The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0001376_Memo_19880121 t. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT January 21, 1988 MEMORANDUM TO: File From: Thomas Stockton Subject: Burlington Industries' Phenols WLA Effluent guidelines for Burlington Industries' discharge stipulate limits for phenolic compounds. Based on Burlington Industries' production, a permit limit of 7.85 lbs/day was developed. North Carolina has a standard of 1 pg/1 for phe- nolic compounds for WS classified waters. Though Burlington Industries does not discharge directly to WS waters, concern regarding the transport of phenols down- stream to WS II waters (approximately 21 miles, 4 miles above Smithfield's water supply intake) was address using the Lower Neuse River Basin model. Phenolic compounds include a wide variety of organic compounds, including phenol. Since modeling each organic compound would be impractical, the analysis focused on determining the first-order decay rate for phenolic compounds required to result in concentrations below 1 }.g/1 at Beddingfield Creek, the WS II waters upstream boundary. If this decay rate is less than decay rates found in the lit- erature then the load would be considered acceptable. The literature indicates that, in waters with high bacteria counts, biolysis is the primary pathway for phenol degradation. The stretch of river below the Burlington Industries discharge includes 2 major and 5 minor domestic discharges, therefore, bacteria counts are likely to be high. The EPA document "A Screening Procedure for Toxic and Conventional Pollutants in Surface and Groundwater" pre- sents biodegradation rates for phenolic compounds of > 0.5 day-' . The attached graph depicts phenols concentrations assuming Kp = 0.0 day-' and 0.15 day-1. Kp = 0.15 day-' results in phenols concentrations below the standard at the WS II waters boundary; less than literature decay rates. Other fate pro- cesses are also likely to be contributing to the loss of phenols instream (oxida- tion has been found to be a significant degradation pathway) . This analysis indicates that a permit limit for phenols based on effluent guidelines is appro- priate. Neuse River Phenols Profile 3.4 — 3.2 — Burlington Ind.phenols load=7.85#/day 3 - 2.8 — 2.6 — 2.4 — 2.2 — 2 — v 1.8 - y 1.6 — WS-I a3 Smithfield Withdrawal 1.4 — Kp=0.0(/day) 1.2 — 1 NC Water Q 'ty Standard for WS clases 0.8 — 0.6 — Kp=0.15(/day) 0.4 — 0.2 — 0 0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 30 35 FALLS DAM-------->POLECAT BRANCH NEUSE RIVER Falls Dam to Polecat Branch QUAL2e Framework Falls Dam USGS Gage 02087183 T —1— Rivermill I —2— Richland Creek WS II Reach 1 —3_ Burlington Industries-withdrawal Hwy 1 —4— Burlington Industries Goforth-Riverfall Development(proposed) D7ANE —51Smith Creek Wake Forest WWTP —6---' " Toms Creek —71Perry Creek Hwy 401 Reach 2 —8— —9— —10s_____Harris creek SR 2215 Riverwalk MHP-Uniprop Inc. ---� River Landings Reach 3 —12— Weaver Brothers Farms(proposed) Riverbend at Lakeside(proposed) —13— Hidden Cove MHP D24SE —14- ----- Milburnie Dam C Hwy 64 —15— aimomma —16— Utility Systems-Barclay Downs —17— _- _ Crabtree Creek SR 1007 Riverview MHP Reach 4 —18------ Walnut Creek —19— E24NE —20— SR 2555 -21— —22— —23-- Raleigh WWTP ---- Poplar Creek —24— SR 2509 —25--_--- Beddingfield Creek Reach 5 —26— E24NW —27— WS II Marks Creek SR 1700 ® —30- —31— Hwy 42 011111=nates USGS Gage 02087500 Q =computional element=0.5 miles 4 Falls Dam to Polecat Branch QUAL2e Framework(cont) —32— T —33— E24NW —34— Southmark Corp-Gattis-Lee Property Reach 6 —35— (proposed) —36— E25NE —37— SR 1908 ivamigim- -39- -40— Reach 7 —41— —42— E25SE Hwy 70a =11=1_43- -44— Smithfield Withdrawal —45 --- Poplar Branch Hwy 70 _46—momona= USGS Gage 02087570 WS II Central Johnson Co WWTP Reach 8 —47—---- Middle Creek E25SW —48— I-95 munamaimo 49— Benson WWTP(proposed) _50—e----.Black Creek —51— —52— Reach 9 —53— E25SW —54- -55- -56- -57- -58- 59 ---'Polecat Branch —60- 0 =computional element=0.5 miles