater
treatment facility. At the present time, the plant is dis-
charging 6.023 mgd into the Haw River in the Cape Fear River
Basin. Modeling predicts that at 7Q10 streamflow (52 cfs) and
present operating conditions, this discharge causes no D.O.
violations in the stream. The D.O. sag (4.8 mg/1) occurs
7.7 miles downstream because of the impact of Alamance Creek's
Burlington South WWTP. The confluence of the Haw River and
Alamance Creek occurs 6.1 miles below the Burlington East
discharge. If 26,000 gpd were added to Burlington East, the
D.O. in the stream would not change.
Self -monitoring data for Burlington Eastside indicates
that dissolved oxygen concentrations are consistantly above
the 5 mg/l D.O. standard in the Haw River.
An on -site toxicological investigation of the Burlington
Eastside WWTP took place between October 24 and October 29, 1983.
Data gathered at this time indicates that ammonia, phenols,
mercury, copper, and chlorine are influencing toxicity. Other
unmeasured parameters are also present. Although not related
to toxicological response, the nutrient levels measured from
the WWTP discharge are extremely high. These nutrients are
probably contributing to future eutrophication problems downstream.

Steve Mauney
July 11, 1984
- page two -
Analysis & Results
The following information describes the operation of the
Burlington Eastside WWTP at this time:
Effluent Characteristics
Flow
BOD5
NH3N
DO
DOavg (low monthly)
Monthly Average
6.053 mgd
30.28 mg/1
3.57 mg/1
8.66 mg/1
7.3 mg/1
An existing Level "C" model was used for this SOC analysis
for -the proposed addition of 0.026 mgd of sanitary waste to
the -Burlington Eastside WWTP. This model is based on work
previously done on the Haw River. The other dischargers
considered in this.analysis were Graham-, the Bar-b-que Restuarant,
Swepsonville; South Burlington on Alamance Creek- Piedmont
Crescent; Dixie Yarns- and B Everett Jordan School. Averages
based on the past twelve months of self -monitoring data were
used -to represent plant operating conditions for these facilities.
The DO sag in this section of the Haw River occurs below the
Burlington South plant. 'Self -monitoring data for this facility
is listed on Table I. It should be noted that they are in
non-compliance for BOD5 and-NH3N.
During the -toxicological investigation which took place
in October of 1983 the following analyses were performed:
1) a 96-hour flow -through bioassay of the effluent at the
discharge using fathead minnows (Pimephelas promelas) as
the test organism, 2) 48 hour Daphnia pulex static bioassays
of the effluent; 3) chemical sampling, 4) collection of benthic
macroinvertebrate samples; both upstream and downstream of
the discharge. According to the study, the 96 hour flow -through
LC50 of 14.74% would indicate a toxic impact to the Haw River
in excess of 50% sensitive organism mortality at low flow
conditions. The Daphnia pulex 48 hour..static tests reveal an
increase in toxicity most likely accountable to addition of
chlorine during treatment. Results of the chemical analyses
indicated several other potentially toxic constituents such as
phenols, copper, mercury, and -ammonia.

n
Steve Mauney
July 11, 1984
- page two -
This segment of the Haw River has a "C" classification
with a 7Q10 flow of 52 cfs. At 7Q10 flow and present conditions,
modeling indicates that the DO will drop to 4.8 mg/1 at either
present conditions or with the additional flow (Table II).
Since the additional waste is domestic, no impact with respect
to to xics is expected.
Please call if you have any questions.
CH:cs
Attachments

TABLE I
Self-Nbnotoring Data - Bur1•igton South
Nbnth
QW (mgd)
BOD5 (mg/1)
\*d3N (mg/1)
march-'83
6.9
45.1
6.2
4.8
April 183
6.9
53.4
"52.0
6.6
May ' 83
0.1
49.8
7.7
JLme ' 83
5.7
4.6
54.1
7.2
_ . July - 83
' 83
5.2
48.2
7.6
Aug
: Sect. 183
4.8
34.3
9.
10.9
'83
4_8-
36.1
32.9
8:6
t�bv. 183
- - -.
..I)ec_
5.6
-. -6.3
17.4
.67
83
Average
5.69
42.3'
7.0
DO (mq/1)
6..3
6.6
6.2
5.9
5.1
5.7
5.5
6.8
6.0

T-,11.1 - TT
In -Stream Assessment
Qw=6.053 mgd Qw = 6.079 mgd
waste DO 7.36 mg/l
Haw River: mile 0 (mix)DO (mg/1) T.39 mg/1
mile 4.25 DO (mg/1) 5.6.2 mg/1
mile 6.5 DO (mg/1) 5.11 mg/1
mile 7.7 DO (mg/1) 4.78 mg/1
mile 9.3 DO (mg/1) 5.00 mg/1
mile 14.65.DO (mg/1) 7.15 mg/1
7.36 mg/l
7.39 mg/1
5.62 mg/l
5.10 mg/1
4.78 mg/1
4.99 mg/l
7.15 mg/1
m

G°rV2_ .
..a STATf o
North Carolina Department of
Resources &Community Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor James A. Summers, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIROMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 15, 1984
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Randy Williams
Technical Services, Operations Branch
FROM: Russell D. Radford
Regional Supervisor
Steve Mauney 4 "
Regional Engineer
SUBJECT: In -Stream Assessment
City of Burlington, Alamance County
Due to a request June 11, 1984 by Mr. K.L. Ketchum, Mayor, City of
Burlington for connection of projects under the authority of 143-
215.67(b), another stream assessment must be performed. Current
data for Eastside Burlington WWTP is also included.
A. Present Conditions: Average effluent characteristics
Flow ---------- 6.053 mgd
BOD5---------- 30.28 mg/1
NH3 ----------- 3.57 mg/l
DO Avg .-------8.66 mg/1
DO(low mo.)--- 7.36 mg/1
DO(min. week) -
DO for model
B. Future Additions: And for an incremental flow increase of
,:cc>=011M gallons per day domestic flow. (Based on a requested
flow in the June 1984 letter from Mr. K.L. Ketchum, Mayor,
City of Burlington).
Winston-Salem Regional Office 8003 North Point Boulevard, Winston-Salem, N. C. 27106-3295 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
January 23, 1984
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: W. Lee Fleming, Jr.
Forrest Westall
Russell Radford
Bob Deweese
FROM: Steve W. Tedder,
SUBJECT: Toxicological Evaluation of Burlington Eastside Waste Water
Treatment Facility NPDES No. NC0023868
A flow -through toxicological evaluation was performed at the
Burlington Eastside WWTP during the week of October 24th, 1983. The
results of this evaluation are detailed in the attached report. The
results of this study would indicate substantial toxic impacts to the
receiving stream. I would suggest that all staff involved in evaluation
and follow-up activities of the toxics program initiate their activities
as soon as possible.
If there are any questions, please contact myself (733-5083) or Ken
Eagleson at 733-2136.
SWT:ps
cc w/attachment
Ken Eagleson
Bill Mills
Randy Williams
L.P. Benton, Jr.

TDxicological Examination of Burlington
Eastside Waste Water Treatment
Facility NPDES #NC0023868
January 23, 1984
N.C. Division of Environmental Management
Technical Services Unit
Aquatic- Thxocology Group. _
F

INTRODUCTION`
-.:.An.,on-si•te toxicological investigation of. the: Burlington:.Eastside -
Waste Water Treatment Plant, was required: as a. result. of: screening bio-_.
assays conducted.' on- its effluent_. on., March..26;: 1983 and.: October.-. 20•,...1983 ..
.These.'tests" resulted in 48 hour LC50 f"s o39%'and.50%.respectively. This,
document-presents.the results. of an array of analyses -performed -as follow-
up to -the preliminary testing.:, These analyses included-1.) a- 96 hour.
..flowthrough bioassay=of: the effluent at the discharge parsha•ll-flume;
using -fathead minnows (Pimephelas promelas)_as the test organism,, 2..)
48 hour'Daphriia pulex static -bioassays of the.effluent at the final par -
shall flume and at the discharge of the final clarifiers, 3.) chemical -
sampling of the effluent at the final parshall flume, and 4.) collection -
of benthic.-macroinvertebrate samples from -the Haw River both upstream _
t ,
and downstream of the discharge. The investigations took place between
October 24 and October 29, 1983. Terminology and experimental details
used within this test series are summarized or defined in the appendix
of this report. The separate components of this investigation will be
discussed individually. A summary section --at the end will identify re-
lationships between the individual components.. Specific recommendations
and followup requirements are also suggested.
r
The Burlington East Treatment Plant discharges to the -Haw River (Class
C) in the Cape Fear River Basin. The facility is located in Alamance Co.
and occupies approximately 75 acres to the eastern side of the city of
'I
Burlington on the west bank of the river. At this point in the Haw Drain- _
age the 7Q10 low flow value is 52 cfs. A large portion of this flow is
due to upstream industrial discharge. The discharge volume of this facility
is restricted to 12 MGD as a monthly average. A functional schematic of -
the WWTP is seen in Figure One. Facility processes include grit removal,
flow equalization, primary clarification- with.; sludge thickeners and de -
watering,,. carboncontact clarification,' activated,sludge aeration,..final..
clarif"i.c•ation-,. gravity sand filtra.tion';_.chl-orination,' and, s.tep':, aeration..- -
For, user: reference a. county -
..map. with, sample: points-,-designated.=may.
be found in ° tfie "appendix -
k L
-
a

Chlorine Contact &
Step Aeration
*--Chlorine
Easy TP
Final Clarifier
FO-1
Backwash.Storage
-Basin
' 3
Gravity Sand
Filters Chlorine
4
Plant Reuse -
Water
Vacuum
Filter
Aerobic
Digesters
E!Cn
Operation &
Lab Bldg. .
I ?
Primary. Clarifiers .
i
t
i 1 �
t
1
,
' r
l
I '
Aeration Basin
x
I
O 0 .,
Polymer
Feed ;.
Activated Sludge Recirculation
�I
t
I
Carbon
$+
Ash`r
Regen
5'.
J` Carbon Sludge
4
J Thickene`rs'
Carbon 'Contact, f
Clarifiers
- � 1.
r �i•'jii.
III'
..

On7-Site, Static• Tests
Usually, the Divi
p --ision monitors toxicitytoxicityat, the, oint. immed ately
prio.
r.to-,'chlorination.- In;. the case of:Burlington East -WWTP this, point-:.
samples. would- only.: be: available, prior
-was-not dccessabl'e. Prechlorination .
--filtration,,.., Since.,.this wouldi not represent�final.:effluent
to, f inAL sand
%
-
quality,,, arv-attempt was: 'made to- compare'.toxicity.- levels above..: and: belowi.
ch1orination. This: would allow an. estimate. of the.. toxic. contribution-,",
made -by chlorination..
Two Daphnia.pulex 48 hour static -bioassays were performed on -site
in- order to-. determine these differencesi... One grab sample-was.obtained
as a spatial -composite as waste exited the "high" and "low" flow final
clarifiers.- Another sample was collected from the -final parshall flume,
below chlorination. 'Forty-eight hour results. of these tests -show an.
LC50 of 54% for the non -chlorinated, clarifier sampl . e-and 36% for -the
chlorinated,p.arshall flume sample. Dilution water was the, samei as: u-sed
for. the flowthrough test This demonstrates an additional.toxic com-
ponent is being added. to the whole effluent toxicity- due to chlorination..
Chlorine toxicity is discussed in a later section of this document.
On -Site Flowthrough Test
The 96 hour fathead minnow test was run on chlorinated effluent -
sample pumped directly from the final parshall flume approximately 50
yards above the discharge point to the Haw River, The dilution water
was collected from an unnamed tributary to Back Creek and transported
to the test site every other day of the test.
This test was initiated at 09:35 hours on October 25, 1983 and.
terminated at 09:35 hours on October 29, 1983. Due to an effluent
pumping system failure in the early morning of October 27, it is-esti-
mated.that-six to seven hours of flow Were lost to the dilutor system.
Dilutionwater-flow-was lost at the same time, thus- no t est.concentration.
variationse should - have: occurred:.:
Pr c:bit', analysis:_ of. the�: f inak­ testmo r tail, it i 6 s - r e s uIt e din.;a.final,
f lowthrough 50
LC ..of., 14,,747-:.'wlt
3
­.---'
_s ­'.­.TesZ.data 3-', I grap lica-I igureTwo
lifO

To;derive the various.concentrations, an appropriate dilution dater
source was selected. Upstream water on the Haw River. contained.efflu-
ent discharge from other point sources.. An alternative dilution water
source was chosen-.. The dilution water was obtained from an unnamed-tribu--
tary to Back Creek at.Alamance SR-1927". The four -week old fathead minnows
(Pime.phales promelas),were acclimated to this water on October 20, 1983.
Further test details. may be -found in the appendix -to this report..
Chemical Sampling
On October- 25, 1983, an automatic composite water sampler was located
at the final parshall flume to collect hourly samples for twenty-four hours.
These samples were retrieved the following day, preserved as necessary,
and placed in a cooler with ice for shipment to the D.E.M. chemistry labor-
atory. Along with the effluent samples, dilution.water samples were collected_
from the dilution collapsible tank and shipped for analysis. Results are
given in Table 1.
A review,of chemical constituents in the effluent identifies no levels
in excess of permit restrictions. Coliform bacteria is eliminated from
the -waste discharge. Nine metals- were analyzed with detectable concentrations
of. s.ix.:. -.Chemical. Oxygen- Demand. appears to be high at, 370 mg/liter. Nutrients
arart extremely' high- as, --both- nitrogen_ and ,phosphorus.. Phenols are high> but _
are,- not. noa, water: quality limited.,. for "C"": waters. A. review •of how ' these. chemi-
cal,constituents relate to.:;the-measured toxicity, levels. is. presented in
k the summary section
r -
-4-
z �

Figure Two..
BURIjI IGTON EASTSIDE" WWTP`- 3
:96 . HOUR FA-THEAD KINNOW 'FT OWT' HROUGHI BIOASS'AY,-_
..NPDES# �'C0023$68
PROBABILITY. PROBIT ANALYSTS`ON DOSE
x o C • • •- • • • v s W • x-®-•�. ® •' ®- O••: .a 0 0 •4- O O• s'._•YF a; r•' •' W' W` • • m • • • • •' • A - - -
0 -e 3 r •
.. _ J •. ,
0.7 +
W
0.6 • _.
e
0.5 +
i
0.4 +
0.3 + •
0.2 +
. x
0.1 + x x
W
0.0 +...•.x
LD0-5 LD50 • LD95
40099,.14:.7`43= 2.5 38T. r _ DOSE:=
. .,.¢^.x�.-x..r„xi.C.w _, .. ._��t�x ...� _.x�,Y ••� -., ..� y. .,-..- , �.. _•e�.., f... ,-.., ..,�...��.,C- � .s._i� ,rt �`.:�a+Sh�..e::.,.:... ._.iti. ;e.. �.: _.53s.. �.. ..�.._ srx-- ..-_ .,_.-
LJ
r
. ii � S'k - .`-.. '.'' _ _ � �-`�'d•`� t� � ter` _ - c"w. __ _ _

Table le Chemical Measurements..taken on
Cr-tober 25-26; 1983-at Burlington
East WWTP discharge —
Effluent
Effluent CoMposite 'Bioassay -Dilution Water
BOD5 (mg/.l) (48
COD. (mg/1) 370
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml) <10
Residue To tal
Tbtal (mg/1) 1500 190
Volatile (mg/l) 310 63
Fixed (mg/1) 1200 130
Residue Suspended
TDtal (mg/1)
120
21
Volatile . (mg/1)
8
Fixed (mg/1)
39
13
pH (S_.U.)
8.1
6..9
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 (mg/1)
360-
34
MBAS (mg/1)
0.6
Phenols (ug/1)
NH3 as N (mg/1)
33
.01
TKN as N (mg/1)
43
1.9
NO2+ NO3 as N (mg/1)
.02
.49
P total as P (mg/1)
13
.10
Cadmium (ug/1)
QO
<20
Chromium (ug/1,)
80
<50
Copper (ug/1)
60
<20
Iron (ug/1)
1200
1100
Mercury (ug/l.)
1.6
<0.2
Manganese:: (ug/1)
500.
.. :: .<5G' . --
Nickel (149/1)
<100:
<100.
Lead.`. tug/1)
<100
<100. .
_
k
Tributytin_Hydrde 02
- _
5 Chloro `2 (2;4-diclilorophenoxyJl
0
j M{
�3 un�.clenti€ied extra :C tables -detected,
by' GC/MS
s � T,_
F F l

Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling
On Friday, October 28, benthos samples were collected both upstream
and downstream of the Burlington East effluent in the Haw River. The
upstream station was. approximately 150 meters above the discharge. Three
kick net samples were taken in a large riffle area composed of cobble and.
rubble-. The downstream sample was located approximately 150 meters down-
stream of the effluent. The discharge did not appear to be completely
mixed at this -point but a: second discharge on the opposite bank was evi-
dent -just above the U.S. Hwy 70 bridge. So as not to sample the effect
of another discharge., the samples were taken upstream of this other point
source discharge. The sample area was between 0.3 and 0.6 meters deep
and the bottom composed of boulder, rubble, and sand.
Table 2 summarizes the biological survey performed above and below
the WWTP discharge. The upstream samples had a total taxa richness of
36.with a community strongly dominated by 5 species of Trichopters. The
dominant predator by biomass was the megalopteran Corydalus.cornutus.
Upstream waters may be considered in fair condition with respect to the
biological community.
The downstream communities had both lower taxa richness and abundance.
Species dominance has shifted to the order diptera, particularly the chirono-
mid Rheotanytarsus. This species is 'a tolerant filter feeding midge re-
placing the ecological niche vacated by the caddisflies upstream. The
dominant predator shifts to the damselfly, Argia which is frequently found
below waste water discharges. Organisms common at the upstream (station 1),
but absent at station 3 (downstream), include Stenonema modestum, S. integrum,
Macronema carolina, Ferrissia rivularis, Sphearium sp. and Prostoma graecens.
The molluscs were most severely affected by the discharge. The biological
survey indicates that the waste water discharge causes poor water quality
conditions. s

Table 2. Biological Survey; Haw River at -Burlington
East WWTP; October, 1983
A Taxa
Richness
B Density
(% of Tbtal)
.Station:
1
2
1
2
Group
Ephemeroptera
6
4
13
3
Trichoptera
5
3
51
9
Coleoptera
4
3
2
5
Odonata
1
2
2
5
Megalo ptera
1
1
Diptera: Misc.
-
1
Diptera: Chiron.
7
11
10
67
Oligochaeta
5
3
3
9
Crustacea
3
-
Nbllusca
3
1
11
-
Other
1
-
8
2
Tbtal
36
2.9
100
100
Station
1 2
Tbtal Taxa Richness (St) 36 29
Average Taxa Richness (S) 24.3 19
Average Density (N) 566 251
Station 1 - Haw River above discharge
Station 2--Haw.River below discharge

Summary
During low flow conditions of the Haw River (7Q10 = 52 cfs including '
upstream.discharges), the discharge of the Burlington East.WWTP (12.0 IiGD)
approaches an instream waste concentration of 26%. The 96 hour flowthrough '
LC50 of.14.74%.would indicate a toxic impact to the Haw River in excess of
50% sensitive organism mortality at low flow conditions. At average river
flow of 600 cfs, the instream waste concentration decreases to 3.'01%. At
this dilution, some chronic toxicity should be expected.
Results of.the two Daphnia pulex 48 hour static.tes.ts conducted on- .
site reveal an increase in toxicity of 54% to 36% LC50. Treatment between
the two samples includes two chlorination steps. This toxicity increase
is most likely accountable to addition of chlorine. Assuming a similar
reduction in toxicity to the fathead minnow, the 96 hour.flowthrough LC
50
would adjust to 22% without chlorination. The level of chlorine generally
acutely toxic to fathead minnows lies.in the range of 0.'09 to 0.21 mg/l.
Thus, an effluent chlorine level lower than 0.34 to 0.80 ' /1 would be
necessary to protect organisms in the Haw River from acute toxicity (assuming
a comparable sensitivity to fathead minnows). On -site measurements of
effluent total residual chlorine ranged from 0.2 to 3.0 mg/1 with an aver-
age of 1.45 mg/l for seven samples.
Results of the wastewater chemical analyses indicated several other
potentially toxic constituents. The 15 ug/l-phenols level could be causing
a chronically toxic condition instream with acute reactions of very sensitive
organisms. This impact would depend oii the specific phenols present. Phenols
are primarily restricted due to their potential for tainting fish flesh.
Since the Haw River is classified as a "C" stream at this point, it is re-
quired by law that the waters be suitable for fishing and that no substance
adversely affect the palatability. Currently, there is no standard for
phenolic compounds in "C" waters.
A 75 ug/l level of copper is considered acutely toxic to fathead
minnows. Levels detected in the effluent (60 ug/liter) probably only
slightly affect the 96 hour LC50 value.- For zinc, the=fathead.'minnow-
acute toxicity level increases. to around"870 ug/I in - soft water and like-
wise probably showed little effect in this test. Copper and" zinc cbncen-
trations_encountered are probably not sufficient to-causer.chronically toxic
conditions- instream'.
_. _ -9-

- Existing water -quality regulation.s.for mercury state that instream
concentrations be no greater than.0.05 ug/l. Results of the effluent
sample.analyses predict this discharge to be contributing,an instreah
level of mercury of 0.4 ug/l at 7Q10 conditions (52 cfs) and"0.045 ug/l
at.average flow conditions (600 cfs).. The presence of mercury in the
wastewater should b'e considered with respect .to -its environmentally accumu-
lative potential. Its presence can be magnified many times over by organisms.::
and sediment of the..receiving stream.
Effluent.pH, measured from the 100% effluent test chamber remained
fairly constant between 7.98 and 8.1. Effluent dissolved oxygen levels
remained between 8.7 and 9.2 mg/l, measured in the 100% test concentration.
These levels can be attributed to the efficiency of the -step aerator---lo.-
cated approximately 50 meters upstream of the final parshall flume.
A large body of information has recently become available pertaining
to toxic response of aquatic organisms to ammonia. One document (Survival
and Growth of Warmwater Fishes Exposed to Ammonia under Low Flow Conditions,
Swigert and Spacie 1983) is particularly appropriate for ammonia evaluation
in this examination. Ammonia toxicity to aquatic organisms is quite complex.
Two forms of ammonia, the molecular form (NH3 or NH4OH) and ionic (NH 4+),
both contribute to.the total toxic response. Generally the molecular form
is more toxic. Chemical_ equilibrium is dependant on temperature and pH.
The more toxic component (molecular ammonia) is found in higher concentrations
at higher temperatures and pH.' To make data interpretation even more diffi-
cult, the toxicity of the molecular form, even though present in larger
quantities under higher temperatures and alkaline conditions, becomes more
toxic under lower temperature and pH conditions. Dissolved oxygen in low
concentrations will also increase toxic response from ammonia.
The highest tested concentration for the bioassay series was 100%
effluent. This was measured as containing 33 mg/liter NH3 as N. The pH
of the effluent was consistently alkaline at 8.1 S.U. Temperature of the
bioassay was maintained at 200C. These. conditions predict that approxi-
mately 3.8 percent of the measured_ammonia.will be found in the more -toxic
molecular form or 1.25 mg/liter:. Swiger.t and Spacie measured 96 hour LC50
values for Pimephales.promelas: at-1..44-and.1.54 mg/liter of molecular
ammonia-. It. is- obvious that_ in the higher.. bioassay concentrations., ammonia
- contr.ibute&--significantly- to the= acute- mortality. -
=__ -10

The-96 hour LC550 of the Burlington.East Bioassay was found'to be ✓
14.7V 'The dilution water was lower in`pH at 6.9`S.U. Middle concen-
trations would contain a signif icantly. lower concentration: of molecular
ammonia due to dilution and the lower pH.levels. The pH as measured in
the 11.9% effluent concentration was only slightly higher than nuetral
(7.05-7.3) S-.U. At a pH of 7, molecular ammonia (20-C) will comprise 0.4%
of the total ammonia. When adjusted for both dilution and pH shift, the
11.9% effluent concentration will contain only 0.016 mg/liter of molecular
ammonia. This level.is not considered to be acutely toxic and was not a
toxic. component.;in the lower test concentrations.
Recommendations and Summa
The waste water discharge at.Burlington East is limited by permit to
specific levels of discharge, BOD53 TSS and Fecal Coliforms. Several per-
mit additions are suggested by results of this on -site toxicological
examination.
1. Ammonia levels are at concentrations which are capable of causing
acute toxicity. These levels are moderated by both dilution and
pH'of the receiving stream. A review of these conditions indicate
that very sensitive organisms may be impaired at current levels.
An ammonia limit should be added to the discharge permit to ensure
that the levels do not increase past levels measured in this test
series.
2. Phenols levels of 15 ug/liter were measured in the Burlington
East discharge. These compounds have the potential to impair
the intended use of the stream. Current levels are not excessive
but require monitoring. This parameter should be added to the
monitoring requirements.
3. Mercury was detected at 1.6 ug/liter in the waste discharge.
During 7Q10 conditions the mercury would be present at levels
exceeding state water quality limits. A discharge limit and
monitoring requirement should be added to the discharge permit.
Chlorine is present in acutely toxic.levels even in the lower effluent -
concentrations. The step aeration did not decrease chlorine -to safe. levels.
During -low flow.periods this chlorine,will.have:a significant impact on
downs.tr.eam..biota:.- Di'sinfection:to meet fecal.coliform restrictions is:
frequently: -necessary but. confronts:: the- discharger; with. conf-licting;. require

ments. This apparent conflict is being addressed by many agencies. A1-
ternatives to chlorination are available but have not been widely used
within the -United States. Several.large dischargers.in North Carolina
use ozone for disinfection. Ultraviolet radiation is also -functional as
a disinfection treatment -.in small treatment facilities. These alternatives
may not be.practical'for use at Burlington East -but their use should be
reviewed.
The toxicological data indicates that ammonia, copper and chlorine
are influencing toxicity. A prechlorination bioassay demonstrates that
chlorine is- not -dominating the total toxicity.- Copper..and ammonia also
can not be implicated for the whole effect. Other unmeasured parameters
are also present. These constituents may be identified through critical
pretreatment review. It is suggested that a limited subset of industrial
contributors be identified by the Division's pretreatment program to under-
go organic analysis by GC/MS.
Although not related to toxicological response,_ the nutrient levels
measured from the WWTP discharge are found to be extremely high. In com-
bination with the large discharge volume, the nutrients are probably con-
tributing to future eutrophication problems downstream. This data should
be reviewed by appropriate Division personnel.

APPENDIX

��V1-.1 .�11 V7V 1 d1• m�v 1 0 •c . .� _ _ _ .
Site I is location of test facility=
Site:2-is location of dilution water source
I!9! .. � IdCH:' R;dpo-• 5 11� bl Ipl�;
- slro Ln � ] e .. o ' rPt9c1a1k Cev.e- ,-_� • 2.
- to �� .>< .. �� �^- . ns9 - = ��1-- .,. M _-`__• , -
1 9 _ ./ T9.:i-__ r �2 P '�- 1]ST' b T!W 4___rZ Y_-S Tti / �-t�•t `� _ Y--�- ` FF,S .,r•
b2 I-0 1 FtF.las off 12 r.o►`•: pi2.. a ` I._
tL , lens'- � t� .. b ,� -•. �•
w
dtl94-t y!r. \ J� '`l - IT29 _(• -2.0 191 d, A. .
::.1797••: -. 1 - - O - I.Y •t - -
� �1]9h' tdri4-2 IM1 t�. }-' - �' - / 'l •
y �Y
191
17U -
2 _3 1' 99� 990• �� 910
Dxp Creels- .•
' Isw: - � �• - 'LIKE' ~, � tn7 per:; ° �- .9- a t9ix• ldl _ -. _
BUIUNGTGN ✓1 ".9
't`+p� . tn° 1n9 : � t' 1ns lvxw •. K � I-
L�. 173V I.8- -p. 1.Z 19r Oa:. a°Peb.
.3. leslcoe � l}9' I735 b - 0 '7007- � 19H]1'•
' .l 191)• 4 I .
Quaker 1919
_ �
W.
I o � .� RGA. PO P� y a 'a•- 19HE. `\ �r910.' - � [ .
-
4
8 � .. �}. '/ ° ',:::... I : is •L- S�� _. _ .�:
'-..�� 37 F�6 ...•,:"� 'HOB. � -
y:•
,v
BURLINGTON
.t
y
:.•: :. b •� HA9PRMR.'
`2.0 FfU o ; •:.iv t� J, y. POP"1,650� 0'" i9HN / .. it
9
,• .l. 4 .. OUt„t{ta tF, br: ?'
RI MCI /.p. ��'•'tv 19 b a9. ':� 19w�5 '�'l yy 1•
FAP" FCA Ivel J. 8 I.6 FCPP
1.2
F - »>z.;� :.. 1..:'�:GRAIiAM m•-_ •E Fra: _ loa]
2127' F•! I9H1 M xIM"- / �
- "v- 211e- 6
�'� yY.IHDY:��V•� 2.1 _-..f� .(ay-+ -'. �;_:,:..,. Habv flelds.'�' °1ist.l 3ii•
� � l,t FfS v 1 7 y LQ
Alaman� t�
s zxl -)F-119)
n Cr �.'!e.!I- f _ �a;+w•+-
^� MATQI -LME• fanb�lO 219
L n32 ..e 7?21 27HT -�3H3' ....- :J
41
14
- O '
it? tb - "r - ao9� - e• 1--° ;f 'r.7 xI1T- 3 `' '• x Jn`. '.
� b
. _24
. 6 nlr 11 ®,h7, )J.,/ _ _ nr �.o �� �i�T., � -T - 3ila ,. ��o L: •;�. � c.1 '- �3�' � �.
9 xl))
ft.'tl]a - 2370. /. xl7i.�-t �Pv'.77176 h 'LII30'.•0
vale' ,n ,t. 719N i11ii*• 1-�'
1. - it17•;•- �tY •-.236V,� v t13
(F
17
_ r,•,:>:i�Cl-'-•tea•_ Pia-s�.�-.Z•A"r•^�s-=-.

Flow:Through.Procedure =
On site,, flow -through -bioassays are-performed:on a facility as --the result of
findings, of., acute. static., bioassays performed at the Aquatic_:Toxi:cology Laboratory
using:'Daphnia pulex..' These" 48 hour: screening ° tests establisp facility_ condidacy
on- the. basisa of. -acute. toxicity and instream waste concentration.. F
For..eacl on -site, flow -through bioassay;,. a. pre -test site: inspection- is: per-
formed'in.order to
1.) Determine appropriate areas for-physical.placement,of the mobile laboratory.-
-2._.). Acquire -proper installation.and materials needed_.for electrical. service...
3.) Determine appropriate areas for effluent sampling and:taterials.needed.
for such.
4..) Determine appropriate areas for dilution water sampling and materials for
such.
5.) Take additional samples of effluent and intended.dilution.water for fur-
ther static Daphnia pulex tests..
6.) Determine route suitability to the facility for the -mobile laboratory
(e..g.- low clearances,:poor road. conditions.)
7.) Discuss test procedures and requirements with appropriate facility personnel..
Upon actual arrival on -site with the mobile labs. dilution water is obtained and
acclimation procedures are begun on the test organisms (Fathead minnows, 2 to 3
weeks of age). Dilution and effluent pumping systems are set up and tested and hydro -
lab systems are calibrated (hydrolab calibration is repeated at least once more during
the test). An effluent grab sample is taken and a 48 hour Daphnia pulex test is set
up that evening.
The following day, after 24 hours of acclimation, fish are wet transferred to
the test chambers which each contain approximately one liter of dilution water each.
Effluent and dilution water pumping systems and the dilutor are then started and
the test is begun. Test organisms are fed newly hatched brine shrimp daily through-
out the. test.
Hydrolab, systems monitor .dissolved- oxygen,xpH;,,temperature;. and^_ specific:. con
ductance at;:.l5 minute, intervals .throughout;, the :.test ::; pa11y, the Hydrolab ; s�..re-covered_,.
_..
and stored on magnet c.tape;and`hard copy On alternate days,:hardness.;samples are
j
-
15
- -
' � x

analyz\ed,on dilution water,, effluent atthe sampling.site,..f.inal.effluent: and re-
ceiving stream,_upstream-
and downstream of. discharge_ On'variable..effluents,,
anal zed from sites -as•.describe d. above,. at f requent
residual.chlorine samples are y
intervals. y
tion•, of one day is devoted
During. the 4 day test,. a por. to, collection. of benthos}
ro riate, electrofishing.is..undertaken
samples.` from:. the- receiving:° stream.-. Where app p
for resident fish population data On a. site specific basis ,._various other"efforts,
olved oxygen.levels.in the stream. are und
such:as"monitoring.dissertaken.
On: a= daily basis,., test chamber screens are cleaned,: dilution water is coil'"ected-
(where" appropriate),. effluent and dilution pumping: systems: are checked and: altered.
as necessary,and fish mortalities are recorded..
A 24 hour composite sample of the effluent.is collected.by means of an auto and dilution -water -samples
samples
---
matic sampler for" chemical analyses.- Receiving stream
are also collected for chemical testing.
waste water -facilities, sampling points,
A photographic record is made of the
receiving stream, and sampling procedures while on -site..
At the end of the 96 hour test period, the dilutor is turned off, effluent and
dilution pumping systems are dismantled and final mortality observations are made.
Final breakdown and packing routines are then begun and the mobile lab is
transported back to the Cary Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory.
Several special care operating procedures should be mentioned. At facilities
which discharge for only a portion of the day, effluent samples are composited by -_ —
s the effluent while
the dilutor system into a large reservoir on board for use a
discharge is not in progress.
Secondly, in those waste streams with a high oxygen demand,.aeration systems
ls_
s are initiated. and dissolved oxygen leve.in. the.. chambers .ar
fob the test:, -chamber e
_.-
monitored. closel}= _ in• order to ,prevent. levels: dropping; below. 40/ .saturation at test
temperatures.:
In the.. event Ghat• actual. receiving, waters areY deemed unfit for the test-
potentially toxic), alternatesour,ces of dilution water are sought in the vicinity
16

48 Hour Daphnia: up lex Screening•Bioassay-
Aquatic Toxicology Group
N.C. Division of'Environmental Management
The -Aquatic. Toxicology Unit performs 48-hour static.bioassays using Daphnia
p lex-,., small freshwater crustaceans,,._ to, estimate the.: toxicity of waste, discharge to.
aquatic: life- in: receiving streams. All test and.sampling; equipment, are. washed:°.with
soap:,: then rinsed. iin nitric .acid,: acetone,. and. distilled water to. remove all'toxins,,
and contaminants.. Effluent.samples.are-collected by DEM.Regional Office or Aquatic+.,
Toxicology personnel.-. The sample is collected as a grab or,24 hour -composite using
an automatic sampler and, is sent e chilled to-, Aquatic Toxicology Lab -by state
courier. or -bus. They must be received within 24 hours. after collection.
The samples are:prepared for testing by -being thoroughly mixed.,, adjusted to
standard test temperature, and -aerated if dissolved oxygen is below 40% saturation.
The.effluent is- diluted with laboratory, well water,. typically to seven concentrations
(with replicates) from 0 to 100% effluent. Each test- chamber receives 160 ml total -
volume and 10 test organisms- Mortality of.the.Daphnia is recorded after 48 hours -
A, 48 hour LC, or concentration of effluent.lethal. to 50% of the.test organisms
50
in 48 hours,. is calculated from the mortality data. An in -stream waste concentration
(IWC), for the effluent in the receiving stream -,is calculated using -the treatment
system design flow and low -flow (7Q10) stream -capacity. If the effluent toxicity
and/or the IWC are high, a persistance test may be conducted. This involves a second
48 hour static bioassay run on the same effluent sample, 96 hours after the first
test. If there is a 100% reduction in the LC50, the effluent is considered non
persistance.

List --of Definitions
Acclimation - refers to the process of -gradually adjusting.organisms-from water of -
one type. -to another so: that the organisms. are not stressedfrom.radical changes
"in• temperature, hardness,. pH,. ionic strength,.- etc.
Acute toxicity-- the effect of a chemical or substance- on: an. organism;; usually de--
fined._as: death of that organism,..
= Application Factor:-. a value established- from_.acute: toxicity tests,., usually as: a ,
fraction -- of the LCS�,'which es-timatea an. instream toxicant -level that will be±
safe for resident organisms..
Aquatic;: having: to do with water..
Aquatic Toxicology Group the group withirr the Monitoring and.Technieal Services -Unit
(Water. Quality Section) which performs aquatic bioassays for the�Division of
Environmental Management.. The group is:"located. at the Cary -laboratory facilities.
All. test: organisms (including Daphniapulex and fathead minnows) are cultured -
at -these facilities by Aquatic Toxicology personnel.. ---
Benthos/Benthic Macroinvertebrates - a wide.assemblage.of invertebrate animals (in
sects,..crustaceans,. mollusca,. etc_) which- live in streams., act as a very impor-
Cant, food_ source for fish populations,_ and are- used. as long-term water quality
indicators:
Bioassay - a test used to determine the.effec.ts of a chemical or substance on an
organism...
Calibration - the adjustment of meters or systems with standards of known values in
order to assure the quality of data obtained from these meters or' systems.
Chronic toxicity - the effect of a chemical or substance on an organism, usually
during a longer period of time than that measured for acute toxicity. This
effect is usually measured as a non -fatal response. (e.g. reduction in growth,
egg production, predator avoidance, feeding rate, etc.) Tests for chronic
toxicity frequently take place on entire life cycles of organisms.
Composite - a sample or method of sampling used to obtain data on a substance which
may vary over time or space. For example; a time or temporal composite of a
stream would be one that is collected at intervals of time at the same location.

i
strains,. and sensitivity to toxic substances.: D_ uP lex,_is widely accepted in
the fie-ld.r testing in moderately soft.waters.
of aquatic toxicology for
Design Flow - the volume of water and waste that is initially planned.. to pass through
a. facility of waste. treatment plant.andl...stilallow maximum operating efficiency..
sed in millions of gallons -per day (MGD)
Design flow is -usually expres
Dilution the water used in -bioassay tests to.dilute the -waste -water to var
n
iou - concentrations. (expressed.- as; percent) ..' Wherever' possible,, this. water. is.
from: the actual` stream. that. receives the. waste,.. upstream_ of- this. waste.. When
this is no t:possible, other suitable water_ - is- obtained-
Dilutor— refers to a modified Mount and Brungs design serial dilution appa
ratus_which
effluent/waste and,,through a series.. chambers
receives.dilutiori water and
and electrical solenoid. valves,.. mixes the: effluent' into a series- -o.f concentrations
for the test (expressed as percentages of 100% effluent).
Effluent. the waste water exiting a facility.which:ia discharged.as treated waste to
a.stream.or as untreated or pretreated. waste to some other facility..
Fathead.minnow.(Pimephelas promelas) - a small.fish.which accurs- throughout.much.of
North America.. It obtains a maximum size -of approximately 100 mm and is raised
commercially as bait fish. The fathead minnow has now -for numerous generations
been raised in a limited number of laboratory cultures.for-use-in toxicity
testing.. Tlie fish can produce. eggs year. round in the laboratory environment
under correct conditions and this produces test organisms as needed.- The two
to three week age class is most often used for these tests.
Flow -through - the flow -through bioassay utilized dilutor systems which either con-
tinuously or occasionally replace effluent/toxicant concentrations throughout
the test.
ument which measures temperature, dissolved oxygen,
Hydrolab --a multiparameter instr
pH, and specific conductance of water. -
Instream Waste Concentration (I.W.C.) the percent concentration of an effluent/
toxicant which is discharged in a stream under assumed worst cast conditions.
D.F. x 100 = I.W.C. (%), where D.F. _
The.I.W.C. is derived from the formula; 7Q10.
Design Flow of the facility in question and 7Q10 = the ten-year, seven day, low
flow of the receiving stream.
ISCO - a brand of automatic,. unattended sampling devices which collect composite
water,.. samples ._ _
LCthat:-.concentration or percentage -of a:..waste/chemical/substance which•is lethal-
50
to 50% `- of test- organisms:. over: a stated`;°period -of .time:.
NPDES -'National Pollution Discharge Elimination System... A.system_devised by. the
Federal. Government.and`adopted_by North Carol.ina'-for the,. permitting,_monitoring,.
and. po11'utional. abatement of.` dischargers. to. -surface_ waters

Neonate —.roughly translated to newly born.-': In reference-- to- pulex,: the
neonate,- refers- to the -life stage in. -the -first. andearly second..instar-
,-
generally the first 24 hours of its life
Screening Bioassay a.- testing: system•: established.. to determine. general: -levels --of:_.,
toxicity- of compounds/discharges using:` 48. hour.Daphnia= pulex.: tests, qulckly_ an3..°
relatively cheaply...:
7'Q10., the. measurement:- of, a. streams- lowest. average Vflow over.:• a seven day"period :: _-
during :a,- ten year span,,,generally - stated- . as -_flow, in cubic:.feet.per.: second (efs);,.
The 7Q10 is used. in. establishing: instream-waste concentrations to..assume worst,,;:
case conditions
Sodium Lauryl Sulfate- a chemical widely accepted as_ a}.toxicant-.:for.testing aquatic
organisms for.quality assurance purposes in--order-to determine the relative-
health.of a testing.culture. The.chemical is: a.surfactant.and.relatively safe
to use.. -
Static. --refers- to an, aquatic. bioassay in. which toxicant/effluent concentrations- are:
set-up at, the: beginning- of the test and not changed: for.- the: rest: of the test.. • -- This test is generally short term.as.compared to a flow -through or replacement
test.because of potential degradation -of the-toxicant/effluent..
Toxicity -- the adverse -effect of a chemical/substance.-on _an.: organism•-; , Toxicity- is
usually defined as a -fatal or non -fatal response over a given period of time...
U.-T..'- Unnamed Tributary - a term -given to streams which have -no accepted- name-