NC0021181_INSTREAM ASSESSMENT_19880822

NPDES DOCUNENT SCANNIM& COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit: NC0021181
Belmont WWTP
Document Type: Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Engineering Alternatives Analysis
201 Facilities Plan
- stream Assessment (67B)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date: August 22, 1988
ahiB document is printed on reuMe paper-ignore any
content on the reverae Bide

DIVISION OF ENVSRONMENTAI, MANAGEMENT
Augu:;t 22, 1988
I-IEMORANDUM
TO: Rex Gleason .\1
THRU: David Vogt w
Trevor ClemeTedder
s�
Steve Teedder
FROM: Jackie Nowel1�
SUBJECT: Instream Assessment for Town of Belmont WWTP
NI'DES Permit No. NC00211.8.1
Gaston County
SOC Case 11 88-23
Summary
The Town of Belmont has requested a first-time SOC to allow time to
complete the relocation of their discharge pipe from the upper end of a
long, slow moving cove area of the Catawba River to an area of better mixing
located in the main arm. The Town's recent permit renewal, completed in
March, 1988 by the Technical. Support Unit, determined that at the present
discharge location in the cove, the previously assigned secondary :Limits
(BOD, = 30 mg/l, TSS = 30 mg/l, and no dissolved oxygen) would not protect
water quality standards. After completion of. a Level B modeling analysis,
more stringent limits of BOD, = 1.5 mg/l, NH.,-N = 0.2 mg/l, and dissolved
oxygen = 6 mg/1 were given. Thus, in order to retain secondary limits, the
Town has agreed with our recommendation to move their discharge point.
In the interim, the Town of Belmont is requesting an SOC to increase
the flow of their WWTP by 660,000 GPD. The request includes 600,000 GPD of
industrial wastewater from a proposed textile dyeing and finishing plant and
60,000 GPD domestic wastewater.
The impact of Belmont's wasteflow on dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in
UT Catawba River was evaluated using Technical Support' s Level B modeling -
framework. The model predicts that severe anoxic conditions will occur in
the cove as a result of the discharge. Although these conditions are pre-
dicted to occur .for only 0.2 miles before DO recovery begins, there is still
the potential for detrimental effects on aquatic life. Moreover, the impact
of the additional. wasteflow cannot be estimated because for headwater condi-
tions where the 7Q10 flow is zero cfs, the model results are dependent on
effluent concentrations only (i.e. identical results are achieved for all
Flows with the same wastewater characteristics) . The assessment of instream
impacts from any additional wastewater with the proposed limits will have to
be based on best professional judgement.

Analysis and Discussion
The Town of Belmont WWTP discharges into an elongated cove of the
Catawba River where Technical. Support estimates the 7Q1.0 flow to be zero.
From the point of discharge to the main arm of the river is approximately
1400 feet. This section of the Catawba River has a stream classification
of WHIT & B and is approximately 7 :5 miles upriver of Lake Wylie,
.The design flow of the Belmont facility is 5.0 MGD. Facility com-
pliance data for July, 1987 through June, 1988 report the monthly average
wasteflow as 2.294 MGD- The SOC request is for 0.660 MGD. This gives a
post-SOC flow of 2.954 MGD. A review of the compliance evaluation report:
:for January, 1987 until July, 1988 shows that the Belmont WWTP has had only
three violations of their effluent limits during this period. There was one
BOD„ violation in October, 1987 and two TSS violations in March and April,
1987. This indicates that BeLmont: has historically been in compliance with
the limits issued.
A Level B analysis was used to assess the impact: of the Belmont dis-
charge on dissolved oxygen in the cove of the Catawba River. The model was
run at the post-SOC wastefl.ow of 2.954 MCD (pre-SOC average flow + SOC flow
request) . The waste input for CBOD reflected the Mooresville Regional
Office' s recommended B011, limit of 30 mg/1; this yields a CBOD input of 60
mg/1 (using a CBOD/BODE multiplier of 2 for >10% industrial waste) . The
waste input. four NBOD was determined after a review of the compliance data
showed that the maximum summertime NH,-N value for the past two years was
6 . 1 mg/1 (June, 1987) ; this yields a NBOD input of 27 mg/1 (using a NBOD/MT,
multiplier of 43) . The model results predict that the instream D.O. level
sags to zero approximately 0.01 miles downstream of the outfall and extends
for 0. 1.7 miles before starting to recover. The instream D.O. level remains
below 5.0 mg/1 until milepoint 0.25, just before entering the main channel
of the Catawba River.
In addition, since there is no toxicity limit in the present interim
permit (copy attached) , Technical Services recommends that this facility
perform chronic toxicity monitoring (copy attached) under the SOC. It is
also recommended that they perform effluent monitoring for cadmium, chro-
mium, and lead during this same period.
Conclusion
Due to the inability to predict differences in impacts from different
amounts of waste, Technical Support: cannot evaluate the proposed SOC flow in
accordance with standard 67(b) criteria. Due to the predicted anoxic con-
ditions in the cove area of the Catawba River, Technical Services adheres to
our previous recommendation of relocation of the Belmont WWTP discharge to
the main arm of. the Catawba River.
JN/gh
Attachment.
cc: Chuck Wakild Ken Eagleson
Kent Wiggins Central Files
Steve Reid cil-WLA.File 7

TABLE 1 . Instream Assessment Summary for the Town of Belmont_
Wasteflow Assumptions
Design Capacity 5.000 MGD
Pre-SOC (8/87-7/88) 2.294 MGD
Additional SOC Flow Requested 0. 660 MGD
Prue-SOC + SOC Flow 2.954 MGD
Model Input Summary
Headwater Conditions:
7Q10 0.0 Us
Qavg 0.5 cfs
Design Temperature 26.0 °C
CBOD 2.0 mg/1
NBOD 1 .0 mg/l
DO 7.3 mg/1
Wastewater Inputs:
Flow 2.954 MGD
CBOD (2.0*recommended BOD, 60.0 mg/1
NBOD (4.Precommended NH.,-N 27.0 mg/l
DO 5.0 mg/1
Special Assumptions:
-- 'Zero runoff
Model Output Summary
DO MIN Distance Distance
(mg/1) DO = Zero ,._ DO < 5 mg/1
(mile) (mile)
0.00 0. 17 0.25

Facility Name mw n oT Permit # N G od 2.11
CHRONIC TOXICITY MONITORING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
The pemmittee shall conduct chronic toxicity tests using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodauhnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *February 1987) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document is
%. The permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance with the permit condition. The fast test will be pe*rmed after thirty days from
issuance of this permit during the months of�-P 4UX-0 14 v v rUa ✓. . Effluent
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDE rmit final effluent discharge below
e
all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Technical Services Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 .
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual
chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for
disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this
pemmit may be re-opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum
control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test
and will require immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit
suitable test results will constitute a failure of permit condition.
7Q10 0 cfs
Pemmited Flow 5 MGD Recommended by:
IWC% /oo
Basin & Sub-basin 03 —OF-" 33 n
Receiving Stream cwt u r vim/ `�
Countyr' c hM Date
**Chronic Toxicity (Cerio) Monitoring at
See Part .3 , Condition z . A✓1 A)o
r

�b C ell 1,?y
z/lx, wac
Soc c�w : 2.9s4 ,urn
- t{''� 3. ss6 c�s —
- - - z
`c
S7�p ' O t 360o t e = JJ7VV7Tooc6
000-99s -- = oouy9
-
Uf�vL
33
1

v _
, I
W w 7 /D p
._ - - _-:}�/' '--=�'��°.T"A_✓,��j- --i2/Jr� /YtG�lvcN. .rn.-�[a.,..�e.�s...-c.-- --
i ' w 7y+�a E s c fS
- --- . U - -
i
-- ---- - -- ------ - ---
i 5`.S7B 7
60/Z7
- -- -- — ' - - ----- -z - ------ -- - --- - - --- — - - - - -- -- -- -- - .
. 'Q�y ¢. S7A7
,r;

SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC is CAW=2 . 954 , BO05=
30 ,NH3 =6 ,DO=5 , VEL VARIES
---------- MODEL RESULTS ----------
Discharger• : TOWN OF BELMONT
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA FIVER
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D . O. is 7 . 30 mg/l .
The End CBOD is 1 . 94 mg/l .
The End NBOD is 0 . 92 mg/l .
-------------------------- --------------- -----------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1 ) M'ilepoint Reach # (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mgd)
Segment 1 0 . 00 0 . 01 1
Reach 1 60 . 00 27 . 00 5 . 00 2 . 95400
Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 4 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000

MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : TOWN OF BELMONT Subbasin 030834
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER Stream Class : WSIII & E
Summer 7Q10 Winter 7Q,10
Design Temperature : 26 .
ILENGTHI SLOPEI VELOCITY I OEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR I
I mile I ft/mil fps I it Idesignl @201 Idesignl @20° Idesignl @20° Idesignl 6201 1
------------------------------------------------------------ --•--------------•----- ----------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment I 1 0.081 20.001 0.003 1 6.00 1 0.26 1 0.20 1 0.38 1 0.331 0.19 1 0.50 1 0,79 1 0.00 1
Reach 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
----------•---- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.091 20,001 0.001 1 9.00 1 0.26 1 0.20 1 0.25 1 0,221 0.79 1 0.50 1 0,79 1 0.00 1
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I I I I i
------------------------------------------ ------ ---------------------------------------- ----------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.081 20,001 0.001 112.00 1 0.26 1 0.20 1 0.23 1 0,201 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.19 1 0.00 1
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------• -----------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment I 1 1.001 5.001 1.187 1 2.18 1 0.31 1 0.28 1 5,95 1 5.221 0,68 1 0,30 1 0.68 1 0.00 1
Reach 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Flow I CEOD I NEOD I D .O . I
I cfs I mg/I I m'g/1 I mg/1 1
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 4 . 579 1 60 . 000 1 27 . 000 1 5 . 000
Headwatersl 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment i Reach 2
Waste 1 0 . 000 I 0 . 000 I 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste 1 0 . 000 I 0 . 000 i 0 . 000 I 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 2 . 000 1 . 000 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 I 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 80 . 000 I 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 I 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

r ,
SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC @ QW=2 . 954 , BOD5=
30 ,NH3=6 ,DO=5 ,VEL VARIES
Seg tk I Reach # I Seg Mi I D .O. I CBOD I . NBOD I Flow
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 01 0 . 00 56 . 31 22 . 31 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 02 0 . 00 52 . 85 18 .43 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 03 0 . 00 49 . 60 15 . 23 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 04 0 . 00 46 . 55 12 . 58 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 05 0 . 00 43 . 69 10 .40 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 06 0 . 00 41 . 01 6 . 59 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 07 0 . 00 38 .49 7 . 10 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 08 0 . 00 36 . 12 5 . 86 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 08 0 . 00 36 . 12 5 . 86 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 09 0 . 00 31 . 82 4 . 00 4 . 58
i 2 0 . 10 0 . 00 28 . 03 2 . 73 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 11 0 . 00 24 . 69 1 . 87 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 12 0 . 00 21 . 75 1 . 27 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 13 0 . 00 19 . 16 0 . 87 4 . 58
1 2 .0 . 14 0 . 00 16 . 88 0 . 59 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 15 0 . 00 14 . 87 0 .40 4 . 56
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 00 13 . 10 0 . 28 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 17 0 . 00 11 . 54 0 . 19 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00 11 . 54 0 . 19 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 18 0 . 00 8 . 96 0 . 09 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 119 0 . 00 6 . 95 0 . 04 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 20 0 . 19 5 .40 0 . 02 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 21 0 . 66 4 . 19 0 . 01 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 22 1 . 28 3 . 25 0 . 00 4 , 58
1 3 0 . 23 1 . 97 2 . 53 0 . 00 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 24 2 . 67 1 . 96 0 . 00 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 25 3 . 35, 1 . 52 0 . 00 4 . 58
1 4 0 . 25 7 . 09 1 . 97 0 . 95 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 35 7 . 11 1 . 97 0 . 94 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 45 7 . 14 1 . 97 0 . 94 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 55 7 . 16 1 . 96 0 . 94 8.4 . 58
I 4 0 . 65 7 . 18 1 . 96 0 . 94 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 75 7 . 20 1 :96 0 . 93 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 85 7 . 22 1 . 95 0 . 93 84 . 58
1 4 0 . 95 7 . 25 1 .95 0 . 93 84 . 58
1 4 1 . 05 1 . 27 1 . 94 0 . 93 84 . 58
1 4 1 . 15 1 . 29 1 . 94 0 . 93 84 . 56
1 4 1 . 25 7 . 30 1 , 94 0 . 92 84 . 58
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D . 0. I CBOD I NBOD Flow

i'
a /x
. I
i �
I ,
,
� I
1.
�1.
II
I1
I #
j•1

&LIMTSc s (purl 30
SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC (a yW=2 . 9S4 MGD ,
VEL VARIES , BOD=30 ,NH3 =6 ,DO=5
---------- MODEL RESULTS ----------
Discharger : TOWN OF BELMONT
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D .O. is 7 . 41 mg/l .
The End CBOD is 1 . 90 mg/l .
The End NBOD is 0 . 93 mg/l .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flock
(mg/1 ) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mgd )
Segment 1 0 . 00 0 . 01 1
Reach 1 60 . 00 27 . 00 5 . 00 2 . 29400
Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 4 -60 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
r

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA *� *
Discharger : TOWN OF BELMONT Subbasin 030834
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER Stream Class : WSIII & B
Summer 7Q10 Winter 7Q10
Design Temperature : 26 .
ILENGTHI SLOPEI VELOCITY I OEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KHR I KNR I
I mile I ft/miI fps I ft Idesignl @20° Idesi9nl @201 Idesignl @201 Idesignl @201 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment I 1 0.081 20.00I 0.002 6.00 1 0.26 10.20 1 0.38 1 0.331 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment I 1 0.091 20.001 0.001 1 9.00 1 0.26 1 0.20 1 0.25 1 0.221 0.19 1 0.50 1 0.19 1 0.00 1
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.081 20.001 0.000 112.00 1 0.26 1 0.20 1 0.23 1 0.201 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
Segment i 1 1.001 5.001 1.06 1 2.18 1 0.37 1 0.28 1 5.90 1 5.181 0.48 1 0.30 1 0.48 1 0.00 1
Reach 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD I D .O . I
I cfs I mg/l I mg/1 I mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 3 . 556 1 60 . 000 1 27 . 000 1 5 . 000
Headwatersl 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 .1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 I 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 I 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 ( 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 -000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 180 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff I 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC f QW=2 . 954 MGD ,
VEL VARIES ,BOD=30 , NH3=6 ,DO=5
Seg # Reach # I Se9 Mi D . O. CBGD NBOD Flow
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 011 0 . 00 55 . 36 21 . 19 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 02 0 . 00 51 . 07 16 . 63 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 03 0 . 00 47 . 12 13 . 05 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 04 0 .'00 43 .47 10 . 24 3 . 56
i 1 0 . 05 0 . 00 40 . 11 8 . 03 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 06 0 . 00 37 . 01 6 . 30 3 . 56
i 1 0 . 07 0 . 00 34 . 14 4 . 95 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 08 0 . 00 31 . 50 3 . 88 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 08 0 . 00 31 . 50 3 . 88 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 09 0 . 00 26 . 77 2 . 38 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 10 0 . 00 22 . 75 1 . 46 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 11 0 . 00 19 . 34 0 . 89 3 . 56
2 0 . 12 0 . 00 16 . 43 0 . 55 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 13 0 . 00 13 . 97 0 . 34 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 14 0 . 00 11 . 87 0 . 21 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 15 0 . 00 10 . 09 0 . 13 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 00 8 . 57 0 . 08 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 17 0 . 00 7 . 29 0 . 05 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00. 7 . 29 0 . 05 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 18 0 . 22, 5 . 25 0 . 02 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 19 0 . 89 3 . 78 0 . 01 3 . 56
I 3 0 . 20 1 . 76 2 . 72 0 . 00 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 21 2 . 67 1 . 96 0 . 00 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 22 3 . 54 1 .41 0 . 00 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 23 4 . 33 1 . 01 0 . 00 3 . 56
I 3 0 . 24 5 . 02 0 . 73 0 . 00 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 25 5 . 61 0 . 53 0 . 00 3 . 56
1 4 0 . 25 7 . 23 1 . 94 0 . 96 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 35 7 . 25 1 . 93 0 . 96 83 . 56
1 4 0 .45 7 . 27 1 . 93 0 . 95 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 55 7 . 29 1 . 93 0 . 95 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 65 7 . 31 1 . 92 0 . 95 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 75 7 . 33 1 . 92 0 . 95 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 85 7 . 34 1 . 91 0 . 94 83 . 56
1 4 0 . 95 7 . 36 1 . 91 0 . 94 83 . 56
1 4 1 . 05 7 . 38 1 . 91 0 . 94 83 . 56
1 4 1 . 15 7 . 39 1 . 90 0 . 94 83 . 56
1 4 1 . 25 7 .41 1 . 90 0 . 93 83 . 56
Sect # Reach # Seg Mi D .O. CBOD NBOD Float

/98L - - - - - - - - -
•
-s7 - -09, 9 zz
^ - - - - --- - - C60 - - - - -
.I
T l �r Tss
V h3
i -
1

SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC W/ BOD5=30 ,NH3=
6 , D0=5 , [ wW=2 . 954 MGD
---------- MODEL RESULTS ----------
Discharger• : TOWN OF BELMONT
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA FIVER
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D .O . is 0 . 00 mg/l .
The End CBOD is 55 . 31 mg/l .
The End NBOD is 23 . 92 mg/l .
-------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
' (mg/1 ) Milepoint Reach $ (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mgd)
Segment 1 0 . 00 0 . 17 2
Reach 1 60 . 00 27 . 00 5 . 00 2 . 95400
.Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000

* �* MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger, : TOWN OF BELMONT Subbasin 030634
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER Stream Class : WSIII & B
Summer 7Q10 Winter 7w10
Design Temperature : 26 .
1LEN0THI SLOPEI VELOCITY I OEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KH I KN I KNR I KHR I
I mile I ft/mi1 fps I ft Idesignl p201 Idesignl p201 Idesignl p201 Idasignl 6201 1
---------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment I 1 0.081 20.001 0.100 1 5.00 1 0.53 1 0.41 1 0.39 1 0.331 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
----------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.091 20.001 0.100 1 9.00 1 0.53 10.40 1 0.25 1 0.221 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
segment I 1 0,08120.001 0.100 112.0010.5310.4010.231 0.201 0.19 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-------------------------------------------------------- --------- ------------------- - -------
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD I D .O. I
I cfs I mg/l I mg/l I mg/l I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 4 . 579 1 60 . 000 1 27 . 000 1 5 . 000
He•aclwatersl 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Tr•'ibutary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
M Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 i 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 l 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 3
waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 I 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 i 1 . 000 l 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

SUMMER
[ODEL FOR SOC W/ EOD5=30 ,NH3=
6 , ❑0=5 , @ QW=2 . 954 MGD
Se9 # I Reach # I S=_-9 Mi I D . O. I C.EOD I NEOD I Flow I
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 4 . 58
1 0 . 01 4 . 78 59 . 90 26 . 87 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 02 4 . 56 59 . 80 26 . 74 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 03 4 . 34 59 . 70 26 . 61 4 . 56
1 I 0 . 04 4 . 12 59 . 60 26 . 48 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 05 3 . 90 59 . 51 26 . 35 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 06 3 . 68 59 .41 26 . 23 4 . 58
i 1 0 . 07 3 . 47 59 . 31 26 . 10 4 . 56
1 1 0 . 08 3 . 26 59 . 21 25 . 97 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 4 . 58
1 I 0 . 01 4 . 68 59 . 80 26 . 87 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 02 4 . 36 59 . 61 26 . 74 4 . 56
1 1 0 . 03 4 . 05 59 . 41 26 . 61 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 04 3 . 74 59 . 22 26 . 48 4 . 58
1 1 - 0 . 05 3 .43 59 . 03 26 . 35 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 06 3 . 12 58 . 84 26 . 23 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 07 2 . 81 58 . 64 26 . 10 4 . 58
1 1 0 . 08 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 08 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 09 2 . 29 58 . 36 25 . 85 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 10 2 . 08 58 . 26 25 . 72 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 11 1 . 87 58 . 17 25 . 60 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 12 1 . 66 58 . 07 25 . 47 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 13 1 .45 57 . 97 25 . 35 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 14 1 . 25 57 . 88 25 . 23 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 15 1 . 04 37 . 78 25 . 11 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 83 57 . 69 24 . 98 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 17 0 . 63 57 . 60 24 . 86 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 08 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 09 2 . 20 58 . 26 25 . 85 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 10 1 . 89 58 . 07 25 . 72 4 , 58
1 2 0 . 11 1 . 59 57 . 89 25 . 60 4 . 58
2 0 . 12 1 . 29 57 . 70 25 . 47 14 . 58
1 2 0 . 13 0 . 90 57 . 51 25 . 35 4 . 59
I 2 0 . 14 0 . 69 57 . 32 25 . 23 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 15 0 . 39 57 . 14 25 . 11 4 . 58
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 10 56 , 95 24 . 98 4 . 58
I 2 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 86 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 86 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 18 0 . 00 56 . 67 24 . 74 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 19 0 . 00 56 . 58 24 . 62 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 20 0 . 00 56 . 49 24 . 50 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 21 0 . 00 56 . 40 24 . 39 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 22 0 . 00 56 . 31 24 . 27 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 23 0 . 00 56 . 21 24 . 15 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 24 0 . 00 56 . 12 24 . 03 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 25 0 . 00 56 . 03 23 . 92 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 86 4 . 58
I 3 0 . 18 0 . 00 56 . 58 24 . 74 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 19 0 . 00 56 .40 24 . 62 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 20 0 . 00 56 . 22 24 . 50 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 21 0 . 00 56 . 04 24 . 39 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 22 0 . 00 55 . 85 24 . 27 4 . 58
1 3 0 . 23 0 . 00 55 . 67 24 . 15 4 . 38
1 3 0 , 24 0 , 00 55 ,49 24 . 03 4 . 56
1 3 0 . 25 0 . 00 55 . 31 23 . 92 4 . 58
icg # I Reach # ( Seg Hi I D .O . I C6OD I NBOD Flow

"(SEuwrscz- `,'
SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC W/ BOD5=30 ,NH3 =
6 , D0=5 , @ QW=2 . 294 MGD
---------- MODEL RESULTS ----------
Discharger, : TOWN OF BELMONT
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER
The End D .O . is 0 . 00 mg/l .
The End CBOD is 55 . 31 mg/l .
The End NBOD is 23 . 92 mg/l .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WLA WLA WLA
Do Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1 ) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) (mg/1 ) NO)
Segment 1 0 . 00 0 . 17 2
Reach 1 60 . 00 27 . 00 5 . 00 2 . 29400
Reach 2 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000
Reach 3 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00 0 . 00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA * �*
Discharger• : TOWN OF BELMONT Subbasin 030834
Receiving Stream : UT CATAWBA RIVER Stream Class : WSIII & B
Summer 7Q10 Winter• 7Q10
Design Temperature : 26 .
1LEN6TH1 SLOPEI VELOCITY I OEPTHI Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KKR I KKR I
I mile I ft/mi1 fps I ft Idesignl @20' Idesignl @201 design) a201 Idesigal @20' 1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.081 20,001 0.100 1 6.00 1 0.53 1 0A 1 1 0.38 1 0.331 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.79 1 0.00 1
Reach i i I I I I I I I I I I I I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 1 0.091 20.001 0.100 1 9.00 1 0.53 1 0.40 1 0.25 1 0.221 0.79 1 0.50 1 0.19 1 0.00 1
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------
I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1
Segment I 1 0.081 20.001 0.100 112.0010.5310.4010.231 9,2010.1910.5010.7910.001
Reach 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I FIowa I CBOD I NBOD I D .O . I
I cfs 1 mg/1 I mg/1 I Ing/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 3 . 556 1 60 . 000 1 27 . 000 1 5 . 000
Headwater•sl 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Tributary 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 2
waste I 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 I 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 i 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff I 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000 1 0 . 000
Tributary 1 0 . 000 I 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff 1 0 . 000 1 2 . 000 1 1 . 000 1 7 . 300
* Runoff flows is in cfs/mile

. - r
SUMMER
MODEL FOR SOC W/ BOD5=30 ,NH3=
6 , DO=5 , @ QW=2 . 294 MGD
Seg # Reach # Seq Mi D .Q . CBOD NBOD Flow
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 01 4 . 78 59 . 90 26 . 87 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 02 4 . 56 59 . 80 26 . 74 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 03 4 . 34 59 . 70 26 . 61 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 04 4 . 12 59 . 60 26 .48 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 05 3 . 90 59 . 51 26 . 35 3 . 56
1 I 0 . 06 3 . 68 59 .41 26 . 23 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 07 3 .47 59 . 31 26 . 10 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 08 3 . 26 59 . 21 25 . 97 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 00 5 . 00 60 . 00 27 . 00 3 . 56
i 1 0 . 011 4 . 68 59 . 80 26 . 87 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 02 4 . 36 59 . 61 26 . 74 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 03 4 . 05 59 . 41 26 . 61 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 04 3 . 74 59 . 22 26 .48 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 05 3 . 43 59 . 03 26 . 35 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 06 3 . 12 58 . 84 26 . 23 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 07 2 . 81 58 . 64 26 . 10 3 . 56
1 1 0 . 06 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 08 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 09 2 . 29 58 . 36 25 . 85 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 10 2 . 08 58 . 26 25 . 72 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 11 1 . 87 58 . 17 25 . 60 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 12 1 . 66 58 . 07 25 .47 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 13 1 . 45 57 . 97 25 . 35 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 14 1 . 25 57 . 88 25 . 23 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 15 1 . 04 57 . 78 25 . 11 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 83 57 . 69 24 . 98 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 17 0 . 63 57 . 60 24 . 86 3 . 56
I 2 0 . 08 2 . 51 58 .45 25 . 97 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 09 2 . 20 58 . 26 25 . 85
1 2 0 . 10 1 . 89 58 . 07 25 . 72 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 11 1 . 59 57 . 89 25 . 60 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 12 1 . 29 57 . 70 25 . 47 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 13 0 . 99 57 . 51 25 . 35 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 14 0 . 69 57 . 32 25 . 23 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 15 0 . 39 57 . 14 25 . 11 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 16 0 . 10 56 . 95 24 . 98 3 . 56
1 2 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 86 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 86 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 18 0 . 00 56 . 67 24 . 74 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 19 0 . 00 56 . 58 24 . 62 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 20 0 . 00 56 .49 24 . 50 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 21 0 . 00 56 .40 24 . 39 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 22 0 . 00 56 . 31 24 . 27 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 23 0 . 00 56 . 21 24 . 15 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 24 0 . 00 56 . 12 24 . 03 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 25 0 . 00 56 . 03 23 . 92 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 17 0 . 00 56 . 77 24 . 66 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 18 0 . 00 56 . 58 24 . 74 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 19 0 . 00 56 .40 24 . 62 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 20 0 . 00 56 . 22 24 . 50 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 21 0 . 00 56 . 04 24 . 39 3 . 36
1 3 0 . 22 0 . 00 55 . 85 24 . 27 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 23 0 . 00 55 . 67 24 . 15 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 24 0 . 00 55 .49 24 . 03 3 . 56
1 3 0 . 25 0 . 00 55 . 31 23 . 92 3 . 56
Seg # I Reach # Sag Mi D .O . CBOD NBQD Flow I

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
July 29 , 1988
MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Tedder
FROM: D. Rex Gleason
PREPARED BY: J. Thurman Horn/ fy y
SUBJECT: Request for Inss.t-ream Assessment
Town of Belmont Wastewater Treatment Plant
SOC Request
Gaston County, North Carolina
Please find attached a request for Instream Assessment for
the City of Belmont Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The request should be self-explanatory, but if you have any
questions or need any additional information, please advise
Thurman Horne or me.
Attachment
JTH: se
9 ...
i9g8
L-'

Request Form for In-stream Assessment for 67B
NAME OF FACILITY: City of Belmont SUBBASIN: 03-08-33
COUNTY: Gaston REGION: Mooresville DESIGN FLOW: 5. 0 MGD
RECEIVING STREAM: The Catawba River (Lake Wylie)
BACKGROUND DATA:
A. why is SOC needed? (Facility is out of compliance with
which effluent limits? )
The existing discharge is into the upper end of a long
cove. During the recent permit renewal, Technical Services
determined that the effluent limitations should be much
more stringent than before. As a result, the City proposes
to extend their outfall to a point of better dispersion and
more attainable limits. The SOC is requested to allow time
for the extension to be made.
B. History of SOC request:
1. Monthly Average waste flow prior to any SOC: 2 . 2683
MGD
Time period averaged June, 1987 through May, 1988
2. Previously approved SOC ' s : N/A
3 . Flows lost from plant ( facilities that have gone off
line) : N/A
4 . Current SOC request: Flow - . 660 MGD
5 . Total plant flow post-SOC ( sum of original flow and
SOC flow minus losses ) : Flow - 2 . 9283 MGD
6 . Is this an accurate flow balance for plant? Why/why
not? Yes. To our knowledge there are no extenuating
circumstances that would affect the validity of these
figures.
C. Please attach DMR summary for past year for all permitted
parameters . If possible, include reports from previous
years if facility has been under SOC for more than a year.
See attachment

Page Two
CURRENT SOC REQUEST:
A. Request is for domestic or industrial waste? If it is a
combination, please specify percentages.
The request is to connect an additional 600 , 000 gpd of
industrial wastewater and 60, 000 gpd of domestic
wastewater.
B. What type of industry? Please attach any pertinent data.
600 , 000 gpd of textile dyeing and finishing wastewater.
This is a proposed new industry. Therefore, there is no
sampling data available. The engineer has expressed that
the proposed new industry should be very similar to
Piedmont Processing which is another existing industry in
Gaston County. They have provided the attached
pretreatment records for Piedmont Processing and indicate
that the effluent from this proposed new industry should be
very similar.
C. The region proposes the following SOC limits:
BOD 30 . 0 mg/l
TSSS 30 . 0 mg/l
Fecal Coliform 200/100 ml
pH 6-9 s.u.
D. What is the basis for these limits?
These are the limits that have been in effect prior to the
recent permit renewal. The facility has a history of
compliance with these limits.

TARANTO, STANTON & TAGGE E� �+ } g 7 TRANSMITTAL
Consulting Engineers 4.•
309 Inverness Way,South • Englewood, CO 80112 Atio
[phone] ( t� v 1498f y
S£RVlc s 8RJd H
To: `Mr- ThE't<--' C)',\ Project No.: ;Z-C: i
W �--EAYED Project: �L.�.�,�c..� Sc-, . J,-,i -(1-_....:.�—
C�� v ENJAL N 4MEIIJW.Dal e:
P..c. LXiX P=
Mcvizs:��. f IL NG 2,�% 117 91UIh 25 198$
ppMFSVIILE
AE(A�Au t7[FM@
We transmit Herewith ❑ Under separate cover ❑ VIA
❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Specifications ❑ Change Order D Other
❑ Copy of Letter ❑ Prints ❑ Survey _ Field Order
NOCOPIES DRAWINGS NO. DESCRIPTION
Remarks ` tl II la d.ts�hnv e s a (' UII 4lu-c ) ^e dc:ssa s /ar
IL /U.G .T�I �t �v�os et ��. ;J,n�_ a
�1-=��I
IF ENCLOSURES RECEIVED ARE NOT AS LISTED ABOVE, KINDLY NOTIFY AT ONCE.
Copies To: Taranto, Stanton & Tagge
By:
G150 4

PIEDMONT PROCESSING div. TI-CARO , INC.
PH ODDS COD TSS NH3
Feb-34 10.5 121 497 7S 1 .26
liar-84 10.2 li0 780 24 0.76
Apr-84 i0.2 137 641 8 2 .24
flay-84 10.3 170 731 16 2. 91
Jun-84 10.2 2SO 462 4 11 .42
Jul -84 9. 9 SS 114 20 2.46
6ug-84 120 46S 4 4 . 93
Sep-64 6.0 ISO 199 24 16.64
Oct-84 9.8 210 S23 8 0.SG
Nov--84 10.0 75 464 I G 2. 1 3
Dec-64 10. 1 203 560 4 57.79
Jan-a5 10. 1 110 32S 24 9.86
Feb-6S 10.3 70 571 12 4 .26
Mar-65 10.3 76 616 4 2 .24
Ap,--65 10.2 70 5.33 4 2 .02
liav-85 10.0 91 607 4 9.63
Jun-65 5. 9 53 93 24 5.60
Jul-85 9.8 88 556 12 1 .79
Aug-8S 9.9 115 S98 12 4.37
Sep-85 10.2 lib 797 4 7.39
Oct-as 9. 9 155 763 24 3.S8
Nov-ES 10.4 68 603 8 2. 13
Dec-6S 10.3 a5 563 8 2S.31
Average 10.0 119 S02 15 7. 57
Maximum 10.4 210 797 24 57 .79
Minimum 8.0 68 5 4 0.56
Range 2 .4 142 792 20 S7.23
PH
~,u.s
b
Feb-ilV May-z4 Pug-a�4 Nov-ifV FeD-35 May-$5 Hu9-RS hw-ES

fi
tf�� god � 412
7-ss 11l/y3 -
� a
/o s-
'f..8,'
POO-
�76
o
© e 9 4 /cc