NC0066516_Wasteload Allocation_19910503

DIEHL & PHILLIPS, P.A.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Telephone [phone] WILLIAM C. DIEHL, P.E.
JOHN F. PHILLIPS, P.E.
219 East Chatham Street, Cary, North Carolina 27511
May 3, 1991 y.6 F�,-��
Mr. Juan Mangles
Division of Environmental Health MAY 2 1, 1991
NC Dept Environment, Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687 SUPPORT 6�4NCM
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Re: Industrial Discharges into Proposed Terrible Creek WWTP,--
Town of Fuquay-Varina
Dear Juan:
In our telephone conversations this week we discussed potential
industrial discharges into the proposed Terrible Creek WWTP. As I
explained there is a possibility that the existing industry in the
Terrible Creek basin could be directed into the proposed WWTP when
it comes on line (it currently discharges into the Town's Kenneth
Creek WWTP). Further, the service area for the Terrible Creek WWTP
covers roughly half of the Town's proposed utility service area.
Most of this area is currently undeveloped. There is a high
probability that some sort of industry will located in the Terrible
Creek WWTP service area in the future. Therefore, it is very
likely that industrial discharge will be present in the Terrible
Creek WWTP influent. The quantity of waste is unknown since
presently there are no specific plans for industrial development in
the Terrible Creek WWTP service area.
Let me reiterate the fact that the Town currently has an
industrial pretreatment program in place. Any future industrial
development would be subject to pretreatment. Also, the WWTP has
not been designed. At the design phase, potential industrial waste
will be addressed. Treatment processes as warranted could be
incorporated into the WWTP.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at
467-9972.
Sincerely,
Diehl & Phillips, P.A.
Alan Keith, P.E.
cc: L.W. Bennett, Jr.
William Diehl, P.E.
I

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
May 3, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Alan Clark
FROM: Juan C. Mangles�,
THROUGH: Mike Scoville �►' y1US� /
Trevor Clements
SUBJECT: Addendum to Town of Fuquay-Varina EA
Terrible Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NCO066516
Wake County
The Technical Support Branch has reviewed the subject addendum to the Fuquay-
Varina/Terrible Creek WWTP Environmental Assessment. The following comments are
offered:
USGS station No. 0208796590 indicates the following flow statistics (see
attached) for the new discharge location in Terrible Creek (i.e. west of NCSR
2751): DA = 9.90 sq. mi., S7Q10 = 0.04 cfs, and 30Q2 = 0.96 cfs. Current DEM
standard operating procedures consider all flow estimates of less than 0.05 cfs to
be zero. Therefore, the Technical Support Branch has recommended NPDES permit
limitations (i.e. see attached WLA) based on 15 NCAC 2B .0206 (d)(1) which provides
that effluent limitations for new or expanded (additional) discharges of oxygen
consuming waste to streams where the estimated 7Q10 flow is zero, and the estimated
30Q2 is greater than zero, will be set at BOD5 = 5 mg/l, NH3-N = 2 mg/l and DO = 6
mg/l. However, based on protecting for instream ammonia toxicity impacts, current
standard operating procedures set the NH3-N limitation to protect an interim State
criteria for ammonia toxicity of 1 mg/1 during the summer and 1.8 mg/1 during the
winter. Also, the NPDES permit should contain a total residual chlorine limitation
of 17 mg/1 and a total phosphorus limitation of 2 mg/1.
Furthermore, the facility will have to meet a chronic whole effluent toxicity
test at 99 o concentration. Specific toxic limitations may be included in the
permit when the permittee is certain of all SIU's and a pretreatment program is
implemented. Conversations with Mr. Alan Keith of Diehl & Phillips, consultants
for the Town of Fuquay-Varina, on April 30, 1991 indicated that there is a strong
probability that at least one industry's waste, and possibly two industries,
currently served by the existing WWTP, will be diverted to the proposed WWTP.
Therefore, the NPDES permit will contain a reopener to allow for the incorporation
of parameter specific limitations for toxics upon the implementation of a pretreat-
ment program.
In light of the above, it is recommended that the following sections included
in the Environmental Assessment be further addressed:

Section 6 17 "Introduction of Toxic Substance to Receiving Water due to WWTP
Effluent"
This section should be updated to identify the potential SIU's in the service
area of the proposed treatment works and indicate that the proposed treatment plant
will be designed to comply with toxic limitations, most likely to be stringent
North Carolina water quality standards or Federal water quality criteria (i.e. the
receiving stream provides no dilution for toxic substances) for toxic parameters
identified in the SIU's waste. This revision will require inclusion of a toxic
removal capabilities paragraph in section 8.2, entitled "Terrible Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant."
Section 6.18 " Eutrophication of Receiving Waters due to WWTP Effluent"
This section should be revised to specifically address that the NPDES permit
will contain a 2 mg/1 total phosphorus limitation and that further total phosphorus
input reductions may be necessary in the future.
ion 6.19 "Dissolved O_x_vgen Effects on Receiving Waters due to WWTP Effluent"
This section should be updated to reflect the previously mentioned recommended
NPDES permit limitations and their development basis (i.e. the recommended oxygen
consuming waste limitations were not developed based on a mathematical simulation
of the receiving stream). According to Mr. Dale Overcash of the Permits & Engi-
neering Section, the Town of Fuquay-Varina should receive a draft NPDES permit
reflecting these permit limitations within the next three weeks.
This section should clarify that although relocation of the discharge (i.e.
further downstream) results in additional natural stream flow being accumulated,
the increased flow is insignificant under low flow conditions (i.e. both locations
have a S7Q10 = 0 cfs and a 30Q2 > 0 cfs). Therefore, relocation of the discharge
has no effect on the recommended permitted oxygen consuming waste limitations at
either discharge location.
Section 8.2 "Terrible Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant"
This section should be revised to reflect the new recommended NPDES permit
limitations.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at ext.
515.
Attachments
cc: Tim Donnelly
Dale Overcash
WLA File
Central Files

e „a SG7[ o
'A
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division -of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor Ap r i 1 19, 19 91 George T. Everett, Ph.D.
VNilliam W. Cobey, Jr., secretary Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Alan Clark Ae_
SUBJECT: Addendum to Town of Fuquay-Varina Environmental
Assessment, Terrible Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
and Interceptor Sewers, Wake County
Enclosed for internal review by the -Department of
Environment, Health -and Natural Resources are ten copies of the
subject addendum. The original_EA/FONSI for this project was
approved in August, 1990. The purpose for the addendum is to
consider the effects of -relocating the wastewater treatment plant
further downstream. In addition, 'the service area would be
enlarged and sewer interceptor lines -have been included. I have
attached a modified project plan to assist in identifying the
changes from the original EA.
Please circulate the addendum.to the appropriate agencies
for review and comment. If -you or any of the reviewers have
questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
FVAddend.Mem/SEPA3
Enclosures
cc: Trevor Clements (w/ encl.)
+ q,
!Pip, 19 1991
-. •pa a1 (..��gg
Pollution Prevenion Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

AN6o T§LY
aULMToSOUTH
wnr W.W.T.a.
`1(°r^\\ � .p� � �/,� � i(�/l III -. � Z•�: ���� �%\'_ �/� pi j � `•,I �� �Cem^ � l ! � � �/�.�.�
it I!IhIII \\� -- 1: � r:-'•'�- ♦�)r �.iJ� �1�' �;``•' c�-�c �� ``i''�Il � .%�j_::.' \ '.f�:•�tJ, �;P� V�);.� .��-/
�. y,M .i. j i,.j%j : ' I ;\\,J((r ���f .'- %_) >y/ , \.. •,. it `' - ��lih�9 !�. .�•,V".:I_ :\`. n -
`\1;
Ye,�•,t r-�� ,�� :Gi�\ � i'31!•:\' f: II!�' J !' 0- •I 1r�`. �J�+%Qnls(-i'i �1 ^' 3anrtn'+ `' ir7 r ,;V��
5-7
Pk as +o%;•,,' •• ~; t rP ✓%�.� I/` I :,to
li6. jVillag (,i 1? .�\..
X.
• � � .^ i � ` .. � L�.�-'�` ,\•',, (�.'''�;.:{Ir1'� - ��l'i� I 1'� �. `�ll�`'' ''• } � �• IV� {�L�r L- \\� T� tw
t::.o', j a �z >'4��• 1".
��� � �\�\��� �, � lDJ L li - � 1 �_'.-:•� �1� �;; �•_ r.� �OC-A��OtJ I�, � ,o•
i �� , \ � ' ' (' �J S � J � ` •r, - fie-- � �:� :� � \ •- 7 f. J ; .•
'icp
1004m
�� • _ �'' PA1tlI j �\ - - r� - j� •�r S / :` �_- �S f r i ap' I �'a
�,-. it Y�.i \� \ ,•• U�/,-Jr✓ 'Die LEGEND
U,i C•\� �• ar �eI"���-•�;•i LEQEIID
\ •' /� _ `" 4y " r' �"\ r `T I' !J r PROJECT AREA UNIIIIIIIIII EA BOUNDARY
..i •1-�- i r ~-` t /'. 1I-'! ` ,,l�l, •� yt•r�/����� I�.t :t 1 I�t !. r.)•� ` �� !'%���/ -y II �. II• Sim mNTERCEPTOR SEWERS
lx\ r �. �i '1 �r• ^\ C / J, ✓ f i PROPOSED AEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT SITE
/�i' err` %�, .'lr\ / -1 it �, '11�V1 \if �.(' i ` . \v�' so/ 1\� •-�• 1�
j /r iI • �` �, , `. -l •'(' ' • A' rt< -! o• _ /i--' •, ' / , �a • ,, �,
- .`�' _ V .�-�. %- ` .31 'i'r'�' ; :a• I f�, •)r /` 6 g,• •�-
SRL.i.-r .� Pbintaa10 ng3
`! . f�(VAp
, , �� `f3 7•�'rlti.v:.,, , wee r < 9 - •'�,� / / I'i ssa„ ` '1
>_, �c-P• L:! I\I �.� � -�`--. � r 4( •._l'• �,;' -1,� a � e`,`` - ' � ,i.� \V I•n \ .�C �J � J9 ., ! :�' a, /-� •I� /
' ` � I1 �_ - TOWN OF FUOUAY-VARWA, N.C.
TERRIBLE CREEK W.W.T.P. AND INTERCEPTOR SEWERS
_- �7.;1 -', -'roY /J� �_l� �c••`8�� CJ��\, TParer
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
N,U) FIGURE 2A — PROJECT AREA
,� !'•..". .c;J ,�. ' : ✓ '.``t'. 'i �� . (7 \- _' % •,l ••( rJ/t it / / °111ii ,' _ ✓1 ` •� •�• .i DEri i PHLLIPS, P.A. CARY, N.C-
i i��� (. ' ),✓ �/! L- , ;' 1, v 1 �,+�/ I t \ , �i
` r1 N Z000 1000 0 2000
µ j :u use 41 -'- - ,) =ill . �' v �`� ; : , A'`' ` `

OkPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
di I
PERMIT NO.: xcoo 6 jIj ES
\I c
FACILITY NAME:
Modeler Date Rec. ,� #
S(_M Mc fql Goo3c�`
- - Drainage Area (mi) Avg. Streamflow (cfs):
Facility Status: EXtb`rM ( PSMN w
(circle one) 7Q10 (cfs) ' Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 30Q2 (cfs)
Permit Status: RENEWAL MUoW1C.AT10N UHP£BMri1F.D
(circle one)
Major L'_ Minor
Pipe No: O
Design Capacity (MGD): ''0 V 1 1
Domestic (% of Flow): C? f1
Industrial (% of Flow):
Comments:
r. r•r. c-■t tilt /•� CTnC � 1t. 1 4.a_nh�
Class: S W
Sub -Basin: 0% O 4 0 3
Reference USGS Quad: 2 3 LE (please attach)
County: CA%k
Regional Office: As Fa Me .(R&D Wa W1 WS
(circle .ae)
Requested By: OjNo MCA Date: N 1 1 SS/C1 i
Prepared By:
� lr
Reviewed By: ✓ _Date:
w cSL 2 y
bo 0 o 12. 5
Toxicity Limits: IWC % (circle one) Acute Chroni
Instream Monitoring: J (t+
Parameters
Upstream Location r� "� a^^^ -�� l( "�' °'\j
Downstream Location C SQL 21 J ffQ
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BODS (mg/1)
NHf N (mg/1)
(-roX
2 LTOX
D.O. (mg/1)
%
G
TSS (mg/1)
3 O
3 O
F. Col. (/100ml)
Z o O
Z O 0
pH(SU)
6-q
6-G
-r (L C
t►
k
(() U 4A)

UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR E 0 0-
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
RAL1:16il 1:1 hit.
78 4 5'. 7040mm-E. 705 706 X MC i M1. 4 2'30
3 5 3 T3 01-+
6 A]'<
IN
3 000'. 50 if
944 N 0,
i2
P. A
r c
a
0b8.ED--D1S.CHXRGE
ij
3943
6
4 V•fill
%
53
It
4t
3942
350
3,92
n
prings '- 56\
r 38
N
3941 ii-3951, yvmow svinips;
r
42) It
iz
yQ
310
rk
350
it
3940 A
351 51
2755
2 6 54) 'o.
.11
0
TOWN OF FUQUAY-VARINA.
TERRIBLE CREEK WWTP
NPDES NO. NC 0066516
3939 36, PROPOSED DISCHARGE POINT
ATTACHMENT 21.
Ftan = Q:Ed, A-goEr, W- 111 = 20001
Didil & niiLUps, PA 11/29/90

Request No.: 6003
PLEASE NOTE THREE WLA'S h)
------------------- WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM -------------------
Facility Name: Fuquay-Varina WWTP RECEIVED
NPDES No.: NC0066516
Type of Waste: Domestic Status: PROPOSED/NEW F ccCC
8 261991
Receiving Stream: Terrible Creek
Classification: C-NSW 190 0208796590
Subbasin: 030403 Drainage area: 9.900 sq mi
County: Wake Summer 7Q10: 0.00 cfs
Regional Office: Raleigh Winter 7Q10: 0.51 cfs
Requestor: Dale Overcash Average flow: 11.00 cfs
Date of Request: 011691 30Q2: 0.96 cfs
Quad: E . W
-------------------- RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS -------------------------
SUMMER WINTER
Wasteflow (mgd) : 2.00 Z.00
BOD5 (mg/1) : 5 10
NH3N (mg/1) : 1 (TOX) 2 (TOX)
DO (mg/1) : 6 6
TSS (mg/1) : 30 30 ApR 1 0 1991
Fecal coliform (#/100ml): 200 200
pH (su) : 6-9 6-9
TRC (ug/1) : 17 17 PERMITS&FNC,INFFR�N(=
Lead (ug/1) : Monit Monit
Total Phosphorus (mg/1): 2 2
Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement: Chronic/Ceriod/QRTRLY @ 99%
---------------------------- MONITORING ----------------------------------
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: At dam's spiAway
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: At NCSR 2751 and at NC 50
in Middle Creek F'V �`�
Instream parameters: Temp, DO, Cond, pH and fecal coliform. °"►el"„+�
COMMENTS--------'��- �►�----------------------------- --------------------
Annual priority pollutant scan should be require mit should P� 5°?0
indicate that these limits are for 1 omestic waste. Permit should
indicate that the permitee should notify DEM if industrial wastes are S12•1",1::t JI
added to this facility. Permit should indicate that permit can be reopened
to incorporate new limits and monitoring requirements if industrial
wastes are added to the facility.) The RRO should notify the permittee, {�°`�;t•p;
once more, that DEM ma re uire the elimination of discharges to,,e
intermittent streams the uture 2 Lt
Prepare by : Date: c0""4�"'
Juan C. Man les "^
Reviewed by
Instream Ass sment: Sc Date:
Regional Su ervisor: //y` !f�`� Date:
Permits & E gineering: Date: 449tr ;r
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY: LIAR 26 1991
ss�
:�1.1t-

' 6 10/89 ,
F&ciliAy NameeT
Permit # Do (` s
CHRONIC TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity in any two consecutive toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
y tests,
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina C
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions. hronic
The effluent concentration at which there maybe no observable inhibition of reproduction
Significant mortality is �% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure or
document). The permit holder shall perform guaqfr
compliance with the permit condition. The firs st ly o i for rmed t r thir
be
using this procedure to establish
issuance of this permit during the rnontlrs of J� v� ty days from
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES pernritt final effluent
• Effluent
alltreatment processes. t discharge below
t<!;; e w
All toxic ..,
Dischar
code 7['j
testing results required.as part of this
ionitorin' Form perr<nit condition will be entered -on the Effluent
g (MR-1) for the month in -which it was performed, using the parameter
I. 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
Ralei h N
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
Performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/res on measurements
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed disinfection of the waste stream. P se data. Total residual
p yed for
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then m
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon assin , this
his
gt
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 Caro
Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receivingstream this
Permit may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoringrequirements Iona
or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as mini
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 cnum
on
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with m tial ng requirements. e to submit
Q
Permited Flow •}cfs O
IWC% to� MGD Recommended by:
Basin c& Sub -basin 1p
Receiving St�eaml ,�v%r
County l�J c2
Date p
**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at(70 cj �J
°' See Part
y� `> Condition

. wf
DIEHL & PHILLIPS, P.A.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Telephone [phone] WILLIAM C. DIEHL, P.E.
JOHN F. PHILLIPS, P.E.
219 East Chatham Street, Cary, North Carolina 27511
December 31, 1990
Mr. Alan Clark
Planning Branch, DEM
NC Dept Environment, Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Re: Environmental Assessment for Proposed.Terrible Creek WWTP
Town of Fuquay-Varina, Wake County
Dear Alan:
As we discussed over the telephone, the Town of Fuquay-Varina has a
site for the proposed Terrible Creek WWTP which is downstream of.
the site used in the Environmental Assessment (EA). The new site
is just upstream of SR 2751 on Terrible Creek. The revised site
information and a request for modification of.the NPDES Discharge
Permit has been forwarded to Permits and Engineering. A copy of
the letter of request is enclosed.
We request that you review the revised site information and notify
our office of any modifications to the EA which are required due to
the discharge point relocation. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Diehl & Phillips, P.A.
��'--.
Alan Keith, P.E.
Enclosure
cc: William C. Diehl
L.W. Bennett, Jr.
Arthur Mouberry
Roseanne Barona

ATTACHMENT 1;`1�JJ ���'iF.I��
.. DEG 0-; mo ---
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
P,_Niv°ii3S rt� iCvr=F,'�d�!{;
Terrible Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant &
Town of Fuquay-Varina
The Town of Fuquay-Varina has prepared an Environmental
Assessment, pursuant to the requirements of the NC Environmental
Policy Act, as a prerequisite to applying for a 6.0 MGD NPDES
discharge permit on Terrible Creek. If permitted, a 2.0 MGD
wastewater treatment facility would be constructed that. would be
expanded in 2.0 MGD increments to 4.0 and 6.0 MGD as needed in
the future. The 6.0 MGD multi -stage treatment facility has been
requested by Fuquay-Varina in order to provide it with a high
degree of flexibilty and security in meeting its wastewater
treatment needs for the next fifty years.
The subject EA addresses a wide array of potential primary,
secondary, and cumulative impacts associated with plant
construction, operation and secondary growth development. Based
on the findings of the EA and on the impact avoidance/mitigation
measures contained therein, including strict effluent discharge
limits being required by DENT, it is"concluded that construction
of the. proposed 3-stage 6.0 MGD wastewater treatment facility
will not result in significant impacts to the environment.
It is recommemded, however, in light of the considerable time
that could elapse between construction of the first and ensuing
stages, that this Finding be contingent on the EA being updated
prior to DEM approval of each future expansion. This is to
provide an opportunity for first hand assessment of the impacts
that may have resulted from each preceding stage and to ensure
that the plans are in consonance with the regulations and
technical advancements that exist at that time.
This FONSI concludes the environmental review. An EIS will
not be prepared for this project.
North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management
August 3, 1990

DIEHL & PHILLIPS, P.A. �, �,�, , ILL
t
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Telephone [phone] WmLIAM C. DIEHL, P.E.
JOHN F. PHILLIPS, P.E.
219 East Chatham Street, Ca, North Carolina 27511
r,- - -
November 30, 1990
Permits and Engineering
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Re: Request for Modification of NPDES Permit No. NC 0066516
Terrible Creek WWTP, Town of Fuquay-Varina
D&P Project No. 19004
Gentlemen:
The Town of Fuquay-Varina applied for a 6.0 mgd NPDES permit on
Terrible Creek in April, 1986. Public Notice of intent to issue a
State NPDES Permit was published in December, 1986. After public
notification, the Town was required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the proposed Terrible Creek WWTP. The EA was
prepared and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued
in August, 1990. A copy of the FONSI is attached as Attachment 1.
The Town of Fuquay-Varina has entered into negotiations to purchase
a site for the proposed Terrible Creek WWTP. The site is just west
of NCSR 2751, and north of Terrible Creek. Therefore, the discharge
point has changed from the 1986 application. A map showing the
revised discharge point is attached as Attachment 2. The
approximate new coordinates for the discharge point are as follows:
Latitude 35o 36' 50"
Longitude 78o 43' 30"
On behalf of the Town of Fuquay-Varina, we hereby request that the
pending NPDES Permit application be modified for the new location
of the proposed 6.0 mgd WWTP. Further, we request that the
permitting process continue and that the NPDES permit for 6.0 mgd
be issued to Fuquay-Varina.

-e
L
Division of Environmental Management
November 30, 1990
Page 2
The WWTP is proposed to be constructed in three (3) 2.0 mgd phases.
After receipt of the permit, construction plans could be prepared
and submitted to the Division of Environmental Management for
review of specific project processes and equipment.
Should you have any questions or require further information,
please contact our office at 467-9972.
- Sincerely,
Diehl & Phillips, P.A.
Alan Keith, P.E.
Enclosures
cc: Mr. L. W. Bennett, Jr.
Mr. William Diehl

IK tl)NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
to s
PERMIT NO.: NC00 CkAu , ,
FACILITY NAME: U W W
Facility Status: EX1STM PROPOSED
(circle one)
Permit Status: RENEWAL `' U010 C.Al" NEW
(circle one)
Major `� Minor —
Pipe No: b O
Design Capacity (MGD):
Domestic (X of Flow): S
C7
Industrial (X of Flow):
Comments:
RECEIVING STREAM:
Class:
Sub -Basin: 0 3 0 '1 0 3
Reference USGS uad: E `( S (please attach)
1•
Count 0 ul
Regional Office: As Fa Me . ia` Wa Wi WS
(circle *me)
Requested By: `' Q) CVgz\A_t� Date:
Prepared By: 0A a't Date: Z
Reviewed By: `J 12YAKA11- Date:
W C�
Modeler
Date Rec.
3'1�M
1 kit 4141
1600; Cb
Z Ee €
Drainage Area (ml a G Avg. Streamflow (cfs):
7Q10 (cfs) Winter 7Q10 (cfs) t 30Q2 (cfs) 0 a
Toxicity Limits: IWC X (circle one) Acute / CChroniDc-
Instream Monitoring: n
Parameters `^'i P Q 01 Co via Ee- C�
Upstream Location
Downstream Location C S 21 d
,� iJ C so
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BODE (mg/1)
1 O
NHs N (mg/1)
D.O. (rag/1)
TSS (mg/1)
3 p
3 O
F. Col. (/100ml)
'Low
20 p
PH (SU)
1 i td
cc', 4 k4

r
\ -
�` in n 'AYJMAJ wA, 21,

k
Request
PLEASE NOTE THREE WLA'S
------------------- WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM
Facility Name: Fuquay-Varina WWTP
NPDES No.: NCO066516
Type of Waste: Domestic
Status: PROPOSED/NEW
Receiving Stream: Terrible Creek
Classification: C-NSW
Subbasin: 030403
County: Wake
Regional Office: Raleigh
Requestor: Dale Overcash
Date of Request: 011691
Quad: E 20 Sji�
No.: 6003
-D ----
FEB 261991
RALLIGH RtGiUNAL OFFICE
'90 0208796590
Drainage
area:
9.900
sq mi
Summer
7Q10:
0.00
cfs
Winter
7Q10:
0.51
cfs
Average
flow:
11.00
cfs
30Q2:
0.96
cfs
4 w
-------------------- RECOMMENDED
EFFLUENT LIMITS -------------------------
SUMMER
WINTER
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1) :
4.00
5
4.00
10
, E
NH3N (mg/1) :
1
(TOX) 1.9 (TOX)
IEC
DO (mg/1) :
6
6
APR 1 1991
TSS (mg/1) :
30
30
Fecal coliform (#/100ml):
200
200
pH ( s u) :
6-9
6-9
PFRIITS &
TRC (ug/1) :
17
17
Lead (ug/1): Monit Monit
Total Phosphorus (mg/1): 2 2
Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement: Chronic/Ceriod/QRTRLY @ 99%
---------------------------- MONITORING ----------------------------------
Upstream (Y/N) : Y Location: At dam's spillway
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: At NCSR 2751 and at NC 50
in Middle Creek
Instream parameters: Temp, DO, Cond, pH and fecal coliform.
----------------------------- COMMENTS-----------------�tshould
---------P-�O
Annual priority pollutant scan should be required. C P �,
indicate that these limits are for 1 waste. Permit should
indicate that the permitee should notify DEM if industrial wastes are st°,4
added to this facility. Permit should indicate that permit can be reopened
to incorporate new limits and monitoring requirements if industrial
wastes are added to the facility. The RRO should notify the permittee,,o
once more, that DEM may require the eoa4AA
mination of discharges to
intermittent streams in the utur
Prepared by: Date: 2/2Z-
Juan C. Mangles
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment: S Date: Z V�- A&
�� 1 - `^ Regional Supervisor: Date: /i
Permits & Engineering: Date:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY:
MAR 2 & 1921 �,p�

10/89
_ Facility Narney V aA 1 V-1,U1UJ
Permit # C 00A - / t
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 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure
document). The permit holder shall perform ZLMICrly monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance with the permit condition. The fir st w- e perf ed a to t{ur issuance of This permit during the months o v I �' days from
sampling for this testing shall be performed at th N DES permitted final effluent ffluent
all treatment processes:. discharge below
Aihtoxicity'testing restiIts required as part of this peniut condition wr1l' be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Nionifonng 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
C.) P.O. Box 27687 -
Raleigh, N
g , . C. 27611
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting
cal
Performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as lldosresponsechemicaUdataSrTotalmeasurements
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 alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 U cfs
Permited Flow . IWC% O MGD
Basin & Sub -basin
Receiving Strea vv�
County
Recommended by:
Date
**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at � �%
M.
See Part Condition

D "-T P� E Q U L S I
� r
F M
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NCO066516
PERMITTEE NAME: Town of Fuquay-Varina / .Terrible Creek Ww-iP
Facility Status: Proposed
Permit Status: Modification
Major -1
Pipe No.:
,-A
Design 1
5
Design Capacity: 6.0 MGD C
N
Domestic (% of Flow): ..1 % Q S / ' ( ? ) ls) a
Industrial (% of Flow): q7- - / . C?) S(-O Li
001
Minor
Comments:
Change in discharge location. An EA is in progress. The permit
expiring 12/31/91 was never issued. Three 2.0 MGD phases planned.
Please provide limits for the three phases.
RECEIVING STREAM: Terrible Creek
Class: C-NSW
Sub -Basin
03-04-03
Reference USGS Quad: E 23 SE (please attach)
County: Wake
Regional Office: Raleigh Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 12/31/91 Treatment Plant Class: 3 or 4
Classification changes within three miles:
none
Requested by: Rosanne Barona
Prepared by: C
Reviewed by:"IT
Stb
I Li
Date: 1/15/91
Date: i / LY M
Date:
9
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
S'c�nn
t V. °II
o03 c
Drainage Area (mil ) C( . Ot Avg. Streamflow (cfs): It .
7Q10 (cfs) p Winter 7Q10 (cfs) p . S � 30Q2 (cfs) O . q 6
Toxicity Limits: IWC �CI % Acut hroni Cc
Instream Monitoring:
.1
Parameters t N � cr.1
Upstream �� Location 4 cX �` s s� t
Downstream Location
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/0
S
1 0
D.O. (mg/1)
(In,
TSS (mg/1)
F. Col. (/100 ml)
o
pH (SU)
6 _
-KC2% 0-
n
t-t
Comments: +�kl w 1AA
-u w -S DJJ
1 1 , 1

v� A v o �1" cx�

I
3
Request No.: 6003
PLEASE NOTE THREE WLA'S
------------------- WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Status:
Receiving Stream:
Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Quad:
Fuquay-Varina WWTP
NCO066516
Domestic
PROPOSED/NEW
Terrible Creek
C-NSW
030403
Wake
Raleigh
Dale Overcash
011691
E 21 Sy'
9' W
-------------------- RECOMMENDED
SUMMER
Wasteflow (mgd): 6.00
BOD5 (mg/1): 5
NH3N (mg/1) : 1
DO (mg/1) : 6
TSS (mg/1) : 30
Fecal coliform (#/100ml): 200
PH (su) : 6-9
TRC (ug/1) : 17
Lead (ug/1): Monit
G
FORM ,-} - - ------
FEB 2 61991
90 ffi.�-fjI_JPIONAL OFFICE
Drainage
area:
9.900
sq mi
Summer
7Q10:
0.00
cfs
Winter
7Q10:
0.51
cfs
Average
flow:
11.00
cfs
30Q2:
0.96
cfs
EFFLUENT LIMITS ---
WINTER
6.00
10
(TOX) 1.9 (TOX)
30
200
6-9
17
Monit
I
APR 15 1991
PFRMITS & FNGINFFR►Nr
r
Total Phosphorus (mg/1): 2 2
Whole Effluent Toxicity Requirement: Chronic/Ceriod/QRTRLY @ 99%
---------------------------- MONITORING ----------------------------------
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: At dam's spiAway
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: At NCSR 2751 and at NC 50
in Middle Creek
Instream parameters: Temp, DO, Cond, pH and fecal coliform.
----------------------------- COMMENTS------------------------------,5
Annual priority pollutant scan should be required. Perm' ould
indicate that these limits are for 100 domesti e. Permit should 5t�'
indicate that the permitee should notify DEM if industrial wastes are
added to this facility. Permit should indicate that permit can be reopened
to incorporate new limits and monitoring requirements if industrial
wastes are added to the facility. The RRO should notify the permittee,
once more, that DEM may require the el' ination of discharges to
°
intermittent streams in the utu
Prepared by: k Date: Z 22 1 q 1
Juan C . Mangles
Reviewed by 6 I c -�
Instream Assessment:
Date:
Regional Supervisor: �J�`La Date:
Permits & Engineering:, �,,u...�_ Date:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY: MAR 26 1991

10/sl9 >
Facility Name h.� �_ �Uj
r Permit # U CO ®tS6 s l
CHRONIC TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QR"IRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity in any t
using test procedures outlined in: wo consecutive toxicity tests
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioass Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September ay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentrat•on at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproducdorl or
significant mortality is% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina roc
document). The permit holder shall perform r rt r procedure
compliance with the r est y monitoring using this procedure to establish
issuance of this permit condition. The fir est willbe perfo ed after thirty days from
Permit during the months of l�
sampling for this testing shall be performed at e N C- - . Effluent
all treatment processes. Permitted anal effluent discharge below
All ioxicity zestuig restiits required as part of this
discharge°Monttorin Form pemut.condition will be entered on the Effluent
g=1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
tale TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
� roF
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental, Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical
Performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/res onse dtaameasurements
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employedrfor
disinfection of the waste stream
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits
monitoring will begin immediately until
such time that a single test is passed. U thnn monthly
Monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.po
passing, this
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
petmit"may be re -opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirementsor limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as n111r111111I11
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an id test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Fail
suitable test results will constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements. ure invalal submit
7Q10 cfs
Pen-nited Flow MGD Recommended by:
IWC% 0 u `
Basin & Sub -basin �ff�
Receivi=,U
m
County—
Dat9--2 1
**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at�% 4 � v �
See Part —, Condition

'Opw , I ,
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 22, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: File
From: Juan C. Mangles
Subject: WLA Request No. 6 03
NPDES Permit No. NCO066516
Town of Fuquay-Varina WWTP
Wake County
The Town of Fuquay-Varini has requested a modification of their previous
request for WLA No. 5859 to discharge into Terrible Creek which is characterized at
the proposed discharge point as a S7Q10=0/30Q2>0 flow stream. Terrible Creek is a
tributary to Middle Creek which receives a large amount of wasteflow from several
facilities. Data collected in Middle Creek indicate that the assimilative capacity
of the receiving stream is exhausted under low flow conditions. Also, the BMAN
report indicated that Middle Creek is rated "fair."
The previous WLA (No. 5859) was finalized on October 22, 1990. The current
modification request, as per WLA request No. 6003, is for a new discharge location
further downstream from the previous proposed site. I requested USGS flow statis-
tics for the new discharge point. However, this new site also has a S7Q10=0/30Q2>0
flow. Since no other changes are contained in the WLA request I recommended the
same set of permit limitations and requirements contained in the WLA finalized in
October, 1991.
I am currently preparing a study plan for a Level C analysis of the Middle
Creek subbasin since recent Level B modeling analyses (see Middle Creek Level B
1991 Model File) do not seem to accurately represent this system. The results of
the Level C analysis will be incorporated into the Neuse River basinwide modeling
framework.
Li O w► �A �edt �,� .p x +
C1, � kQ WaA,, uJ
u Q 1 Q. X I aA"A C� kM AU ham' 01
kc, C : �n� \:,.;In,.A S Ou ar t,1 "kL— 6L sX S�(, W W �
t �_R .

.
0
01
cp 4.12- -6 (
NPDES PRE7?FATMH2qT INFORMATION REQUEST FORM
FACILITY NAME: F6W 1 V 0 Ck v I MNPDES NO. NC00 g' l
,
IREQUE
I I
I I
STER: 3L&Ckyx Mct�A I�5 DATE: REGION:
I
• �I•� •• It • • DI• • • ICI
This facility has no SIUs and should not have pretreatment language.
This facility should and/or is developing a pretreatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
Program Development
Phase I due
Phase II due
Additional Conditions
(attached)
This facility is currently implementing a pretreatment program.
Please include the following conditions:
?� Program Implementation
Additional Conditions
(attached)
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USERS'
(SIUs) CONTRIBUTIONS
perr►•iJIed
ows a
SIU FIAW - TOTAL:
t
0 O 1
�
- OOMPOSITI
TF'XTTT,F.;
0 O
MGD
D a 3
METAL FINISHING:01
1 MGD
vat
= 4glenhowe
cable =
o
M�
,
I
I
I
MGD
I
I
MGD
i EADWO1;KS REV W
I
PASS
PARAMETER
iTHROUGH
DAILY
LOAD IN LBS/DAY ACTUAL
ALLOWABLE
DOMESTIC
PERMIT=
INDUSTRIAL % REMOVAL
Cd
0.01
0.01
0.00(3
6.ax-Y
Iq
Cr
(5,AR
0,64
Q.,133'f
t.QZli
cif
Cu
—
C�.�1
6.I1is0
�-
Ni
0.57
0.08
6. 240,A
�
n1-
0. A9
& .0 (
o .255�
! ,
Zn
0.3
D . a41tt
-
31
CN
0.03
0.05
0.0013
I
Phenol
-.
?
6.0-75
tCOW
92
Other
-• j
Q,O1
/.jyQl30.d0(v�
9
I
D o 000
S
RECEIVED: /aA/q/ REVIEWED BY: o t i�r RETURNED-
I-T-
I
I
,
i
I
I
I
I
+L&A/ Noo

OBS
NPDES
IUNUM
PIPE _TYPE_ _FRE9
MCDL MCRL MCUL
1'NCO028118
0001
1
0 43
0.005675 0.009013
2
NCO028118
0002
1
0 12
.0011985 0.003638 0.018617
3
NCO028118
0003
1
0 8
.0002766 0.017855 0.001001
4
NCO028118
0003
2
0 6
.0003615 0.013636 0.006512
OBS
MNIL
MPBL
MZNL
MCNL
MHGL MAGL MAS
1
.0031270
0.036937
.0016563
.
2
.0005436
0.057003
.0015054 .000059589 .0049630 .00054363
3
.0012130
.0009794
0.001382
.0005046
.0006370 .
4
.0018291
.0017328
0.010708
.0004701
.0011548 .
OBS
MPHENOL
MFL
BODL
CODL
TSSL MFLOW
1
18.9762
54.7127
17.3714 0.016481
2
.0047760
37.4388
61.4074
26.2718 0.017658
3
0.003875
4
7.4304
18.1203
5.8417 0.006233

d .+ 2
----------------------------- NPDES=NC0028118----------------------------
Variable Sum
PIPE
5.0000000
_TYPE_
0
_FREQ_
69.0000000
MCDL
0.0018366
MCRL
0.0408039
MCUL
0.0351429
MNIL
0.0030421
MPBL
0.0063828
MZNL
0.1060292
MCNL
0.0041364
MHGL
0.000059589
MAGI,
0.0067548
MAS
0.000543629
MPHENOL
0.0047760
MFL
BODL
63.8453688
CODL
134.2404732
TSSL
49.4848896
MFLOW
----------------------
0.0442481

To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
(NPDESSR.MNN-4/91,RH)
DATE: April 8, 1991
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
COUNTY: Wake
s • s + sra
PERMIT NUMBER: NCO066516 (new)
S t' YY V!E: D
PART'I - GENERAL INFORMATION APR 1 5 1991
TECHNICAL SUPPORr BRANNf'
1. Facility and Address: Town of Fuquay-Varina
P.O. Box 158
Fuquay-Varina, N�. C . 27526'-*
2. Date of Investigation: March 15, 1991
3. Report Prepared by: Rick Hiers, Environmental Engineer
4. Person Contacted & Telephone Number: Alan Keith, P.E., Diehl &
Phillips, P.A. - [phone]
5. Directions to Site: Travel Highway 401 South from Raleigh, then
turn left onto SR2751 (Hilltop Rd.), and the proposed discharge
point is to the right of the Terrible Creek bridge.
6. Locution of Discharge Point (see attached USGS map extract with
discharge point indicated).
a. : USGS.Quad Number: E24SW USGS Quad Name: Angier, N.C.
b. Latitude: 35036150" r_ Longitude: 78043132"
7. Size (land available for expansion and upgrading): There is
adequate land available for the proposed three-phase construction
and maybe a little beyond that..
S. Topography (including relationship to-100-year flood plain): The
site slopes moderately (less than 10%) upward from the creek to
the proposed treatment plant site, which is above the flood
plain.
9. Location of Nearest Dwelling: There are a few houses which are
several hundred feet from the proposed treatment plant, and one
which is about three hundred feet from the proposed discharge.

10. Description of Receiving'Stream or Affected Surface Waters.
a. Name: Terrible Creek
b. Classification: C NSW
C. River Basin and Subbasin Number: 03:04:03
d. Receiving Stream Features and Pertinent Downstream Uses:
The creek bed,is about 20 feet wide, and the creek was about
two=feet deep and fast -flowing at the proposed discharge
point at the time of the site visit. One permit, .for Willow
Springs Elementary School, has been issued for a discharge
into a UT to 'Terrible Creek upstream of the proposed
discharge, but the RRO records show no downstream permits.
Willow -Springs Elementary School discharges into a UT to
Terrible Creek which enters the creek just above the
proposed discharge.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. Description of Wastewater.
J.
a. Type of Wastewater: 95 % Domestic
5 % Industrial
* This is the rough domestic percentage of the -wastewater
that is currently entering the existing treatment plant.
b. Volume of Wastewater (design capacity): 6.0 MGD
*:This is the total. design capacity. The treatment system
is to be built in three separate 2.0 MGD phases.
C. Types and Quantities of --Industrial Wastewater: About
40% of the industrial .flow is from a textile manufacturer,
about 50% is from an electrical and electronic components
manufacturer, and about 10% is from an.insulation
manufacturer.
d. Prevalent Toxic Constituents in Industrial Wastewater:
Metals and other constituents associated with the above
industry types.
2. Pretreatment Program Status. _ In Development
X Approved
Should Be Required
Not Needed

3. Treatment System Information.
a. Status of Treatment System: Existing
X Proposed
b. Description of Treatment System: The 6.0 MGD system
originally proposed consists of aerated grit removal,
aeration basins, chemical conditioning, settling basins, and
chlorination. Since that time, the proposed effluent limits
have become more stringent; therefore, a more advanced,
tertiary treatment system with phosphorus and ammonia
removal capabilities is needed.
4. Residual Solids Treatment and Disposal Method: The original
proposal was for aerobic digestion, thickening, and dewatering,
with disposal by landfill. The Town currently uses Woodall
Vacuum Pumping Service, a contract hauler, for disposal, and will
probably continue to do so, at least initially. The proposed
sludge treatment is probably adequate, but may need to be
resized depending on what type of phosphorus removal is
proposed.
5. Treatment System Classification (rating sheet attached, if
appropriate): The system will probably be at least a Class III
and maybe a Class IV facility.
6. Codes.
a. SIC Code: 4952
b. Wastewater Codes: 01, 02, 36, 55, 57, 59
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is This Facility Being Constructed With Construction Grants
Funds? No
2. Special Monitoring Requests: Possibly metals associated with the
industrial facilities permitted under the Town's pretreatment
program.
3. Additional Effluent Limits Requests: None. Proposed limits
should be adequate.
4. Other: See below.

PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Raleigh Regional Office (RRO) has reviewed the submitted
information and has conducted a site visit for the subject permit
request. Based on the summer 7Q10 shown on the wasteload allocation
forms, it appears that the permit request should be denied, but the
files show that at least three positive 7Q10 values have been given
for the receiving stream in the past, both by DEM and USGS. Something
was apparently worked out at some point to allow a discharge at the
proposed location, conditional on the issuance of a FONSI after the
preparation and review of an EA. The RRO will therefore go along with
your office on the general decision as to whether to issue a permit or
not.
A FONSI was issued for the originally proposed discharge point after
an EA was completed for that location. However, the proposed
discharge point has since been relocated, and at last word in this
office, a revised EA was being completed for the new proposed
discharge point. If it has not already been done, this EA should be
approved and a new FONSI should be issued before a new permit is
drafted.
Other than the zero 7Q10 question, the proposed site appears to be
suitable for a new treatment facility and discharge. Adequate land is
available for the proposed three-phase construction. The topography
is suitable and the nearest houses are a few hundred feet from the
proposed plant and discharge point.
If a draft permit is prepared, consideration should be given to
monitoring requirements for the metals that are included in the Town's
pretreatment permits. These parameters were not taken into account in
the wasteload allocation, in which the wastewater was considered to be
100% domestic. If a permit containing the proposed effluent
limitations is issued, a more advanced treatment system than the one
originally proposed needs to be designed. The new design will need to
be for advanced tertiary treatment with nitrogen and phosphorus
removal capabilities.
In summary, the RRO recommends that a draft permit be prepared and
placed at public notice if the 7Q10 issue has been resolved in that
direction by the Division, provided a FONSI is issued for the revised
EA. The draft permit should be written for the construction of three
2.0 MGD phases, and should contain all standard conditions for this
type of permit. If there is no significant adverse public comment,
the permit should be issued in accordance with the basin wide
permitting plan.

Report Writer
,f c
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
Date
TD:RH:rh