NC0023906_Historical information 2008 wilson_20081231

OFFICIAL USE
$Postage
Certified Fee
□
Total Post
Sent To 1
For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.comg
See Reverse for Instructions!PS Form 3800. June 2002
CT
ZF□
J]
ru□□□
o
□
n-
Postmark
Here
ru
m
LT)
U.S. Postal Service™
CERTIFIED MAIL™ RECEIPT
domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
Restricted Delivery Fee
r-R (Endorsement Required)
■ MR RUSSELL BRICE, WRF MANAGER
Total Pnaf C|TY OF WILSON
POST OFFICE BOX 10
WILSON. NC 27894-0010
-Street Apt: CEI.NC0023906 & NCG110081
orPOBox! HOMINY CREEK.WRF.WILSON.COUNTY
Clfy.'siate. 6/13/08.MAILED.6/17/08.SWP.HAYES
(esjdAay) goOZ aunp 'ooe Sd
Certified Mail Provides:
■ A mailing receipt
■ A unique identifier for your mailpiece
■ A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years
Important Reminders:
■ Certified Mail may ONLY be combined with First-Class Mail® or Priority Mail®.
■ Certified Mail is not available for any class of international mail.
■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Certified Mail. For
valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail.
■ For an additional fee, a Return Receipt may be requested to provide proof of
delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Return
Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the
fee. Endorse mailpiece "Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for
a duplicate return receipt, a USPS® postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is
required.
■ For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or
addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mailpiece with the
endorsement "RestrictedlDelivery".
■ If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is desired, please present the arti­
cle at the post office for postmarking. If a postmark on the Certified Mail
receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail.
IMPORTANT: Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry.
Internet access to delivery information is not available on mail
addressed to APOs and FPOs.
1. Article Addressed to:
Yes
7DDb OfilO □□□2 bDHT 5327
Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540
I
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
MR. RUSSELL BRICE, WRF MANAGER
CITY OF WILSON
POST OFFICE BOX 10
WILSON, NC 27894-0010
CEI.NC0023906 & NCG110081
HOMINY.CREEK. WRF.WILSON.COUNTY
6/13/08 MAILED.6/17/08 SWP.HAYES
Express Mail
&Return Receipt for Merchandise
C.O.D.
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service label) __
PS Form 3811, February 2004
Agent
Addressee
•elivery
3. Service Type
O-Certified Mail
Registered
Insured Mail
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
A. Signattire ,,
B. Received
D. Is delivery address different from item 1 ? Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: No
'an
II, II■1628
Raleigh Regional Office
Surface Water Protection
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
CXJ
CD
CXJ
luhllHihil’ii’.iHl’hnH • ‘■Hili! ih! t itsL I h uh fl
Rtdenrljl
NoffliC|oliraDefi’'jDentol Jk
EiivlronmtindNalffllR«ouiws y
CGQl
Iqss
[O'
^TEO STATES POSTAL r I JI
d J
i,9 ju&i aooB fS-M1
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+^'inlfTis box • ■
PART B., B. 2.
FIGURE 1-1
BAR SCREENS—,
X X X X X X
X--------X
PLANT DRAIN PUMP STATION
LIME SILO
SLUDGE STORAGE PADrsi //X 1
L -DUE STABILIZATION BUILDING
x
[AERATION TANK NO. 13
AERATION TANK NO. 2
[1AERATION TANK NO. 3
Jinnrn
XAERATION TANKS NO. 4, 5. AND 6
AIR SCOUR BLOWERSR PAD ~i
jCHLORINE BUILDING AERATION TANK NO. 7aa Xn
G )x
/
y
r
X
WASTE CAS
FLARE
■v 4-
NPW STORAGE
BUILDING
PRIMARY CLARIFIER
DISTRIBUT1CN BOX
-----X------------
MAINTENANCE
SHOP
CHLORINE CONTACT TANK/
POST-AERATION -----
CHLCRINATTCN/
DECHLORINATION
STORAGE FACILITY
METHANOL STORAGE/
FEED FAOUHES-------
PLANT EFFLUENT TO
CONTENTNEA CREEK
PLANT INFLUENT
HOMINY SWAMP
INTERCEPTOR
CONTENTNEA
PLANT INFLUENT
INTERCEPTOR
NPW BLDG
ANO TANK
EFFLUENT
FILTERS
SAND
DRYING
BEDS
RAS
PUMP
STATION
.NO. 2
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO. 4
SECONDARY
CLAf-TER
NO. 1
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO. 3
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO. 2
QiCLOGiCAL PHOSPHORUS
-x -MOVAL TANK
SECONDARY
CLARIFIER
NO. 5 .
CHEMICAL
FEED
FACILITIES EX3
PRIMARY
CLARIFIER
NO. 3
PRIMARYCLARIFIER
NO. 2
PREAERATION
TANKS-------,
fcNAEROBlt
DIGESTER
s NO. 2 ,
&NAER08IE
DIGESTER
„ NO. 1 .
ANAEROBK
DIGESTER
. NO. 4 .
Anaerobic
DIGESTER
, NC. 3 .
GRIT
COLLECTORS
SLUDGE HOLDING
TANKS-]
DEWATERING
BUILDING
PLANT INFLUENT
TOISNOT
INTERCEPTOR
GAS HANDUNG/
BOILER BUILDING

WAS PUMP
STATION
ADMINISTRATION/
LAB BUILDING
! ihimary
' CLARIFIER
\ NO. 1
------SEPTAGE RECEIVING
STATION
PRIMARY SOLIDS
PUMP STATION
NO. 1
- - PRIMARY
COLLECT1ON/DISTR1BUT1CN
P-
PRIMARY SCUDS
I PUMP STATION
\ ___NO. 2

J
•OPERATIONS | J
BLDG -LL
/ RAS \
' PUMP \
STATION NO. 3
'INFLUENT PUMPING
STATION
RAS \
PUMP \
STATION NO. I
AERATION TANK-'
INFI UFNT CHANNFI
o
\ »- CMtT=AH
i —. | BLOWER PAD
\ -GENERATOR
- FUEL TANK
I BLOWER-]
I BUILDING I
PRELIMINARY
TREATMENT
FAQU^ES—,
AJUfW-
_________y /MiWTrnl
J L_L__
□ n---------SECONDARY CLARIFIER
COLLECTION BOX
January 16, 2008
Subject:
Dear Sir/Madame:
9.09 6.00
3.28 2.0
23
Water Reclamation
Division
P.O. BOX 10 I WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894-0010 I TELEPHONE [phone] / FAX: [phone]
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
Attention: Central Files
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NPDES Permit Violation
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
City of Wilson
CITY OF WILSON
cAlo/tfli CoAoftna
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
Date
12/27
12/28
12/24-
12/28
12/07
NH3-N, mg/1 Wk Ave, mg /I Wk Limit, mg/1 Mo Ave, mg/1 Mo Limit,mg/I
9.82
8.36
Rich Hayes, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office was notified of the violation by telephone on
January 3, 2008.
The NH3-N values recorded the week ending December 28, 2007 and the monthly
average are as follows:
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
This serves to notify you that the City of Wilson Hominy Creek Water Reclamation
Facility (HCWRF) experienced a plant upset the week of December 24, 2007 that led to a
weekly ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) violation and a monthly NH3-N of NPDES Permit
No. NC0023906.
Please let me know if you need additional information
Cc:
Central Files
NPDES Permit Violation
City of Wilson
Page 2
The City imported approximately 30,000 gallons of seed MLSS from the City of Rocky
Mount on December 28, 2007. Due to the colder water temperatures nitrification was
slow in returning. Nitrification began to improve on December 31 and the plant was back
in compliance the first week of January 2008. The monthly average through January 16,
2008 is 1.76 mg/1.
Sincerely,
Russell Brice
Water Reclamation Manager
In order to address the under loading problem the City has purchased 5,000 gallons of
sugar water to experiment with supplementing the food supply during these periods of
very low flows.
Charles Pittman, Deputy City Manager
Barry Parks, Assistant Director of Public Services/Water Resources
Jerome Randolph, Lead Operator
Rich Hayes, Raleigh Regional Office
The loss of nitrification is believed to have been caused by under loading during the week
of December 17. The primary clarifiers average BOD removal efficiency from
December 17-31 averaged 53%. This significant reduction in the food source for the
biological treatment process contributed to the loss of nitrification.
Adjustments were made by taking a clarifier off-line in order to over-load one clarifier
thereby reducing the BOD removal efficiency to increase the food source.
October 10, 2008
Subject:
Dear Mr. Pittman:
inspection were as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us Phone[phone]
FAX [phone]
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
A review of the files containing the pretreatment program elements was conducted. These files were
very well organized.
Mr. Charles Pittman III
Deputy City Manager/Operations and Public Service
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
City of Wilson
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
Wilson County
NprthCarolina
--------Naturally
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
■6>
3^
On October 7, 2008, Cheng Zhang of the Raleigh Regional Office (RRO) conducted a Pretreatment Compliance
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Inspection (PCI) of City of Wilson’s pretreatment program. The assistance given by Ms. JoEllen Gay,
pretreatment coordinator, was greatly appreciated. The inspection report is attached. Findings during the
The pretreatment inspection file review included Smithfield Packing Co. (Permit No. 9525), Cott
Beverages (Permit No. 9726), and Kidde Aerospace (Permit No. 8402). The files needed for review
were available tor inspection, contained all the required elements and were in excellent condition.
There are 15 Significant Industrial Users (SIUs), 12 of which are also Categorical Industrial Users
(CIUs). It was noted that no SIUs were in SNC for the most recent semi-annual period.
POTW and SIUs completed monitoring as required by the Industrial User Pretreatment Permits (lUPs)
during the most recent semi-annual period. Smithfield Packing and Kidde Aerospace had no limit or
reporting violations. Cott Beverages had two BOD daily maximum violations, Notices of Violation
(NOVs) were issued by the POTW as required in the Enforcement Response Plan (ERP). The POTW
has an excellent tracking system for violations and enforcement.
#^0,
> ■
The review of Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) data indicated that all locations were sampled with
required frequencies since last audit. It was noted that the POTW did not analyze influent nitrate/nitrite;
therefore no influent total nitrogen result was available in May 2008. The POTW is considering
removing several sampling locations (secondary clarifier effluent and one or two lift stations) from its
LTMP. Please be reminded that LTMP modification is subject to PERCS’ review and approval.
Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection
1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Sincerely,
i
Enclosure City of Wilson PCI Inspection Form
CC: Monti Hassan, DWQ - FPERCS Unit
Cheng Zhang - RRO
Central Files
JoEllen Gay, City of Wilson
7. The ERP revised to meet the requirements of PERCS 2008 Model ERP was submitted to the PERCS
Unit for approval on July 28, 2008.
Cheng Zhang
Environmental Specialist
City of Wilson
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906 " W
Pretreatment Compliance Inspection
6. The next Industrial Waste Survey (IWS) is due March 1, 2009. It was noted that the POTW had started
the survey and was receiving responses from industrial users.
City of Wilson’s pretreatment program is well managed. Thank you for your continued support of the
Pretreatment Program. If you have any questions or comments, please call Cheng Zhang at [phone] (or
email: [e-mail]).
1.
2.JoEllen Gay
3.
4.
5.
6.
PSNC
18.
19.
20.on an
None
21. YES |Z) NO
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 1
Is LTMP/STMP Monitoring Being Conducted at Appropriate Locations and Frequencies? YES NO
Are Correct Detection Levels being used for all LTMP/STMP Monitoring? £<] YES NO
Is LTMP/STMP Data Maintained in a Table or Equivalent? £<] YES NO Is Table Adequate? [X] YES NO
All LTMP/ STMP effluent data reported on Discharge Monitoring Report? [XI YES I I NO DWQ Inspector, please verify yourself!
If NO to 23 - 26, list violations
Should any Pollutants of Concern be Eliminated from or Added to LTMP/STMP? YES NO
If yes, which ones? Eliminated:Mercury and silver Added:
Are Any Permits Or Civil Penalties Currently Under Adjudication? If Yes, Which
Ones?
SNC for Limits: None
SNC for Reporting: None
Not Published: None
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any NPDES Limits Violations?
If Yes, What are the Parameters and How are these Problems Being Addressed?
MM/DD/YY
I 10 107 | 08 I
(DTIA)
Since the Last PCI, has the POTW had any Problems Related to an Industrial
Discharge (Interference, Pass-Through, Blockage, Citizens’ Complaints, Increased
Sludge Production, Etc.)?
If Yes, How are these Problems Being Addressed?
Which Industries have been in SNC for Limits or Reporting during
either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods? Not Been Published for
Public Notice?(May refer to PAR if Excessive SIUs in SNC)
Which Industries are on Compliance Schedules or Orders? For all SIUs
Order, Has a Signed Copy of the Order been sent to the Division?
Main Program Permit Number
I N I Cl 0 I 0 I 21 31 91 0 161
Inspec.Type
LPJ
(TYPI)
£
£
0
]
]
]
I
MSNC
SNPS
NOIN
NOCM
Fac. Type
m
(FACC)
SIUS
CIUS
KI YES NO
ammonia, 12/07, monthly &
weekly; 11/07, monthly
yes KI no
Inspector
L^J
(INSP)
=
j2
_0
2
2
?
o
POTW INTERVIEW
17.
LTMP/STMP FILE REVIEW:
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
7. Current Number Of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs)?___________________
8. Current Number Of Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs)?______________________
9. Number of SIUs Not Inspected By POTW in the Last Calendar Year?__________________
10. Number of SIUs Not Sampled By POTW in the Last Calendar Year?__________________
11. Enter the Higher Number of 9 or 10__________________ ________________
12. Number of SIUs With No IUP, or With an Expired IUP________________________
13. Number of SIUs in SNC for Either Reporting or Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-Annual Periods (Total Number of SIUs in SNC)
14. Number of SIUs in SNC For Reporting During Either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods
15. Number of SIUs In SNC For Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2 Semi-Annual Periods
16. Number of SIUs In SNC For Both Reporting and Limits Violations During Either of the Last 2
Semi-annual Periods
^RTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WjER QUALITY
PRETREATMENT COMPLIANCE INSPECTION (PCI) REPORT
BACKGROUND INFORMATION [Complete Prior To PCI; Review Program Info Database Sheet(s)|
Control Authority (POTW) Name: City of Wilson
Control Authority Representative(s):
Title(s): Pretreatment Coordinator^
Last Inspection Date: j 0/30/2007 Inspection Type (Check One)- PCI KI Audit
Has Program Completed All Requirements from the Previous Inspection and Program Info Sheet(s)? K YES NO
Is POTW under an Order That Includes Pretreatment Conditions? YES K NO
Order Type, Number, Parameters:Are Milestone Dates Being Met? YES NO
PCS CODING
Trans.Code
1. Smithfield Packing
ElYesdNodN/A SYesDNodN/A ElYesONoaN/A
□YesONoElN/A □YesDNoEIN/A EYesDNoEIN/A
YesDNo^N/A □YesDNoEN/A □YesdNoEN/A
□YesdNoElN/A ISYesdNodN/A □YesdNo^N/A
dYesdNo^N/A EYesdNodN/A dYesdNo^N/A
a.QYesaNoBN/A a.SYesnNoDN/A a.nYesDNoSN/A
b.nYesnNoBN/A b-OYesONoBN/Ab-DYesCNoBN/A
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 2
INDUSTRIAL USER PERMIT (IUP) FILE REVIEW (3 TUP FILE REVIEWS OR 1 FILE REVIEW AND 1 IU INSPECTION)
29. User Name
Headworks Analysis (HWA)
Industrial Waste Survey (IWS)
Sewer Use Ordinance (SUO)
Enforcement Response Plan (ERP)
Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP)
a.DYesaNoBN/A
b-DYesDNoElN/A
Yes KI No
dYesdNoEIN/A
dYesdNo^N/A
08/15/2008
0706/2004
11/02/2007
06/17/2008
02/06/2004
a.nYesQNoHN/A
bDYesDNoBN/A
Yes K No
dYesdNog^N/A
dYesdNol3N/A
a. SYes UNo
b-DYcsDNoEN/A
K Yes No
KI Yes [~J No
K| Yes No
K Yes No
K Yes No
K Yes No
a. ElYes EJNo
b-DYesDNoElN/A
K Yes No
K Yes No
a. ^Yes DNo
b. DYes CINo
dYesdNoE]N/A
Last Approval
Date In file
K Yes No
K Yes No
K Yes No
K Yes No
K Yes No
dYesdNo^N/A
dYesdNoElN/A
a. nYesnNo0N/A
b. DYesDNoEN/A
Yes K No
K Yes No
KYesdNodN/A
Last Submittal
Date In file?
01/16/2008
03/01/2004
10/30/2007
02/25/2008
12/29/2003
a. SYes DNo
b. qYesaNoBN/A
K Yes No
KI Yes [~~l No
a. E^Yes DNo
b. OYes DNo
dYesdNo^N/A
K Yes No
EIYesdNodN/A
Date Next Due,
If Applicable
11/01/2012
03/01/2009
2. Cott Beverages
9525
K Yes No
12/31/2010
432
K Yes No
c.DYesDNoHN/A
Yes K No
dYesdNoEN/A
K Yes No
EYesdNodN/A
c.8 YesDNoON/A
Yes K No
SYesdNodN/A
3. Kidde Aerospace
9726
K Yes No
06/30/2013
463
K Yes No
c.DYesnNoEJN/A
|~Z] Yes K No
dYesdNoSN/A
30. IUP Number _______________________________
31. Does File Contain Current Permit?____________
32. Permit Expiration Date
33. Categorical Standard Applied (LE. 40 CFR, Etc.) Or N/A_______________
34. Does File Contain Permit Application Completed Within One Year Prior
to Permit Issue Date?____________
35. Does File Contain an Inspection Completed Within Last Calendar Year?
36. a. Does the File Contain a Slug/Spill Control Plan?
b. If No, is One Needed? (See Inspection Form from POTW)____________
37. For 40 CFR 413 and 433 TTO Certification, Does File Contain a Toxic
Organic Management Plan (TOMP)?
38. a. Does File Contain Original Permit Review Letter from the Division?
_____b. All Issues Resolved?________________
39. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Did the POTW Complete
its Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow?______________
40. Does File Contain POTW Sampling Chain-Of-Custody Forms?__________
41. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Did the SIU Complete its
Sampling as Required by IUP, including flow? ___________________
41b. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Did SIU submit all reports
on time?____________________
42a. For categorical IUs with Combined Wastestream Formula (CWF), does
file include process/dilution flows as Required by IUP?
42b. For categorical IUs with Production based limits, does file include
production rates and/or flows as Required by IUP?
43a. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
All Limits Non-Compliance from Both POTW and SIU Sampling?
43b. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Did the POTW Identify
All ReportingNon-Compliance from SIU Sampling?____________________
44. a. Was the POTW Notified by SIU (Within 24 Hours) of All Self­
Monitoring Violations?
b. Did Industry Resample and submit results to POTW Within 30 Days?
c. If applicable, Did POTW resample within 30 days of becoming aware
of SIU limit violations in the POTW’s sampling of the SIU?
46. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Was the SIU in SNC?
47. During the Most Recent Semi-Annual Period, Was Enforcement Taken
as Specified in the POTW's ERP (NOVs, Penalties, timing, etc.)?
48. Does the File Contain Penalty Assessment Notices?____________________
49. Does The File Contain Proof Of Penalty Collection?____________________
50. a. Does the File Contain Any Current Enforcement Orders?
b. Is SIU in Compliance with Order?______________
51. Did the POTW Representative Have Difficulty in Obtaining Any of This
Requested Information For You?
28. PRETREATMENT PROGRAM ELEMEN^^REVIEW- Please review POTW files, verify^^TW has copy of Program Element in
their files, complete with supporting documents and copy of PERCS Approval Letter, and dates consistent with Program Info:
Program Element
8402 |
K Yes N^
12/31/2008 |
433 |
K Yes No |
IK Yes nT~|
a. ^Yes dNo
b. DYes UNo
EYesdNoDN/A
FILE REVIEW COMMENTS:
INDUSTRY INSPECTION PCS CODING:
Trans.Code MM/DD/YY
J
Title:

Requirements:

Recommendations:
X
NC DWQ Pretreatment Compliance Inspection (PCI) Form Updated 7/25/07 Page 3
J__L
(DTIA)
1. Industry Inspected:
2. Industry Address:
3. Type of Industry/Product:
4. Industry Contact:
Phone:
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
Unsatisfactory
October 7, 2008
NOD: YES 13 NO
NOV: YES 3 NO
QNCR: YES 3 NO
POTW Rating:
L_2_J
(FACC)
Inspec.Type
LXJ
(TYPI)
Inspector Fac. Type
l_s_!
(INSP)
OVERALL SUMMARY AND COMMENTS:
Comments:
Main Program Permit Number
J__I__I__ __I__I__I
Comments:
A. Initial Interview
B. Plant Tour
C. Pretreatment Tour Q YES Q NO
D. Sampling Review
E. Exit Interview
Industrial Inspection Comments:
Satisfactory X Marginal
PCI COMPLETED BY: Cheng Zhang .DATE;
#27 - The POTW is considering to remove secondary effluent and one or two lift stations sampling locations from it LTMP.
#43a - The POTW identified two BOD daily max violations from Cott Beverages in January and February.
#43b - Cott Beverages failed to response timely to a NOV for BOD violation, this led to another NOV for reporting violation.
#44b - The POTW has been monitoring BOD monthly at Cott Beverages, resampling by SIU was not required.
Fax:
5. Does the POTW Use the Division Model Inspection Form or Equivalent? YES NO
6. Did the POTW Contact Conduct the Following Parts of the Industrial Inspection Thoroughly?
2 2008
Water Reclamation ICE
September 9, 2008
Subject:
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please call me if you need additional information.
Cc:
I
jinij sep i
[DENR RALEIGH f
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Enclosed are three copies of the City of Wilson’s 2008 Wastewater Collection and
Treatment System Report and a copy of the U. S. Postal Service Postage Statement. The
Postal Statement verifies that the Report was mailed to customers on September 3, 2008.
The mailing of the report was delayed due to an unforeseen labor shortage experienced
by the business responsible for labeling the brochures.
The report is based on fiscal year July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008. The report is
submitted as required by the NC Clean Water Act of 1999.
Barry Parks, Assistant Director of Public Services/Water Resources
Regional Supervisor, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
System Performance Annual Report
NC DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
P.O. Box 10 I Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010 / Telephone [phone] / Fax [phone]
Equal Opportunity / Affimative Action Employer
2008 Wastewater Collection and Treatment System Report
City of Wilson Water Reclamation Facility
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
I
CITY OF WILSON
uVo/it(i Ca/io&na
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
Sincerely,
Russell P. Brice
Water Reclamation Manager
I * // \\ •)
p. INo. 3 676
(Telephone
139?
i red
0)
2
federal Agency Cost Code
pounds
Permit #
NC0ALlnl1 ACS Alternative method D Multiple
Parts Completed (Select ail that apply)
A QB QC
PCS. X S
I
Sigi
■4
£
gif
(V
O
1
<D
O) ro
75 o
CL
Total Pieces
Total Weight
t25PcsD 15lbs, □both i>7y. 7
jp □_£ DF PG PH □! pj Qk Qins
Total Postage (Addparts totals}
= Postage Affixed
(Subtract postage affixed from total postage)
Customer No.
Statement Ssq. No.
[P^ennii imprint
QprBOBnceiea stamps
Q Metered
PS Form 3602-K1, May
__... -< -. si?3—7—.g
Sep. 9. 2 008 11:21AM USPS
United States Postal Serviced
Postage Statement — Standard Mail
SIP
Tor Automation Price Pieces, Enter Date of Addrg^T
Matching and Coding
- I/____________
Move Update method:
Q Ancillary service endorsement Q FASTfoiwerd
No. and type of Containers
' ___ Sacks
__2 1 fl Letter Trays
I 7- A LetterTrays
—EMM Letter Trays
- Flat Trays
Pallets
_ Other
For Enhanced Carrier Route Price Pieces. Enter Date of
Carrier Route Sequencing
-I
ire of Mailer or Agent .
Processing Category
f^Lstten CMM
O Flats Q NFM
Parcels - Machinable
Parcels - Irregular
Lenars ■ Paid as NFMs
ECR Carters. Paid aa ECR Plate
r»rMa,lendosedwi,h^no#leraaes ■apeHodMi l(, Sack8di Based-
Bound Pnmed MatlerQ Library Mali Media Mail Pa ma I Post [“
p-Qr Enhanced Carrier Route Price Pieces, Enter Date of
Address Matching and Coding
1=^.-----------'------------'------------------------
V^get of 11) PSN 7530-07-000’6209
^5.

s

Priv^y Notice'. For informaton regarding our Privacy Policy vjsit
Pflnt?d Nafr° of MflJler o'/gent Signing Forau^-__- 7
anP Address [7^^ “
of Mailing Agent
(If other ihgn pamir hoia&k '--------------------------- -----
771 'r ty/0!
/I ~lol b Ty^'^Vc 7
wx, !\/c a. 7M3 I
Customer No.________
Mailing
Woightof a Single Piece
3 7 5
Pnce at Which Postage Affixed (Check one) ~~ '
Correct nLoweat 0 Neither ------------
Net Postage Due
.................................................. ““
Mr •
(3 SMI
Bi
Name and Address of Individual or
Organization for Which Mailing Is Prepai
(If other than permit helper)
Permit Holder's Name and Address and
Email Address, If Any
7^'7/ oi^l|/t/'/^’r^ (//
V.-D-! KoX. <0 tIa> « /s a/c 9.^^^CAPS CusL Ref. No. - 7 ______________
Customer No.
Post Office
of Mailing
Type of
Postage
Telephone
__________6j-7^
B^sejMSK ,
■■ -r "iO'71 X":a
JmmbWIw '
- ----------J This form and mnillnn qfanrtarHo
USPS No. 3676 P. 2. Sep. 9. 2008 11:22AM
Standard Mail
rn Part C
'—J Parcels Check box at left if prices are populated in this section.
Pounds Tota!
C1 None 5-Digit $0,400 $0,733
C2 None BMC 0.799 0.733
C3 None Mixed BMC 1.007 0.733
C4 DBMC 5-Digit 0.400 0.574
C5 DBMC BMC 0.799 0.574
C6 DSCF 5-Digit 0.400 0.524
C7 DDU 5-Digit 0400 0.402
Nonbarcoded Surcharge 0.050
Check box at left if prices are populated in (his section.
Price No. of Pieces
Di None $0,258
D2 None Mixed AADC 0.260
D3 DBMC AADC 0.225
DBMC Mixed AADC 0.227
DSCF AADC 0.216
Price No. of Pieces Total
None $0,343
None 3-Digit 0.438
D8 None ADC 0.461
D9 None Mixed ADC 0.561
D10 DBMC 5-Diglt 0.310
D11 DBMC 3-Digit 0.405
D12 0.428
0.528
D14 DSCF 5-Digit 0.301
D15 DSCF 3-Digit 0.396
DSCF ADC
Part D Total
PS Form 3602-R, May 2008 (Paoe 4 of in
D16__
Or Amount
Affixed
Piece
Price
No of
Pieces
Pound
Prine Pounds
StihWaf
DBMC
’ Ol's “DBMC
Machinable Lettere 3.3 oz. (0.2063 lbs.) or less
. , Price
Entr* Category
AADC
ADC
Mixed ADC
0.419
CS_
Part C Total
rq Part D
l----1 Nonautomation Letters
/ 7 3 79
^/3
Total
Machinable Parcels
Entry r ^riCe
1 Category
D4
D5
Nonmachlnable Letters 3.3 oz. (0.2063 lbs.) or less
c. Price
_______ty Category
5-Digit|D6
D7
Pieces
Subtotal
No. 3676USPSt Sep. 9. 200Ml:23AM
I EeadtjacK [ Pegonal Profile | Logout [
Restricted Information
Today's Date: 09/03/2008
Final
3602
Mailer’s Job#:
27894-0010 FINANCE NUMBER: 368648
CAPS Acct No:
AMOUNT FROM TRUST: $4,643,16
VERIFICATION SUMMARY:
No verification errors.
RECEIVI OR PROCESSING BY
SIGNATURE QF WEIGHER
COMMENTS:
MAILED FOR:
PERMIT NO.
NAME:
STATION OR UNIT:
DATE OF MAILING
09/03/2008
WEIGHT OF SINGLE PIECE
(LBS)
Nonidentical
CITY OF WILSON
PO BOX 10
WILSON NC
WILSON NC (0898A)
CLASS
Standard Mail
TOTAL PIECES
17992
PROC CAT
Letter
BEGINNING BALANCE: $6,304.32
ENDING BALANCE: $1,661.16
TRANS#
200824715471121M1
CAPS TRANS NO: N/A
CONTAINERS
30
Postage Statement:
58701726
ROS
DATA PROCESSED BY
TOTAL POUNDS
581.1420
PERMIT NO: 510
TYPE
_______PI
Customer Reference ID
P. 3rage 1 of 1
|FBfldbgck[Logout |
Copyright ©1999-2008 USPS. All Rights Reserved.
Termg of Use
mailing has been Inspected concerning:
(1) eligibility for postage prices claimed;
(2) proper preparation (andpresort where required);
(3) proper completion of postage statement; and
(4) payment of annual fee (If required).
POSTAL SERVICE
STATEMENT OF MAILING/3607 WEIGHING AND DISPATCH
CERTIFICATE
Tjansacttunfi > Postage Statement Processing
Standard Mail - Permit Imprint > Receipt
■
Water Reclamation
SEP 1 ?
September 9, 2008
<■
SEP !
Subject:
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please call me if you need additional information.
SEP 16 2
Cc:
Enclosed are three copies of the City of Wilson’s 2008 Wastewater Collection and
Treatment System Report and a copy of the U. S. Postal Service Postage Statement. The
Postal Statement verifies that the Report was mailed to customers on September 3, 2008.
The mailing of the report was delayed due to an unforeseen labor shortage experienced
by the business responsible for labeling the brochures.
The report is based on fiscal year July 1, 2007 - June 30, 2008. The report is
submitted as required by the NC Clean Water Act of 1999.
Barry Parks, Assistant Director of Public Services/Water Resources
Regional Supervisor, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
System Performance Annual Report
NC DWQ
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
P.O. Box 10 / Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010 / Telephone [phone] / Fax [phone]
Equal Opportunity I Affimative Action Employer
'WJTY
Sincerely,
Russell P. Brice
Water Reclamation Manager
£
/
p i nf
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
2008 Wastewater Collection and Treatment System Report
City of Wilson Water Reclamation Facility
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
CITY OF WILSON
cAfo/itti Ca/ioftfia
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
7. / \ v// y
il-x -
-Cs PE' :
«1P
V ira -
p'*
-Jp
' !
r'‘ (.TTr ■——.1
'^14^8
Dear Mr. Brice:
Subject: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit No. NC0023906
Hominy Creek WRF
Wilson County
[phone]
FAX [phone]
On the Internet at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/
co/l J
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
August 13, 2008
Mr. Russell P. Brice, Water Reclamation Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
Michael F. Easley, Governor
State of North Carolina
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
_____________________Division of Water Quality
• There have been some minor language changes in Special Condition A. (3)
regarding annual limits for total nitrogen.
• The addition of Special Condition A. (4). Total Nitrogen Allocations, which notes
clarification language on the nitrogen allocation and states the allocation amount
“assigned to, acquired by or transferred to” the Hominy Creek Water Reclamation
Facility.
o Mon Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has received your application and has drafted
a NPDES permit for the above referenced facility. The draft permit authorizes the City of
Wilson to discharge municipal wastewater from the Hominy Creek - Water Reclamation
Facility to Contentnea Creek, a class C Swamp NSW water in the Neuse River Basin The
draft permit includes discharge limitations/or monitoring for flow, BODS, ammonia
nitrogen, total suspended soflds, dissolved oxygen, total residual chlorine, fecal coliform
cadmium, total nitrogen and total phosphorus.
The following procedure has been recently implemented by DWQ: Total residual
chlorine (TRC) compliance level changed to 50 ug/1. Effective March 1, 2008, the Division
received EPA approval to allow a 50 ug/1 TRC compliance level. This change is due to
analytical difficulties with TRC measurements. Facilities will still be required to report
actual results on their monthly discharge monitoring report (DMR) submittals, but for
compliance purposes, all TRC values below 50 ug/1 will be treated as zero. A footnote
y regarding this change has been added to the effluent limitations page in the draft permit.
The following modifications have been made to the draft permit:
• Effluent limits for cadmium have been added to the permit based on the results of
the reasonable potential analysis of submitted data. The analysis showed the
reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentration. There will be a
weekly average limit of 2 ug/1 and a daily average limit of 15 ug/1.
• Quarterly monitoring for chloroform and dichlorobromomethane has been added to
the permit based on the analysis of submitted data. The total residual chlorine
(TRC) limit has been changed to 13 ug/1 in this permit to comply with the acute
criteria for saltwater bodies established by (EPA) (EPA National Recommended
Water Quality Criteria, 2006).
3
A<,
<Jac
cc:
Page 2
Letter to Mr. Brice
Permit No. NC0023906
EPA/Region
Raleigh Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section
PERCS/ecopy
Ecosystems Unit/Attn. Jenny Atkins
NRCA/Cindy Finan
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
NPDES File
• Please review the language in Special Condition A. 5. Chronic Toxicity Permit Limi .
There are some minor additions regarding the DWQ forms to be submitted and
clarification on reporting pollutant data.
4/ At this time, the Division is submitting a notice to the newsparpers of general
circulation in Wilson County, inviting comments from you or your, rePre®en^ve’1116
public and other agencies on the draft permit. The notice should be published on or
about August 19, 2008. Following a 30-day comment period, we wifi review all
pertinent comments received and take appropriate action on the permit issuance.
Please provide written comments on the draft permit no later than September19,
2008. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me a
telephone number [phone] [e-mail].
Sincerely,
(
Permit No. NC0023906
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
to receiving waters designated as Contentnea Creek in the Neuse River Basin
This permit shall become effective xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31, 2013.
Signed this day xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
in accordance with the discharge limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, III, and IV hereof.
In compliance with the provisions of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Water Quality Commission, and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility
Wilson - Hominy Creek WRF
3100 Old Stantonsburg Road
Wilson
Wilson County
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDESNo. NC0023906
DRAFT
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
By the Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit No. NC0023906
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
is hereby authorized to:
1.
2.
3.
Discharge wastewater from said treatment works at the location specified on the
attached map into Contentnea Creek which is classified C Sw-NSW waters in Neuse
River Basin.
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility
Continue to operate a water reclamation and distribution system to provide beneficial
reuse for treated effluent from the treatment plant, as approved pursuant to Permit No.
WQ0020915.
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge, are
hereby revoked. [The exclusive authority to operate this facility arises under this permit. The
authority to operate the facility under previously issued permits bearing this number is no
longer effective.) The conditions, requirements, terms and provisions of this permit
authorizing discharge under the NPDES govern discharges from this facility.
Continue to operate an existing 14 MOD wastewater treatment facility consisting of:
• mechanical bar screens
• manual bar screen
• grit chamber
• two (2) preaeration basins (out of service)
• three (3) primary clarifiers
• one (1) biological nutrient removal tank
• seven (7) extended aeration basins
• five (5) secondaiy clarifiers
• polishing ponds
• five (5) tertiaiy filters
. • methanol feed system
J j H fU e . sodium hypochorite disinfection tank
i « | -L-* sodium bisulfite dechlorination
1 • pOSt aeration, and
I ^anaerobic digesters *•
Cw S cUvj ccfe H nJ c' 11 + Cf j
peIt 6^6^ I /^t
5 I 5 Zy) 1 j
+ Pb) S1
The^ facility is located at Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility, 3100 Old | j
Stantonsburg Road, Wilson, Wilson County, and t
Latitude:Sub-Basin:03-04-07
I
Facility
Location
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NC0023906North
Longitude:
Quad #:
Stream Class:
34°40’37”
77°54’ 51”
E27NW, Wilson
C-Swamp NSW •
Receiving Stream: Contentnea Creek, Neuse River Basin
Permitted Flow: 14 MGD
109
xas
• '■Cem
Cem
xa?
i6i5;
IM
H
II
II
II
II
II .
II
I ■x
-
V -
...V
r
11
/ 4
Z;
/
.n n
((
Effluent Characteristics
Sample Type
Flow Recording
Total Monthly Flow (MG)Monitor & Report Monthly
5.0 mg/l 7.5 mg/l Daily
10.0 mg/l 15.0 mg/l Daily Composite
30.0 mg/l 45.0 mg/l Daily Composite
200/100 ml 400/100 ml
Grab
TN Load7
2 pg/l 15 pg/l
6-9
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -
DRAFT
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Daily
7 3/Week
Recorded or
Calculated
Composite
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
Limits
Monthly
Average
14MGD
Conductivity____________
Conductivity
Total Phosphorus 9_________
Temperature (9C)__________
Temperature (SC)
Monitor & Report ------
Monitor & Report
Monitor & Report
Monitor & Report
157,684 Ib/year (Annual Mass Loading)8
2.0 mg/L (Quarterly Average)
1.0 mg/l
2.0 mg/l
3.0 mg/l
6.0 mg/l
Tlv> IqC.
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
Frequency
Continuous
Quarterly
Weekly
Monthly
Monthly
Quarterly
Quarterly
Daily
Daily
Weekly
Weekly
Weekly
Monthly
Annually
Weekly
Daily
3/Week
Daily
Daily
Daily
3/Week
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
Grab
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Calculated
Calculated
Composite
Composite
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Effluent
Effluent
Upstream &
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream &
Downstream
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Sample
Location^
Influent or
Effluent
Influent or
Effluent
Influent &
Effluent
Influent &
Effluent
Influent &
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Upstream &
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream &
Downstream
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
BOD, 5 day (209C)2
[April 1 - October 31]
BOD, 5 day (209C)2
[November 1 - March 31]
Total Suspended Solids2
NH3 as N [April 1 - October 31]
NH3 as N [Nov. 1 - March 31]
Dissolved Oxygen3_______
Dissolved Oxygen Pe-vi
Daily
3/Week
Chronic Toxicity10
Total Cadmium_____
Total Copper_______
Total Zinc_________
Chloroform________
Dichlorobromomethane
pH11
Fecal Coliform (geometric mn)4
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
_____________
Total Residual Chlorine5______
TKN (mg/l)_______________
NO2-N + NO3-N (mg/l)_______
TN (mg/l)6
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge up to 14 MGD of municipal wastewater from outfall OO1.
Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
Footnotes:
1.
5.
6.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
weekly during each calendar quarter (Januaiy-March, April-June, July-September, October-
December).
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS - DRAFT
(Continued)
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
10. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia dubia) P/F at 90%: February, May, August, and November [see
Special Condition A. (5)]. Toxicity monitoring shall coincide with metals monitoring.
11. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units or greater than 9.0 standard units.
For a given wastewater sample, TN = TKN + NOa-N + NCh-N, where TN is Total Nitrogen, TKN is Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and NOa-N and NO2-N are Nitrate and Nitrite Nitrogen, respectively.
7. TN Load is the mass quantity of Total Nitrogen discharged in a given period of time. See
Special Condition A.(2.), Calculation of TN Loads.
8. Compliance with this limit shall be determined in accordance with Special Condition A.(3.) of this
permit. Annual Limits for Total Nitrogen.
9. The quarterly average for total phosphorus shall be the average of composite samples collected
Sample locations: Upstream at Old Black Creek Road and downstream at NC Highway 222.
Stream samples shall be grab samples and shall be collected 3/Week during June - September
and 1 /Week during the remaining months of the year. Instream monitoring is provisionally-
waived in light of the permittee’s participation in the Lower Neuse Basin Association.
Instream monitoring shall be conducted as stated in this permit should the permittee
end its participation in the Association.
2. The monthly average effluent BODS and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not
exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 7.0 mg/1.
4. Refer to Condition A. (6) regarding fecal coliform limits.
^otLl i^idu^Chlorine^mcJnitonnl is^require^ohly tPchlorine or a^hlorinated compound is
used as a disinfectant (or elsewhere in the process).
TMF
8.34
b.
a.
b.
c.
d.
i.
If the Permittee is a member and co-permittee of an approved compliance association, its TN
discharge during that year is governed by that association's group NPDES permit and the TN
limits therein.
The Permittee shall be considered a Co-Permittee Member for any given calendar year in
which it is identified as such in Appendix A of the association’s group NPDES permit.
ii. Association roster(s) and members' TN allocations will be updated annually and in
accordance with state and federal program requirements.
= the average Total Nitrogen concentration (mg/L) of the
composite samples collected during the month
= the Total Monthly Flow of wastewater discharged during the
month (MG/mo)
= conversion factor, from (mg/L x MG) to pounds
City of Wilson
Hominj Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
ii. Annual TN Load (Ib/yr) = Sum of the 12 Monthly TN Loads for the calendar year
The Permittee shall report monthly Total Nitrogen results (mg/L and Ib/mo) in the
appropriate discharge monitoring report for each month and shall report each year's results
(lb/yr) with the December report for that year.
A. (2.) CALCULATION OF TOTAL NITROGEN LOADS
a. The Permittee shall calculate monthly and annual TN Loads as follows:
i. Monthly TN Load (Ib/mo) = TN x TMF x 8.34
where:
TN
A. (3.) ANNUAL LIMITS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN
Total Nitrogen (TN) allocations and TN Load limits for NPDES dischargers in the Neuse River
basin are annual limits and are applied for the calendar year.
For any given calendar year, the Permittee shall be in compliance with the annual TN Load
limit in this Permit if:
i. the Permittee's annual TN Load is less than or equal to said limit, or
ii. the Permittee is a Co-Permittee Member of a compliance association.
The TN Load limit in this Permit (if any) may be modified as the result of allowable changes
in the Permittee’s TN allocation.
i. Allowable changes include those resulting from purchase of TN allocation from the
Wetlands Restoration Fund; purchase, sale, trade, or lease of allocation between the
Permittee and other dischargers; regionalization; and other transactions approved by the
Division.
ii. The Permittee may request a modification of the TN Load limit in this Permit to reflect
allowable changes in its TN allocation. Upon receipt of timely and proper application, the
Division will modify the permit as appropriate and in accordance with state and federal
program requirements.
iii. Changes in TN limits become effective on January 1 of the year following permit
modification. The Division must receive application no later than August 31 for changes
proposed for the following calendar year.
iv. Application shall be sent to:
NCDWQ / NPDES Programs
Attn: Neuse River Basin Coordinator
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
(
A. (3.) ANNUAL LIMITS FOR TOTAL NITROGEN (continued)
e.
A. (4.) TOTAL NITROGEN ALLOCATIONS
STATUSDATESOURCE
ActiveBase
ALLOCATION
TYPE
12/7/97;
4/1/03
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
Estuary (Ib/yr)
78,842
Discharge (Ib/yr)
157,684Assigned by Rule
_________(T15A NCAC02B .0234)
Footnote:
(1) Transport Factor = 50%
ALLOCATION AMOUNT (1)
a. The following table lists the Total Nitrogen (TN) allbcation(s) assigned to, acquired by, or
transferred to the Permittee in accordance with the Neuse River nutrient management rule
(T15A NCAC 02B .0234) and the status of each as of permit issuance. For compliance
purposes, this table does not supercede any TN limit(s) established elsewhere in this permit
or in the NPDES permit of a compliance association of which the Permittee is a Co-Permittee
Member.
b. Any addition, deletion, or modification of the listed allocation(s) (other than to correct
typographical errors) or any change in status of any of the listed allocations shall be
considered a major modification of this permit and shall be subject to the public review
process afforded such modifications under state and federal rules.
iii. If the Permittee intends to join or leave a compliance association, the Division must be
notified of the proposed action in accordance with the procedures defined in the
association's NPDES permit.
(1) Upon receipt of timely and proper notification, the Division will modify the permit
as appropriate and in accordance with state and federal program requirements.
(2) Membership changes in a compliance association become effective on January 1
of the year following modification of the association's permit.
The TN monitoring and reporting requirements in this Permit remain in effect until
expiration of this Permit and are not affected by the Permittee's membership in a compliance
association.
Attention:
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring
is required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic toxicity
(AT) test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the
month/year of the report with the notation of “No Flow” in the comment area of the form. The
report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences SecUon at the address cited above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re­
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or
ChV below the permit limit, then multiple-concentration testing shall be performed at a
minimum, in each of the two following months as described in “North Carolina Phase II
Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure” (Revised-February 1998) or subsequent
versions.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the “North CaroUna Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure,” Revised
February 1998, or subsequent versions or “North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised-February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during the months of February, May, August, and November. Effluent sampling for
this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment
processes.
A (5.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90 %.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of
the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the
lowest conceptration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The
definition of “detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical
methods are specified in the “North CaroHna Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
Procedure" (Revised-February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed. If reporting
pass/fail results using the parameter code TGP3B, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is sent to the below
address. If reporting Chronic Value results using the parameter code THP3B, DWQ Form AT-3
(original) is to be sent to the following address:
NC DENR / Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no
later than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
and all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or
approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be
measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently then required by this permit, the results
of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation & reporting of the data submitted on the
DMR & all AT Forms submitted.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate
environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate follow-up
testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month following the month of the initial­
monitoring. x
k\4' 5 15 rctfh'1 .
A. (6.) Fecal Coliform Compliance Condition
Should the City of Wilson be deemed by the Division of Water Quality to be chronically
noncompliant with the weekly average and/or monthly average fecal coliform limit after
completion of the expansion to 14 MOD, the City shall submit plans and specificaUons within 90
days after notification by the Division. The plans and specifications shall provide for an
adequately designed chlorine disinfection facility. If another method of disinfection is proposed, it
should conform to conventional design parameters, as well as any minimum requirements
specified by the Division. Bidding and subsequent construction of the project shall commence
immediately after the issuance of the Authorization to Construct permit.
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chloronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1.2- dichlorobenzene
1.3- dichlorobenzene
1.4- dichlorobenzene
3.3- dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2.4- dinitro toluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(l,2.3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodl-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1.2.4- trichlorobenzene
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES No. NC0023906
A. (7.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The permittee shall perform an annual pollutant scan of its treated effluent for the following
parameters:
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved oxygen
Nitrate/Nitrite
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen
Oil and grease
Total Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1,1 -dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1.1 -dichloroethylene
1.2- dichloropropane
1.3- dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1.1.2.2- tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1.1.1 -trichloroethane
1.1.2- trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid-extractable compounds:
P- chloro- m- cresol
2-chlorophenol
2.4- dichlorophenol
2.4- dimethylphenol
4.6- dinitro-o-cresol
2.4- dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2.4.6- trichlorophenol
Base-neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo (a) pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k) fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
1. The total set of samples analyzed during the current term of the permit must be representative of
seasonal variations.
2. Samples shall be collected and analyzed in accordance with analytical methods approved under 40 CFR
Part 136.
3. Unless indicated otherwise, metals must be analyzed and reported as total recoverable.
4. Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- DMR-PPA1 or in a form approved by the
Director, within 90 days of sampling. Two copies of the report shall be submitted along with the DMRs
to the following address: Division of Water Quality, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27699-1617.
Regional Office:Receiving Stream:RRO
Stream Classification:Quad
303(d) Listed?:Permit Writer:
Date:August 11, 2008
The
DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0023906, Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
NPDES Renewal
Page 1
E27NW
Wilson, NC
Jackie Nowell
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
IWC (%):_________
Primary SIC Code:
Subbasin:_________
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
94.4
4952
RECEIVING STREAM INFORMATION
The flow in Contentnea Creek is regulated by release from an upstream reservoir,
minimum release is 1.3 cfs and DWQ has used this value as a 7Q10 flow.
Applicant/Facility Name:
Applicant Address:_____
Facility Address:_______
Permitted Flow________
Type of Waste:_________
Facility/Permit Status:
County:
Miscellaneous
Contentnea
Creek_________
C-Swamp NSW
SI: 27-86-(7)
Yes; TMDL on
the Neuse River;
Listed for D.O.,
section 27-86-
(7)a___________
030407________
240___________
1.3 (regulated,
conservative
est.)
Facility Information ________________
City of Wilson/ Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility
P.O. Box 10, Wilson, NC 27894_______________________
3100 Old Stantonsburg Road Wilson, NC 27894_______
14 MGD ________________________________________
Domestic and Industrial
Renewal
Wilson
The City’s treatment system consists of: mechanical bar screens, manual bar screen, grit
chamber, two (2) preaeration basins (currently out of service), three (3) primary clarifiers, one
(1) biological nutrient removal tank, seven (7) extended aeration basins, five (5) secondary
clarifiers, polishing ponds, five (5) tertiary filters, methanol feed system, sodium hypochorite
disinfection tank, sodium bisulfite dechlorination, post aeration, and anaerobic digesters
The Wilson - Hominy Creek WRF has a full pre treatment program through the Division of
Water Quality’s PERCS Unit. This program will continue to be implemented in accordance with
the permit.
SUMMARY
The City of Wilson operates a 14 MGD water reclamation facility that discharges treated
municipal wastewater (domestic and industrial) into Contentnea Creek (a tributary to the
Neuse River). The City’s current NPDES permit was last issued December 31, 2003. The
permit expired May 31, 2008 and has been administratively extended. Wilson submitted the
renewal application December 4, 2007. The City also is reusing a portion of its wastewater
under Non-discharge permit WQ0020915
The segment of Contentnea Creek where the Wilson WRF discharges is not listed on North
Carolina’s draft 2008 303(d) list. However, approximately nine miles downstream of the
discharge, Contentnea Creek is impaired for aquatic life based on the exceedance of biological
criteria. Parameters of interest are ecological/biological integrity and benthos.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY:
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
NPDES Renewal
Page 2
TOXICITY TESTING:
Current Requirement: Chronic Ceriodaphnia Qrtrly P/F @ 90%
Testing during the months of February May August and November.
The City has passed 17 (all) of its whole effluent toxicity tests from January 2004 through
January 2008.
DWQ recommends that the quarterly chronic Ceriodaphnia toxicity tests @ 90% be
continued in the renewed permit.
Oxygen Demand
As stated in the previous fact sheets (dated July 25, 2003), due to the swamp-like nature of
Contentnea Creek, a steady state one dimensional model could not be used to determine limits
for oxygen consuming parameters. The BODS limits for 14 MGD are based on BPJ (tertiary
treatment levels). The Wilson - Hominy Creek plant is designed for tertiary treatment and
biological nutrient removal.
Nitrogen
The Environmental Management Commission adopted Nutrient Management Strategy rules in
December 1997, classifying the entire Neuse River Basin as Nutrient Sensitive Waters. The
point source rule (T15A NCAC 2B .0234) sets Total Nitrogen (TN) discharge Umits for all point
source dischargers larger than 0.5 MGD.
The rule also allows dischargers to form a group compliance association and work together to
reduce nitrogen: this option allows the association members added flexibility in controlling
nitrogen discharges. At the same time, the association is subject to a group NPDES permit
ensuring that the association and its individual members are accountable if they exceed the
applicable nitrogen limits.
Under the rule, there are three types of TN limit in the Neuse:
1. the individual limits in the dischargers’ individual permits,
2. the aggregate limit in an association's group NPDES permit, and
3. the individual allocations/limits for each Association member, also in that association
permit.
A discharger may be subject to the first type of limit, or to the second and third, but never to all
three at the same time. The discharger is first subject to the TN limit (if any) in its individual
NPDES permit. If becomes a co-permittee to a compliance association's group NPDES permit, it
is then governed by the TN limits in that permit. If the association complies with its group TN
limit in a given year, all members are deemed to be in compliance with their individual
allocations/ limits in the group permit. If the association exceeds its limit, the members then
become subject to their individual allocations/ limits as well.
Regardless of which permit governs a TN discharge, allocations/ limits will likely change over
time as the dischargers purchase, sell, trade, lease, or otherwise transfer nitrogen allocations.
The Division will modify the affected permits as necessary to ensure that the limits are kept up
to date and reflect any such transactions.
Overall the City has been in compliance with most permitted limits since the last issuance.
Retrieval of compliance data shows that there were some ammonia (NH3) limits violations in
April 2005 and during the last quarter of 2007. Investigations found that unpermitted
biodiesel facilities discharging into the collection system were the cause of the latter violations.
The more stringent summer and winter NH3 limits of 1 mg/1 and 2 mg/1, respectively, became
effective on November 1, 2004.
Water Quality Consil^rations
Contentnea Creek is a tributary to the Neuse River. According to the Basinwide Water Quality
Management Plan for the Neuse, the primaiy water quality considerations for point sources in
the basin are discharges of (1) oxygen-demanding substances and (2) nutrients.
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS (RPA) RESULTS
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
NPDES Renewal
Page 3
2006, and 2007. The
. See attached RPA
INSTREAM MONITORING:
Wilson is part of the Lower Neuse Basin Association (LNBA) and is not required to perform the
instream monitoring listed in this permit 6(//)
The LNBA monitors upstream and downstream sites on Contentnea Creek [J6764000, '
upstream at Hwy. 301, above the Wilson WRF); J6890000, downstream at NCSR 1622;
J7210000, downstream at Hwy. 58). During the past 2 years, data have shown depressed DOs
have occurred at the downstream sites. This appears to indicate a definite impact from the
upstream to the downstream sites. This creek is likely affected due to both point and nonpoint
source impacts; it should be noted that Contentnea Creek is classified as “swamp”, in which
DOs may be naturally depressed on occasion.
RPA - Other parameters
The application contained APAM data from the years 2004, 2005, 20
following volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were shown to be present,
analyses.
Raleigh Regional Office stall report and Compliance Evaluation Inspections indicate that the
facility is well maintained and operated.
• Chlorodibromomethane (c) - 1 value in 2005 only.
• Chloroform (c) - 3 values in 2005 -2007
• Dichlorobromomethane (c) - 3 values in 2005 -2007
• Butyl Benzyl Phthalate - 1 value in 2007 only.
(c) - possible carcinogen
There is no North Carolina water quality standard for any of these constituents; therefore they
were evaluated with federal water quality criteria. RPA analysis guidance recommends a
minimum of 8 - 12 values; however there was a maximum of only three data values for some
parameters. Three of these substances have a human health criterion and are possibly
carcinogenic. North Carolina regulations recommend a mean annual flow be used to calculate
potential effluent limits. The flow in Contentnea Creek is regulated by release from an
upstream reservoir. The minimum release is 1.3 cfs and DWQ has used this value as a 7Q10
flow. There was no estimate of a mean annual flow currently available for Contentnea Creek.
A RPA analysis was done for the VOCs but without optimal stream flow information (min.
release flow value used) or the recommended number of data values. The results and
recommendations are as follows:
Reasonable potential analyses were conducted for cyanide and metals based on sampled data
in discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) from January 2006 through May 2008. The DMRs
contained permitted data as well as LTMP data. See attached RPA analyses.
• Arsenic, chromium, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, molybdenum, selenium and silver
demonstrated no reasonable potential to exceed state water quality standards or acute
criteria. Most data were reported below detection levels (exceptions were chromium,
mercury and nickel). No effluent limits or monitoring will be required with the permit,’
but the City will have to continue to monitor these parameters through the
Pretreatment Program’s Long Term Monitoring Plan.
• Cadmium - the maximum predicted value indicated a reasonable potential to exceed the
chronic allowable concentration. Based on this result, it is recommended that a weekly
average limit of 2 ug/1 and a daily maximum limit of 15 ug/1 be added to the permit.
• Copper and Zinc - maximum predicted values for both parameters demonstrated a
reasonable potential to exceed both the chronic and acute allowable concentrations.
However, these are both Action Level standards and should be reviewed in conjunction
with toxicity testing. It is recommended that monthly monitoring be continued for both
parameters.
PROPOSED CHANGES:
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
NPDES Renewal
Page 4
Metals:
• Cadmium -a weekly average limit of 2 ug/1 and a daily maximum limit of 15 ug/1
be added to the permit based on the reasonable potential analysis.
Other permit conditions
The fecal cohform special condition is being continued with this renewal (based on
the modifications for the 14 MGD, the chlorine contact basin is not going to be
enlarged, so the NPDES Unit has the same concerns regarding the contact time).
Nutrients
This permit includes nutrient limits consistent with the Nutrient Management Strategy rule
(T15A NCAC 2B .0234).
Nitrogen. Under the new rule, the City of Wilson - Hominy Creek WRF receives a TN Load limit
of 157,684 lb/yr, a calendar year limit.
The City of Wilson is a member of the Neuse River Compliance Association at this time. So long
as it remains a co-permittee member, it is deemed to be in compliance with the TN limit in this
permit, and its TN discharge is governed instead by the Association's group NPDES permit,
issued December 30, 2002.
Phosphorus. The City's 2.0 mg/L Total Phosphorus limit is carried forward in the new permit.
However, it is now a quarterly average limit rather than a weekly average, to conform with the
new rule.
Other Parameters
• Chloroform and Dichlorobromomethane will be monitored quarterly based on
results of the reasonable potential analysis and the possible formation of
trihalomethanes from chlorination.
• Butyl Benzyl Phth^ate ^5 noncarcinogen, only one data v^iue and the results did not
show reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentration. No monitoring
recommended. Will be sampled once per year in future APAMs. •
The minimum release flow was used to also evaluate the following parameters. As carcinogens,
a higher mean annual flow would normally be used in calculating the allowable concentrations.
• Chlorodibromomethane - a carcinogen, only one data value, and the results did not
show reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentration. This value
was detected in 2005 and was not present in the last two APAMs. No monitoring
recommended. Will be sampled once per year in future APAMs.
• Chloroform - a carcinogen, only three data values used, and the results did not show
reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentration. Values were
detected in 2005, 2006 and 2007. This may show the development of trihalomethanes
from chlorination. Will recommend that quarterly monitoring for chloroform be added
to the permit.
• Dichlorobromomethane - a carcinogen, only three data values used, and the results did
show reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentration. Values were
detected in 2005, 2006 and 2007. This may show the development of trihalomethanes
from chlorination. Will recommend that quarterly monitoring for
dichlorobromomethane be added to the permit.
An annual priority pollutant scan requirement will remain in the permit to ensure that the
permittee complies with the requirement in the municipal permit applications.
DATE:
RO SUPERVISOR NAME
Draft Permit to Public Notice:
Permit Scheduled to Issue: ,
1 i he ' i f So
Wilson/ Hominy Creek WRF
NPDES Renewal
Page 5
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
August 13, 2008
November 1, 2008 (est.)
NAME:. flA iAtA eXn y cl"?
CL
STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Jackie Nowell at [phone].
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENT:
FocAncA T'F.C 'fv\ i?»\ CLov\cy
| i he Sf) if SO
He '
Th# ch lot / cm cTsmTcTwTTT
-pkcd p co cefJ 77uj ihclufi# $ jiAoty f-l\> clceni ec/e^cAeci'n^
pec Sl^Aje $+« fac<
(}) I>£IIa(A kolAt^j f5) A> tester z>i f '
h?Asz 7~^ A0p^~'cc\ sheet lei eclso -A cr-> Ih cll<.de
fam Idrr
(Ap^earvx^ OffconsT^ea^ Pa^detfks $ko<dd laa redro/ed Tc SjcAe /~i\rd CJ'lWf]
() p&tf effTf Lwer l\lecmt AsyccteA'r! inS'-b^^ is
Kfot beefed cis IcmJ cs tL#oj (%n c\cf^ve rv\e/mp
C c> i Lee i> c\y)>/ 'tks ffC- Y'CCC’Yuet'^TJ cd peer^.,'t
/^J.^ ^DATE: CC/^C/C^Cf'
'ec 1}/) '-/Sjs r' A DATE: -c 0 ?/ F Tf
..cASONABLE POTENTIAL A YSIS
PARAMETER PQL I Units REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
*D< MkrftWCV
Acute:NIAArsenicC10uft/L 21 0 5.0
Chronic:
Acute:N/ABerylliumC6.5 uglL 0 0 N/A
Chronic: fVALUEl
Acute:15CadmiumNC215□9/L 21 3 4.2
Chronic:2
Acute:1.022ChromiumNC501,022 ug/L 21 4 32.6
Chronic 53 No RP shown. Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP
Acute:
Copper NC 7 AL 7.3 ug/L 38 33 3108
Chrcmic'
Acute:22
Cyanide NC 5 N 22 10 ug/L 21 0 5.0
Chronic:5
Acute:N/AFluorideNC1,800 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Acute:34
Lead NC 25 N 338 ug/L 21 0 5.0
Chronic 26
Acute:N/AMercuryNC122.00001 ng/L 1.0000
Chronic 13 No RP shown. Recommend continue’monitoring’in LTMP.
Acute:N/AMolybdenumA3,500 ug/L 21 0 50.0
Acute:261
Nickel NC 88 261 ug/L 21 20.8
Chronic:93 | No RP shown. Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP.
Acute:N/APhenolsANug/L 0 0 N/A
Acute:56
Selenium NC 5.0 56 ug/L 21 0 5.0
Chronic 5
Acute:1SilverNC0.06 AL 1.23 ug/L 21 0 2.5
Chronic 0
Acute:67ZincNC50AL67ug/L 38 35 156.9
Chronic:
~ Freshwater Discharge
14
1.3
0
0
0
No RP shown. AH values belwr detection
| Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP
RP shown. Chronic aRowabie exceeded. Recommend
weekly avg. and dally max, limits
23906rpa2008.xls, rpa
8/12/2008
Wilson - Hominy Creek WWTP
NC0023906
TYPE
<1)
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7Q10S 94.348
@ 7Q10W N/A
@3002 N/A
@QA N/A
Stream Class C Swamp NSW
#VALUEI I No avg flow to compute RP. All value’s below detection
[Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP
RP shown b/c of detection level. Al values below detection
Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP
Outfall 001
Qw = 14 MGD
■ Legend:
C • Cardnogenic
NC * Non-cardnogenic
A « Aesthetic
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
MCMW/ SMYZ
C*™*_______ Acu»
Time Period 01/2006-5/2008
Qw (MGD)
7Q10S (cfs)
7QWW(cfs)
3OQ2 (cfs)
Avg. Stream Flow. QA (cfs)
Reccing Stream Contentnea Creek
Chronic 1,908
Chronic #VALUEI |No 3002 to impute RP. ‘ah values betov detection
Recommend continue monitoring in LTMP
10 10
Note: n<12
Limited data set
RP shown b/c of detection level. AH values below detection
[Recommend continue monitoring In LTMP
|RP shown b/c of detection level AFv’aiues'beiow detection
Recommend continue monitoring In LTMP
|RP shown. Chronic and acute allowables exceeded. B/c
[NC AL and no tox failures, continue monthly monitor
53’ I " '
1 |RP shown. Chronic and acute allowables exceeded. B/c
AL and no tox failures, continue monthly monitor
7 I ..............................................
Chronic #VALUE!
1 2
Arsenic Beryllium
Date BDL=1/2DL
Nov-2006
-1 -
Date I
May-2008 a
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
BDL=1/2DL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
21
1.0000
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
N/A
0.0 ug/L
N/A ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Data
REASONABLE potential a^Ilys.^
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
Data
1 100
■a 100
3 10.0
a 10.0
100
a 10.0
3 1003 100 3 io.o
3 100 I 10-0
1 100 a 100 a io.o
J 100 3 100 I 10.0
1 100 J 10.0
10.0
a io.o
43
ChromiumCadmium
Date
Nov-2006Feb-2006
-2-
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
BDL=1/2DL
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.8
0.7
0.1
0.1
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.2663
0.2095
1.2709
21
4.2400
1.0 ug/L
4.2 ug/L
5
5
12
5
11
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
7.0
6.0
5
5
5
5
BDL=1/2DL
2.5
2.5
12.0
2.5
11.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
7.0
6.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.8532
3.7381
0.7633
21
2.7200
12.0 ug/L
32.6 ug/L
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Date
May-2008
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
.*
h^AS^ABLE POTENTIAL ANALIolS
<
Apr-2008
May-2006 ‘
Data
Sep-2007
May-2007 >
§
■<
I
I
Data
1 May-2008
2
3
4
5 Aug-2007 “
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
5 6
Copper Cyanide
Data
Dec-2007
Dec-2006
Jan-2006
-3-
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
BDL=1/2DL
10.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
2.0
3.0
1.0
74.0
0.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
2.5
6.0
3.0
4.0
12.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
3.0
6.0
6.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
6.0
0.0
3.0
4.0
1.0
11.6302
5.6975
2.0413
38
4.2000
74.0 ug/L
310.8 ug/L
BDL=1/2DL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.000
5.000
5 000
5.000
5.000
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
21
1.0000
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Date
May-2008 10
5
2.99
4
5
6
2
3
2
74
0
2
3
4
2
3
‘ 4
5
5
6
3
4
12
3
4
2
3
6
6
3
4
4
6
6
0
3
4
2
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
I
R^mSONABLE POTENTIAL aHLYSio
Date
1 May-2008
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
I
I
i
i
!
I i
I
Data
10.0
10.0
0.01
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
87
LeadFluoride
DataBDL=1/2DLDate
-4-
s
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
N/A
0.0 ug/L
N/A ug/L
Date
May-2008 10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
BDL=1/2DL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
21
1.0000
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Data Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
R_AsHaBLE POTENTIAL ANAL\ ^iS
I
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
9 10
Mercury Molybdenum
-5-
Date
May-2008
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
BDL=1/2DL
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0000
1.0000
0.0000
10
1.00
1.0 ng/L
1.0 ng/L
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
BDL=1/2DL
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
1.0000
50.0 ug/L
50.0 ug/L
0.00
50.00
0.00
21Aug-2007
Feb-2007
May-2007
Nov-2006
Aug-2006
May-2006
Feb-2006
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Data
0.847
0.88
0.795
0-712
$ 1-11
■ 1.16
£3 °-793 °-971
9 11
9 0.9
Date Data
1 May-2008 |
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
REASONABLE POTENTIAL A^LYS.o
L
I
'■
1211
PhenolsNickel
BDL=1/2DLDate
Nov-2006
-6-
Date
May-2008 10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
13
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
BDL=1/2DL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
13.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
1.7457
5.3810
0.3244
21
1.6000
13.0 ug/L
20.8 ug/L
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
N/A
0.0 ug/L
N/A ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
§
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
3
DataData
53
h-AS^ABLE POTENTIAL ANAL\ ^IS
j
I
I
NO DATA
NO DATA
NO DATA
0
13 14
Selenium Silver
-7-
Date
May-2008
BDL=1/2DL
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
0.0000
5.0000
0.0000
21
1.0000
5.0 ug/L
5.0 ug/L
Date
May-2008 5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
BDL=1/2DL
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
0.0000
2.5000
0 0000
21
1.0000
2.5 ug/L
2.5 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
REASONABLE POTENTIAL A^LYS.o
Data
I
-
i
i
Data
.4 10.0
10.0
-3 10.0
3 io.o
4 10.05 1004 io.o
3 100 <] 10.03 100
a 1003 100 •d 10.0
□ 1004 10.0
a 10.0
10.0
4 10.0
J 100
3 1004 10.0
15
Zinc
Dec-2007
Sep-2007
Dec-2006
May-2006
Jan-2006
-8-
Date
May-2008
BDL=1/2DL
21.0
26.0
21.2
28.0
40.0
44.0
83.0
33.0
26.0
20.0
0.0
5.0
15.0
24.0
18.0
5.0
52.0
29.0
36.0
32.0
32.0
27.0
21.0
24.0
28.0
20.0
16.0
17.0
17.0
16.0
22.0
25.0
29.0
11.0
0.0
26.0
25.0
5.0
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Fred Cw
14.8723
24.1909
0.6148
38
1.8900
83.0 ug/L
156.9 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
21
26
21.2
28
40
44
83
33.
26
20
0.026
10
15
24
18
10
52
29
36
32
32
27
21
24
28
20
16
17
17
16
22
25
29
11
0.028
26
25
10
23906rpa2008.xls, data
8/12/2008
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Data
1
h^AS^IABLE POTENTIAL ANAL\olS
Outfall 001
Qw 14MGD
1.3
PARAMETER PQL Units REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
• DM MuftadCv
Acute:N/A
:hlorodibromomethan C 13 ufl/L 1 1 N/A
Chronic:14
Acute:N/A
Chloroform C 170 0 ug/L 96.6
Chronic 180
Acute:15
)ichlorobromomethan C 17 ug/L 3 17.9
Chronic:18
Limited data set
Acute:1.022
Butyl Benzyl Phthalah NC 19 ufl/L 1 1 N/A
Chronic 20
Acute:
Copper NC 7 AL 7.3 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:7
Acute:22
Cyanide NC 5 N 22 10 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:5
N/AAcute:
Fluoride NC 1,800 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:1,908
Acute:34
Lead NC 25 N 33 8 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 26
Acute:N/A
Mercury NC 12 20000 ng/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 13
Acute:N/A
Molybdenum A 3,500 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:♦VALUE!
Acute:261
Nickel NC 88 261 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 93
Acute:N/A
Phenols A 1 N ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic •VALUE!
Acute:56
Selenium NC 5.0 56 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:5
1Acute:
Silver NC 0.06 AL 1.23 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:0
Acute:67
Zinc NC 50 AL 67 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 53
** Freshwater Discharge
TYPE
(1)
14
1.3
0
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Note: n'lZ
Limited data set
Insufficient data to determine RP.
No monitonng recommended
23906rpathms1.32008.xls, rpa
8/12/2008
Wilson Hominy Creek WRF
NC0023906
WWTP Class IV
IWC(%)Q7Q10S 94.348
@ 7Q10W N/A
@30Q2 N/A
@ QA 94.348
Stream Class C Sw NSW
3 3 s
Note: n<12
Limited data set
3
Note: n<12
• Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC ■ Non-carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
HCWQS/ UFAV/
Chronic 4cule
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. No detects since 2005, No monitoring recommended
1
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. Delected in 05.06,07. Recommend quarterty monitorir
__Z_.J
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. Detected in 05,06.07. Recommend quarterly monitorir
.seasonable potential an^ysis
Time Period 2005-2007
Qw (MGD)
7Q10S (cfs)
7Q10W(cfs)
30Q2 (cfs)
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs)
Rec'ving Stream Conlentnea Creek
Outfall 001
Qw 14MGD
ea Creek
PARAMETER PQL Units REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS RECOMMENDED ACTION
IM MrPrWC*
Acute:N/A
:hlorodibromomethan C 13 119/L 1 N/A
Chronic:18
N/AAcute:
Chloroform C 170.0 ug/L 3 3 966
Note: n<12 Chronic.230
Limited data set
15Acute:
tichlorobromomethan C 17 15 ug/L 3 17.9
Chronic 23
Limited data set
Acute:1,022
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate NC 19 1,022 ug/L N/A
Chronic 20
Limited data set
Acute:7
NC 7 AL 7.3 ug/L 0Copper0 N/A
Chronic:7
Acute:22
22CyanideNC5N 10 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:5
N/AAcute:
Fluoride NC 1,800 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:1,908
34Acute:
Lead NC 25 N 338 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 26
Acute:N/A
Mercury NC 12 2 0000 ng/L 0 0 N/A
13Chronic
Acute:N/A
Molybdenum 3,500 ug/L 0 0 N/A
•VALUEIChronic:
Acute:261
Nickel NC 88 261 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic:93
N/AAcute:
N/APhenolsANug/L 0 0
Chronic: #VALUEI
Acute:56
Selenium NC 5.0 56 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 5
Acute:
Silver NC 0.06 AL 1.23 ug/L 0 0 N/A
Chronic 0
Acute:67
AL 67 ug/L 0 0 N/AZincNC50
53
“ Fmshwater Discharge
1 1
Note: n<12
14
1.3
0
Note: n<12
Limited data set
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7Q10S 94.348
@ 7Q10W N/A
@3002 N/A
@ QA 74.061
Stream Class C Sw NSW
Insufficient data to determine RP.
No monitoring recommended
Wilson Hominy Creek WRF
NC0023906
TYPE
tn
3
Note: n<12
239O6rpsthms7.62008 xIs, rpa
8/12/2008
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC ■ Non-caro'nogenic
A - Aesthetic
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
NCWQS/ KFAV/
Chronic Ao*
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. No delects since 2005. No monitoring recommended
____________
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. Detected in 05.06,07. Recommend quarterly monitorir
___________I
Insufficient data to determine RP. No avg flow to calculate
RP. Detected in 05,06,07. Recommend quarterly monitorir
KcASONABLE potential an^sis
Time Period 2005-2007
Qw(MGD)
7Q10S (cfs)
7Q10W(cfs)
30Q2(cfs)
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs)
Rec'ving Stream
Chrome:
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Chlorodlbromomethan*Chloroform Dichloro bromomethane Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Data Data
-1-
Data
Sap-2005
N/A
5.2 Ufl/L
N/A ug/L
Data
Sep-2005
Nov-2006
Mar-2007
Mult Factor-
Max. Value
Max. PradCw
2.9900
32.3 ug/L
96.6 ug/L
Data
Sep-2005
Nov-2006
Mar-2007
2.0300
8.8 ug/L
17.9 ug/L
23906rpathm»2008.xl», data
8/12/2008
Mult Factor ■
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
N/A
10.0 ug/L
N/A ug/L
Mult Factor-
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Reeulta
StdDev.
Mean
C.V.
n
9.1877
25.5667
0.3594
3
Reaulte
StdDev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor ■
Max. Value
Max. Prod Cw
1.7427
7.6867
0.2267
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Date
Mar-2007
Reaulte
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Reaulte
StdDev.
Mean
C.V.
n
BDL-1/2DL
8.8
8.8
5.7
BDL-1/2DL
18.1
29.3
32.3
•DIV/01
5.2400
•DIV/01
1
•OIV/01
10.0000
•DIV/01
1
BDL-1/2DL
5.2 5.2 BDL-1/2DL
10 10.0
Data
33 8.82
■ 8.58
■ 5.68
Data
M 15.1
R 29-3■ 32-3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 —
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Chlorodibromomethane Chloroform Dlchlorobromomethane Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Dau5.2
-1-
BDL-1/2DL
5.2
N/A
5.2 ug/L
N/A ug/L
BDL-1/2DL
15.1
29.3
32.3
MuH Factor ■
Max Valua
Max. PradCw
9.1877
25.5687
0.3594
3
2.9900
32.3 ug/L
98.6 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2.0300
8.8 ug/L
17.9 ug/L
Data
Mar-2007
23906rpalhm»2008.xla. data
8/12/2008
N/A
10.0 ug/L
N/A ug/L
DaU
Sap-2005
Mult Factor*
Max. Value
Max. PredCw
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Data
Sep-2005
Nov-2006
Mar-2007
ReaulU
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
DaU
Sep-2005
Nov-2006
Mar-2007
BDL-1/2DL
8.8
8.6
5.7
ReeulU
Std Dev.
Maen
C.V.
n
Mult Factor ■
Max. Value
Max PredCw
1.7427
7.6867
0.2267
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ReaulU
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
MuH Factor ■
Max. Value
Max. Prod Cw
ReaulU
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
DaU
8DIV/0I
5.2400
M)IV/0l
1
#DIV/0l
10.0000
•DIV/01
1
BDL-1/2DL
10 10.0
Dau
M 8.82
H 8.56
S-68
Data
■ 15.1
n 293H 32 3
□1
June 13, 2008
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brice:
Mr. Russell Brice, WRF Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
* Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
City of Wilson Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility
NPDES Permit NC0023906
Stormwater Permit NCG110081
Wilson County
MAIL^"3
&
CERTIFIED MAIL 7006 0810 0002 6049 5237
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
2. The 14.0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility consists of the of the following units: influent
pump station; two automatic bar screens; screenings compactor; automatic grit removal; influent
ultrasonic flow meter; two pre-aeration basins; a biological phosphorus removal tank; three
primary clarifiers; seven aeration basins with seven anoxic zones and one reaeration zone; five
secondary clarifiers; methanol feed facilities; five deep bed denitrification filters with automatic or
manual backwashing; sodium hypochlorite disinfection tank; reaeration basin with sodium
bisulfite dechlorination; effluent ultrasonic flow meter; effluent pump station; one reuse water
basin; a reclaim water facility; one plastic lined reclaimed water pond; four anaerobic digesters
heated by natural gas or methane generated from digesters; a sludge thickening and dewatering
building with two gravity belt thickeners, two belt filter presses, waste activated sludge pump
station; a ten-ton per day alkaline sludge stabilization facility capable of producing Class A
dewatered sludge; three liquid sludge holding tanks; and a septage receiving station.
1. A permit renewal for the Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility was received in this office in
December 2007. The permit is still under review in the Central Office. Please continue to operate
under the last issued permit until a new permit is issued.
On May 20, 2008, Mitch Hayes and Cheng Zhang of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted an
inspection of the subject facility. The assistance from Sandra Mooneyham, Joellen Gay, Tonya Grogan
and you with this inspection was appreciated. Below is a list of findings and recommendations developed
from the inspection.
> I
CH
3. At the time of inspection, one (1) automatic bar screen, one (1) grit chamber, both pre-aeration
basins, two (2) primary clarifiers, one (1) aeration basin and two (2) anoxic zones, and were not
being used due to low inflow and underloading. The plant has been experiencing underloading for
the last four months. Spikes in BOD and ammonia have been noticed on Mondays and after
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterqiiality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper NprthCarolina
Naturally
5.
7.
8. Discharge Monitoring Reports for the period June 2007 to May 2008 were reviewed for
Wilson Hominy Creek WRF CEI
Page 2 , . »
The wastewater treatment plant staff. Tritest, Mircrobac (STR Division), and EnChem analyzes all
permit parameters.
holidays. Presently, infusion of sugar water into the 7 BNR Basins appears to be reducing the BOD
spikes. Methanol is being fed into the two (2) anoxic zones to further reduce ammonia. Installation
of a mechanical mixer at the end of the aeration zone is planned later in the year to increase Total
Nitrogen uptake. Please note that the addition of the mechanical mixer may require an
Authorization to Construct (ATC) from the Construction Grants and Loans Section and a
modification to the permit. Please contact Mr. Daniel M. Blaisdell at 919.715.6211 for further
information. Effluent flowing off the primary clarifier was even with no obstruction. Diffusion of
air in the aeration basin appeared to be evenly distributed. Secondary clarifier weirs are covered to
prevent algae growth and could not be checked. Weirs are checked annually to ensure there is no
build-up of solids. All five (5) denitrification deep bed filters were in operation. Backwashing of
the five deep bed denitrification effluent filters is done on a 42-hour cycle for 45 minutes. Effluent
flowing into the reaeration zone below the dechlorination feed appeared clear with no odor, solids,
or foam. Rainwater was present in the basin that was formally used for sludge storage. Sludge
drying beds are used for drying out pump station wet well clean out pumpings and basin clean
outs. Some of the unused drying beds will be dismantled and removed. The digester methane
generation unit was operating as designed.
Reclaimed water is distributed under permit WQ0018709. Reuse water is irrigated on Wedgewood
Golf Coarse and will be used in at the Firestone plant for cooling water. Reclaimed, reuse water
permits and other non-discharge permits are regulated by the Aquifer Protection Section (APS).
All correspondence pertaining to these permits should be directed to the APS.
compliance with permit limits and monitoring requirements. Weekly and monthly permit limit for
ammonia nitrogen were exceeded in 09/2007. The violations occurred as a result of repairs being
made to the aeration blowers and were dismissed. Monthly permit limit for ammonia nitrogen was
exceeded November 2007. This occurred as a result of an unpermitted biodiesel facility
discharging wastes with high concentrations of BOD, COD, NH3-N, TKN, and FOG. The
discharge caused a plant upset. Monthly and weekly permit limit for ammonia nitrogen were
exceeded for December 2007. The plant experienced underloading during the weekends and
holidays and believed to have caused the permit limits for ammonia to be exceeded. Further
examination by plant staff found that another unpermitted biodiesel facility was discharging into
4. The sludge thickening and stabilization facility was producing Class B sludge at the time of
inspection. The facility is capable of producing Class A and Class B sludge. The facility has been
unable to produce Class A sludge for the last two weeks due to an error in the programmable logic
controller (PLC). Repair is expected to be completed later in May or early June 2008. There were
Class B solids stored under shelter. Dewatered and stabilized biosolids are land applied to
permitted privately owned farmland or transported to a privately owned composting facility.
Granville Farms operates the Land Application Program under permit WQ0001896. Any
supernatant from the sludge dewatering is conveyed back to the wastewater treatment head works.
6. The laboratory was checked in a cursory manner. All instrument calibration logs are being
maintained. An operator’s logbook was available and being maintained. The influent and effluent
flow meters were last calibrated 05/01/2008 and are calibrated every 90 days by Pearson Controls
Services from Raleigh, NC. The BOD incubator temperature was 20.0 degrees C, the drying oven
was 107 degrees C, sample refrigerator was 4.5 degrees C, fridge #2 was 4 degrees C, and the fecal
fridge was 1.0 degree C.
Stormwater Permit NCG110081
updated!2/18/2006 and contains all permit requirements.
Cc: Central Files
EPA
13. Qualitative monitoring reports for Outfalls 1, 2, 3, and 4 were available for 04/18/2008 and
09/10/2007. Documentation of employee training on clean-up procedures occurred on 04/2007.
11. The stormwater map for the facility was
Sincerely,
Mitch Hayes
Environmental Specialist
10. Permit NCG110081 was reissued and became effective on June 01, 2008 and expires on May 31,
2013. A review of the permit requirements was conducted after the CEI for NC0023906. A copy of
the permit was on hand.
I would like to thank you and your staff for your time and assistance with this inspection. If you have
any questions concerning this report or the inspection, please contact me at 919.791.4261.
12. There are four stormwater discharge outfalls listed on the stormwater map. Outfall 4 drains to a
catch basin in front of the old head works pump station off site. This outfall has been reworked to
include more rip/rap with a small settling basin with diffuse flow. There was no discharge. Outfall
3 flows from the drainage area on the southeast side of the property to a creek off site. Water in the
creek appeared clear with no indication of sediment. Outfall 2 flows from the reuse water pump
station to a small pond. Water in the pond appeared tanic most likely due to the high organic
matter content in the soil. Outfall 1 flows to a storm drain by the old headworks pump station to a
settling basin (Raymond’s Pond) off site. A locked gate valve controls discharge. Water at the gate
valve appeared clear. There were no stormwater discharges at the time of inspection.
9. Commercial lab results, chain of custody records, and bench sheets were compared with data
submitted on the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) for the month of February 2008. No
discrepancies were noted.
Wilson Hominy Creek WR^£EI
Page 3
the collection system and most likely have caused the spikes in ammonia. There were no other
violations for the review period.
EPA
NPDES
3l NC0023906
211
Entry Time/Date Permit Effective Date
04/02/0108/05/2009:15 AMWilson WWTP
Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date
08/05/3108/05/2004:30 PM
Other Facility Data
Randolph/ORC/252-399-2495/Jerome
Russell P Brice//252-399-2491 /2523992209
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Effluent/Receiving Waters
(See attachment summary)
Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Cheng Zhang RRO WQ//919-791-4200/
Mitchell S Hayes RRO WQ//919-791-4200/
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page #1
12,
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D C. 20460
yr/mo/day
08/05/20
Old Stantonsburg Rd
Wilson NC 27893
Flow Measurement
Self-Monitoring Program | Sludge Handling Disposal
Laboratory Storm Water
________Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Contacted
Yes
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Inspection Work Days
671 I 69
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
///
OG/15
Date
Date
J11
Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating
70 Lil
J17
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports
Facility Site Review
Inspection Type
18U
Fac Type
20U
Inspector
19LU
Name(s) and Signature(s) oflnspector(s) (
QA
72LJ
--------Reserved---------------------
1 75l I I I I I I I8073l I I74
__________________________//
lanagement Q A Reviewer //
si
Transaction Code
1 H 2U
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
■ Permit
Russell P Brice,PO Box 10 Wilson NC 278940010/Plant
Manager/252-399-2491/
Bl 71 u
________________________________________________Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Signatu^e'oTM;_o
Remarks
’I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | | III I I I I I | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |66
Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
(cont.)1
3l
Page # 2
NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
NC0023906 |11 121 08/05/20 | 17 18|c|
_Sectlon D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)______
The 14 0 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility consists of the of the following units: influent pump station-
two automatic bar screens; screenings compactor; automatic grit removal; influent ultrasonic flow meter; two
pre-aeration basins; a biological phosphorus removal tank; three primary clarifiers; seven aeration basins
with seven anoxic zones and one reaeration zone; five secondary clarifiers; methanol feed facilities- five
deep bed denitrification filters with automatic or manual backwashing; sodium hypochlorite disinfection tank-
reaeration basin with sodium bisulfite dechlorination; effluent ultrasonic flow meter; effluent pump station-
one reuse water basin; a reclaim water facility; one plastic lined reclaimed water pond; four anaerobic
dtgesters heated by natural gas or methane generated from digesters; a sludge thickening and dewatering
building with two gravity belt thickeners, two belt filter presses, waste activated sludge pump station- a
ten-ton per day alkaline sludge stabilization facility capable of producing Class A dewatered sludge- three
liquid sludge holding tanks; and a septage receiving station.
At the time of inspection, one (1) automatic bar screen, one (1) grit chamber, both pre-aeration basins, two
(2) primary clarifiers one (1) aeration basin and two (2) anoxic zones, and were not being used due to low
inflow and underloading. The plant has been experiencing underloading for the last four months. Spikes in
BO\uar,7 DMn?»nia have keen not'ced on Mondays and after holidays. Presently, infusion of sugar water
inio the 7 BNR Basins appears to be reducing the BOD spikes. Methanol is being fed into the two (2) anoxic
zones to further reduce ammonia. Effluent flowing off the primary clarifier was even with no obstruction
Dittusion of air in the aeration basin appeared to be evenly distributed. All five (5) denitrification deep bed
filters were in operation Backwashing of the five deep bed denitrification effluent filters is done on a 42-hour
cycle for 45 minutes. Effluent flowing into the reaeration zone below the dechlorination feed appeared clear
with no odor, solids, or foam.The digester methane generation unit was operating as designed.
Discharge Monitoring Reports for the period June 2007 to May 2008 were reviewed for compliance with
Jkd n n^onn°7nit-?Iin9 .r®^irements- Weekly and monthly permit limit for ammonia nitrogen were
exceeded in 09/2007 The violations occurred as a result of repairs being made to the aeration blowers and
were dismissed. Monthly permit limit for ammonia nitrogen was exceeded November 2007. This violation
tlXi1 °fh bJodiesel facility discharging wastes with high concentrations of BOD,
Hicmi’ceoH3 an^ The dl?c.ha.rge caused a plant upset. The November 2007 violation was
d smissed. Monthly and weekly permit limit for ammonia nitrogen were exceeded for December 2007. The
plant experienced underloading during the weekends and holidays and believed to have caused the permit
hmits for ammonia to be exceeded. Further examination by plant staff found that another unpermitted
biodiesel facility was discharging into the collection system and most likely have caused the spikes in
ammonia. There were no other violations for the review period.
Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE
■ Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable Solids, pH, DO, Sludge ■
Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment:Process control parameters are analyzed daily.
Permit Yes No NA NE
■ (If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new application?
■ o Is the facility as described in the permit?
■ # Are there any special conditions for the permit?
■ oIs access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
■ Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
Comment:
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
■ Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
■ Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
■ 0 Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
■ Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
■ Is the chain-of-custody complete?
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
■ Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
■ Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
■ (If the facility is - or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
■ □00Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?■ 000
■ 000Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
■ ODOIs a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Page #3
Owner - Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Record Keeping Yes No NA NE
■ Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained?■
■ Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris?
■ If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly?
Comment: Effluent appeared clear entering Contentnea Creek.
Flow Measurement - Influent Yes No NA NE
O ■ 0# Is flow meter used for reporting?
■ Is flow meter calibrated annually?
Is the flow meter operational?■
(If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?■
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
# Is flow meter used for reporting?■
Is flow meter calibrated annually?■
■ oIs the flow meter operational?
■ (If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter?
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Type of operation:Fixed cover
■ Is the capacity adequate?
# Is gas stored on site?■ o
Is the digester(s) free of tilting covers? ■
Is the gas burner operational?■ o
■ □□□Is the digester heated?
Is the temperature maintained constantly?■
Is tankage available for properly waste sludge?■
Page #4
Meter was calibrated 05/01/2008 and is calibrated every 90 days.
Flow Measurement - Effluent
Owner ■ Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Meter was calibrated 05/01/2008 and is calibrated every 90 days.
Anaerobic Digester
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Comment: Back-up ORC has been changed to Jerome Randoph WW-4, #14110 with
the retirement of Alchester Hinnett.
Comment: Digesters are heated by methane gas generated by anarobic bacteria
Digesters can also be heated by natural gas.
Drying Beds Yes No NA NE
■ O Is there adequate drying bed space?
Is the sludge distribution on drying beds appropriate?■
Are the drying beds free of vegetation?■
■ # Is the site free of dry sludge remaining in beds?
■ Is the site free of stockpiled sludge?
Is the filtrate from sludge drying beds returned to the front of the plant?■ o
# Is the sludge disposed of through county landfill?■
■ # Is the sludge land applied?
■ (Vacuum filters) Is polymer mixing adequate?
Sol ids H andling Equipment Yes No NA NE
■ Is the equipment operational?
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?■ o
Is storage adequate?■
■ O Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
■ o Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?■
The facility has an approved sludge management plan?■
Chemical Feed Yes No NA NE
Is containment adequate?■ ODD
■ 0Is storage adequate?
■ Are backup pumps available?
Is the site free of excessive leaking?■
Comment:
Pump Station - Influent Yes No NA NE
■ Is the pump wet well free of bypass lines or structures?
Page#5
Owner ■ Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Comment: Only Class B sludge was being produced. Class A sludge could not be
produced due to to an error in the programmable logic controller (PLC). Repair is
expected to be completed later in May or early June 2008.
Comment: Sludge drying beds are used for drying out pump station wet well clean out
pumpings and basin clean outs. Some of the unused drying beds will be dismantled and
removed.
Pump Station - Influent Yes No NA NE
■ Is the wet well free of excessive grease?
Are all pumps present?■
Are all pumps operable?■ o
■Are float controls operable?
■ Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?■
Comment:
Bar Screens Yes No NA NE
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?■ o
Is the screen free of excessive debris?■ □00
Is disposal of screening in compliance?■ ODD
Is the unit in good condition?■ ODO
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Type of grit removal
a.Manual o
b.Mechanical
Is the grit free of excessive organic matter?■ 000
Is the grit free of excessive odor?■ DOO
# Is disposal of grit in compliance?■ ODO
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?■ ODD
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?■ 000
Are weirs level?■ DOO
Is the site free of weir blockage?■ 000
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?■ ODO
Page #6
One grit removal collector was in service due to low inflow.
Primary Clarifier
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Owner - Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
One bar screen was in operation due to low inflow.
Grit Removal
Primary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
■ OIs scum removal adequate?
■ Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
■ Is the drive unit operational?
■Is the sludge blanket level acceptable?
■Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately % of the sidewall depth)
Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE
■ Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
■ Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
■ Are weirs level?
■ Is the site free of weir blockage?
■ o Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
■ 0Is scum removal adequate?
■ oIs the site free of excessive floating sludge?
■ o Is the drive unit operational?
■ 0Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
■ o Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
■Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately !4 of the sidewall depth)
Aeration Basins Yes No NA NE
Ext. AirMode of operation
Type of aeration system Diffused
■ Is the basin free of dead spots?
■ Are surface aerators and mixers operational?
■ 0Are the diffusers operational?
■ Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
■ o Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin’s surface?
■ Is the DO level acceptable?
Page #7
Owner - Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Comment: One out of three primarys was in service in trying to increase organic
loading.
Comment: Secondary clarifier weirs are covered to prevent algae growth and could
not be checked. Weirs are checked annually to ensure there is no build-up of solids.
Aeration Basins Yes No NA NE
Is the DO level acceptable?(1.0 to 3.0 mg/l)■
Comment:No foam was noted.
Nutrient Removal Yes No NA NE
# Is total nitrogen removal required?■
# Is total phosphorous removal required?■ o
Type Biological
# Is chemical feed required to sustain process? ■
Is nutrient removal process operating properly?■ o
Filtration (High Rate Tertiary)Yes No NA NE
Type of operation:Down flow
Is the filter media present?■
Is the filter surface free of clogging?■
Is the filter free of growth?■
Is the air scour operational?■
Is the scouring acceptable?■
Is the clear well free of excessive solids and filter media?■ o
Comment:
Disinfection-Liquid Yes No NA NE
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?■
(Sodium Hypochlorite) Is pump feed system operational?■
Is bulk storage tank containment area adequate? (free of leaks/open drains)■
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?■ 0
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?■ 0
Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination?■
Comment:
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Type of system ?Liquid
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)?■ o
Page #8
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Owner - Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Comment: Methanol is being fed into the two (2) anoxic zones to further reduce
ammonia. Installation of a mechanical mixer at the end of the aeration zone is planned
later in the year to increase Total Nitrogen uptake.
De-chlorination Yes No NA NE
Is storage appropriate for cylinders?■
# Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? ODO
Comment:
Are the tablets the proper size and type? ■ o
Are tablet de-chlorinators operational? ■
Number of tubes in use?
Comment:
Standby Power Yes No NA NE
Is automatically activated standby power available? o
Is the generator tested by interrupting primary power source? o
Is the generator tested under load? o
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?0 o
Is the generator fuel level monitored?0
Comment:
Pumps-RAS-WAS Yes No NA NE
Are pumps in place?■ o
Are pumps operational?■
Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site?■ o o
Comment:
Laboratory Yes No NA NE
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?■
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?■
# Is the facility using a contract lab?■ ODD
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees Celsius)?■
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/- 0.2 degrees?■
Incubator (BOD) set to 20.0 degrees Celsius +/-1.0 degrees?■ 0
Comment:
Page #9
Permit: NC0023906
Inspection Date: 05/20/2008
Owner ■ Facility: Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
T
Attn. NPDES Reviewer:
2.
e. Receiving Stream OK on Existing Permit KI, OR, if not, is
OK on Application Q, or provide Receiving Stream or affected waters:
'es or No.
Application/ Permit No.: NC0023906
Staff Report Prepared By: Mitch Haye$
Project Name: City of Wilson Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility
SOC Priority Project? (Y/N) N If Yes, SOC No.
County: Wflsori
Permitee: City of Wilson Hominy Creel
A. GENERAL INFORMA TION
1. This application is (check ail that apply): | I New K Renewal
0 Modification
Was a site visit conducted in order to prepare this report? K Y<
a. Date of site visit: May 20, 2008
b. Person contacted and telephone number: Russell Brice 252.399.2491
c. Site visit conducted by: Mitch Hayes
d. Inspection Report Attached: K Yes or Q No.
3. Keeping BIMS Accurate: Is the following BIMS information (a. through e. below) correct?
Yes or No. If No, please either indicate that it is correct on the current application or the
existing permit or provide the details. If none can be supplied, please explain:
Discharge Point: (Fill this section only if BIMS or Application Info is incorrect or missins}
(If there is more than one discharge pipe, put the others on the last page of this form.)
a. Location OK on Existing Permit K, OR, if not, is
OK on Application O, or if neither is right, provide Location:
NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(This form is best filled out on computer, rather than hard copy. Then unprotect to
highlight in light blue as needed to make your comments more visible in the final printing.)
[But DON’T protect document again, or Word wipes out all you have entered.]
Date: May 28,2008
To: NPDES Discharge Permitting Unit
d. Latitude/Longitude OK on Existing Permit K, (check at http:. www.topozone.com These are
often inaccurate) or is OK on Application K, or provide Latitude: Longitude:
b. Driving Directions OK on Existing Permit □, OR, if not, is
OK on Application □, or provide Driving Directions (please be accurate): From Raleigh, US 64
East By-Pass toward Rocky-Mount. Exit onto US- 264 East By-Pass toward Wilson. Exit onto
Old Black Creek Road toward Wilson. Drive approximately 1 mile, turn right onto Charleston
Street. Drive to stop sign, turn right onto Old Stantonsburg Road. Drive approximately 0.5 mile,
tum^kft into plant enterance.
c. USGS Quadrangle Map name and number OK on Existing Permit □, OR, if not, is
OK on Application Q or provide USGS Quadrangle Map name and number: Wilson, NC E-27
NW
c.
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03, 1/07 2
NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
a.
b.
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES AND WASTE(S) (renewals and modifications only)
1. Describe the existing treatment facility: The 14.0 MOD Wastewater Treatment Facility consists of the
of the following units: influent pump station; two automatic bar screens; screenings compactor;
automatic grit removal; influent ultrasonic flow meter; two pre-aeration basins; a biological phosphorus
removal tank; three primary clarifiers; seven aeration basins with seven anoxic zones and one reaeration
zone; five secondary clarifiers; methanol feed facilities; five deep bed denitrification filters with
automatic or manual backwashing; sodium hypochlorite disinfection tank; reaeration basin with sodium
bisulfite dechlorination; effluent ultrasonic flow meter; effluent pump station; one reuse water basin; a
reclaim water facility; one plastic lined reclaimed water pond; four anaerobic digesters heated by
natural gas or methane generated from digesters; a sludge thickening and dewatering building with two
gravity belt thickeners, two belt filter presses, waste activated sludge pump station; a ten-ton per day
alkaline sludge stabilization facility capable of producing Class A dewatered sludge; three liquid sludge
holding tanks; and a septage receiving station.
2. Are there appropriately certified ORCs for the facilities? Yes or No.
Operator in Charge: Russell Brice Certificate # WW-4, 6060 (Available in BIMS or Certification
Website)
Back- Operator in Charge: Jerome Randoph Certificate # WW-4, 14110
3. Does the facility have operational or compliance problems? Please comment: Currently, the plant has
been experiencing underloading during the weekends, decreasing the amount of denitrifing bacteria in
the BNR basins. The plant is experimenting mixing sugar water into the BNR basins. Results have
shown an even reduction in BOD levels. The plant experienced two different upsets when two
unpermitted biodie^ facilities discharge wastes into Wilson Wastewater Colllection System in October
For NEW FACILITIES Proceed to Section C, Evaluation and Recommendations
(For renewals or modifications continue to section B)
Stream Classification: C-Swamp NSW
River Basin and Sub basin No.: Neuse River Basin 03-04-07
Describe receiving stream features and downstream uses: Receiving stream is Contentnea
Creek approximately 1 mile downstream from Wigginss Mill Reservoir. The creek is
shallow, broad (approximate 20 feet), and swift flowing at the discharge point. Riparian
buffer ieatures are intact Contentnea Creek flows through areas used mainly for agriculture.
Slow flowing creeks and swamps confluence with Contentnea Creek all the way to the
confluence with the Neuse River near Grifton. This may account for the low Dissolved
Oxygen noted in the lower sections of Contentnea Creek. Downstream uses include fishing
and discharge outfalls for the Towns of Stantonsburg WWTP, Snow Hill WWTP Hookerton
WWTP.
r
or
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03, 1/07 3
NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
and late November resulting in permit limit violations for ammonia nitrogen for November and
December 2007.
Summarize your BEMS review of monitoring data (Notice(s) of violation within the last permit cycle;
Current enforcement action(s)): Weekly and monthly permit limit violation for ammonia nitrogen
ocurred in April 2005. The plant experienced two different upsets when two unpermitted biodiesii
facilities discharge wastes into Wilson Wastewater Colllection System in October and late November
resulting in permit limit violations for ammonia nitrogen for November and December 2007. There
are no other violations or current enforcement actions.
Are they currently under SOC, Currently under JOC, Currently under moratorium □? Have
all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit, SOC, JOC, etc. been complied with? Yes
or O No. If no, please explain:
4. Residuals Treatment: PSRP (Process to Significantly Reduce Pathogens, Class B)
PFRP (Process to Further Reduce Pathogens, Class A)?
Are they liquid or dewatered to a cake?
Land Applied? Yes [X] No If so, list Non-Discharge Permit No. WQ0001896
Contractor Used: Granville Farms Inc.
Landfilled? Yes No^l If yes, where?
Other? Some Class B residuals are taken to Eastern Composting in Battleboro, NC.
Adequate Digester Capacity? Yes KI No Sludge Storage Capacity? Yes KI No
Please comment on current operational practices: Anaerobically digested sludge (ADS) is pumped
from the sludge holding tanks and conveyed to two (2) belt filter presses (BFP) located in the
dewatering building. Liquid polymer feed facilities provide effective dewatering of the ADS. Dewater
sludge is discharged from the BFP directly onto a conveyor belt and then to the sludge storage pad or
to the alkaline stabilization facility. The dewatered sludge cake has a solid concentration of 20 to 25
percent. Alkaline stablization is provided in order to produce a Class A biosolids product. A series of
conveyors deliver the dewatered sludge cake to the alkaline stabilization facility. Lime and
supplemental heat are added to the sludge cake in a lime-sludge blender to raise the temperature and
adjust the pH. Supplemental heat is added to boost the temperature to pasteurization levels.
Temperature is maintained at or above pasteurization temperature levels during passage through a
plug flow pasteurization vessel conveyor. Lime is stored in a 66-ton lime silo. Dewatered and
stablizied biosolids are land applied to permitted privately-owned farmland or transported to a
privately-owned composting facility. A 32,000 sq. ft. covered storage pad provides a storage for
periods when solids cannot be land applied. Granville Farms, Inc operated the City of Wilson land
application program.
C. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Other Disposal Options: None
3.
Reason
4.
Reason
Reason
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03, 1/07 4
1. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: has the facility evaluated the non-discharge options available? Give
regional perspective for each option evaluated:
Spray Irrigation: N/A
Connect to Regional Sewer System: N/A
Subsurface: N/A
5. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this
permit? O Yes or No. If yes, please explain:
NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
List any items that you would like NPDES Unit to obtain through an additional information
request. Make sure that you provide a reason for each item:
Recommended Additional Information
2. Provide any additional narrative regarding your review of the application: Facility underwent a name
change to Hominy Creek Water Reclamation Facility and should be reflected in the new permit.
Back-Up Operator in Responsible Charge has been changed with the retirement of Alchester Hinnett
to Jerome Randoph, WW-4, Certificate # 14110.
List specific Permit requirements that you recommend to be removed from the permit when
issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each condition:
___________Recommended Removal
5. List specific special requirements or compliance schedules that you recommend to be included in
the permit when issued. Make sure that you provide a reason for each special condition:
________ Recommended Addition
f
FORM: NPDES-RRO 06/03, 9/03, 1/07 5
NPDES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6. Recommendation: Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office;
Hold, pending review and approval of required additional information by NPDES permitting
office; £3 Issue; Q Deny. If deny, please state reasons:
D. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
Russell Brice, ORC, stated that the City is in the planning stages of installing two (2) 64 KW micro­
turbine generators to be powered by the methane gas bum off The power generated from the
generators will provide electricity to the facility. The treatment plant will also be experimenting with
adding grease trash pumpings to the digesters to produce more methane gas.
Reminder: attach inspection report if Yes was checked for 2 d.
7. Signature of report preparer: ^\/\
Signature of WQS regional supervisor:
Date:
•it
November 6, 2008
Subject:
Dear Sir/Madame:
I 2 2008
Date
October
NPDES Permit Violation
NPDES Permit Number NC0023906
City of Wilson
ATTENTION: Central Files
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CITY OF WILSON
INCORPORATED 1849
Mo Limit
1.0 mg/1
Date
10/27
10/28
10/29
10/30
10/31
11/1
11/2
Concentration, mg/1
7.25
6.37
1.94
0.86
0.97
0.62
0.38
.1?
WILSON
frn6 Cn St\°f V‘°lation has not been determined at this time. The monthly average
■ Jhe.nit“n efficiency dipped On October 27
was notified of the violation by telephone on
Mo Ave
1.21 mg/1
Mitch Hayes, DWQ Raleigh Regional office
Monday November 3, 2008.
The monthly average
SKKK r =- SSX.
—fl
— V 1 —'
JacilXT5 10 n0“f/ y°^ that the City °f WilS°n Hominy Creek Water Reclamation
ity experienced a plant upset the week of October 27, 2008 that led to a monthly
ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) violation of NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
The NH3-N final effluent monthly average value was recorded as follows:
Please let me know if you need additional information.
Sincerely,
Cc:
Russell Brice
Water Reclamation Manager
Central Files
Ammonia Nitrogen Violations
Page 2
Charles Pittman, Deputy City Manager
Barry Parks, Assistant Director of Public Services/Water Resources
Mitch Hayes, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor
°l
November 7, 2008
Subject:
Dear Mr. Pittman:
Sincerely,
cc: PRO files
Raleigh Regional Office
1628 Mail Service Center
Vicki Webb
Environmental Specialist
Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us
Surface Water Protection
Raleigh. NC 27699-1628
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Whole effluent toxicity test results
Wilson WWTP
NPDES Permit # NC0023906/001
Wilson County
Test Type 3-Brood Ceriodaphnia duhia pass/fail
Test Concentrations 90% sample
Test Result Pass
Control Survival 92%
Control Mean Reproduction 21.8 neonates
Test Treatment Survival 100%
Treatment Mean Reproduction 24.5 neonates
First Sample pH 7.61 SU
First Sample Conductivity 525 micromhos/cm
First Sample Total Residual Chlorine <0.0052 mg/L
Second Sample pH 7.65 SU
Second Sample Conductivity 583 micromhos/cm
Second Sample Total Residual Chlorine <0.0052 mg/L
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
Charles Pittman III, Deputy City Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
NorthCarolina____ Naturally
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
I kv t ■ Il UJ r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
4 07.
<Z) I > L
DC"
If you have any questions concerning the toxicity sampling or results, please contact me either by phone at (919) 791-
4256 or email at vicki.webb(ancmail.net.
The aquatic toxicity test using 24-hour composite samples of effluent discharged from Wilson WWTP has
been completed. Wilson WWTP has an effluent discharge permitted that is 14.0 million gallons per day
(MGD) entering Contentnea Creek (7Q10 of 0.5 CFS). Whole effluent samples were collected on August
19 and August 22 by Vicki Webb for use in a chronic Ceriodaphnia dubia pass/fail toxicity test. The test
using these samples resulted in a pass. Toxicity test information follows.