NC0073393_wasteload allocation_19950614

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NCO073393
PEp-WrME NAME: Dana -Hill Corporation
FACILITY NAME: Dana -Hill Corporation WWTP
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major
Minor _q
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 0.010 MGD 0 , a 4 Z
Domestic (% of Flow):
Industrial (% of Flow):
Comments:
100 %
RECEIVING STREAM: an unnamed tributary to Devil's Fork
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 04-03-02
Reference USGS Quad: f-9-NW F 9 S W (please attach)
County: Henderson
Regional Office: Asheville Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 9/30/95 Treatment Plant Class: II
Classification changes within three miles:
No chance
Requested by: Jay Lucas Date: 3121/95
Prepared by: Date: ,$
Reviewed by: /; ate: 5
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
SM tJ
3 z 5 s
a z.-?
3)
Drainage Area (mi`) Q, Avg. Streamflow (cfs):
7Q10 (cfs) o, z Winter 7Q10 (cfs) p. 3 30Q2 (cfs),0,
Toxicity Limits: IWC % Acute/Chronic
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters
Upstream
Location
Downstream Location
a
Characteristics
Rcc=mendkd Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (STJ1 -.
Residual Chlorine (µg/l):
Comments:
Summer I Winter
Monthly Average
Monthly Average
Summer
Winter
Summer
Winter
0.01
0.01
.042
0.042
30
30
30
30
11
monitor
3.4
9.0
NL
NL
NL
NL
30
30
30
30
200
200
200
200
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
monitor
monitor
28
28
`fs_�
a

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Dana -Hill Corp. WWTP
NCO073393
100% Domestic
Existing
Renewal
UT to Devils Fork
C
04-03-02
Henderson
Asheville
Jay Lucas
3/21/95
F9NW
F95W
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Request #
8277 (A&B)
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC @ 0.01 MGD:
IWC @ 0.042 MGD:
Region HA 10
Equation
5/23/95
0.7
0.2
0.3
1.2
0.4
7.2 %
25 %
At last renewal permittee requested modification to lower design flow to 0.01 MGD and chose
NH3N limits over WET test requirement. NH3N and Residual Chlorine limits were added to
0.042 MGD as new flow. All strearnflows are up to date with current USGS methods, and all
permit limits are up to date with current Division Procedures. Permit should be renewed
with existing limits. Renewal could have been streamlined. Facility's recent compliance
record has been poor with 3 monthly avg. BOD violations, 6 TSS viola ' ns and 2 NH3N
violations from 9/94 to 2/95.
Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewe
Recommended by.
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment
Regional Supervisor:
Permits & Engineerin
�-- ZZ' G I �. Date: ' 2V,5
Date: S/,XAS'
Date: 1
r'
g: Date• /r
J UN 2 g 1995
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY:

Existing Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BODS (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
Recommended Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BODS (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
TP (mg/1):
IN (mg/1):
CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Monthly Average
Summer
Winter
0.01
0.01
30
30
11
32
NL
NL
30
30
200
200
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
monitor
monitor
Monthly Average
Summer
Winter
.042
0.042
30
30
3.4
9.0
NL
NL
30
30
200
200
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
28
28
Monthly Average
Monthly Average
Summer
Winter
Summer
Winter
WQ or EL
0.01
0.01
.042
0.042
30
30
30
30
EL
11
732; rnot.r 3.4
9.0
WQ
NL
NL
NL
NL
30
30
30
30
EL
200
200
200
200
EL
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
6.0-9.0
EL
monitor
monitor
28
28
EL
Limits Changes Due To: NONE
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
Instrearn data
New regulations/standards/procedures
New facility information
Parameter(s) Affected
Parameter(s) are water quality limited For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
X No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.

3
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: NONE
Downstream Location: NONE
Parameters:
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
AAd quacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment
facilities? Yes No
If no, which parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) N (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach updated evaluation of facility, including toxics analysis, modeling analysis if
modeled at renewal, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

0
,P
4� L
J56,f
A)

q *1
X6
zir
7
h �13
j r�

H
U56 X&,

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Jay Lucas
DATE: March 29, 1995
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
COUNTY Henderson
PERMIT NUMBER NCO073393
'
�4rQ5
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
Facility and Address: Dana Hill Community
925 Dana Road
Hendersonville, N. C, 28792
Date of Investigation: March 15, 1995
Report Prepared By: Paul White
Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Vito Montaperto
704-692-8477
5. Directions to Site: From the intersection of SR 1525 (Dana Road)
and SR 1893, 1.5 miles SE of I-26/Hwy 64 interchange, proceed east
on SR 1525 for 0.1 mile to the entrance on the south side of the
road. The wastewater treatment plant is 0.4 mile south of the
entrance. The discharge point is 300 feet east of the treatment
plant.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 350 19' 23" Longitude: 820 24' 57"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. F9,?94 U.S.G.S. Quad Name Hendersonville
FA5%4
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application? yes
Yes No If No, explain:
Page 1

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included):
not in flood plain.
2 - 7% slopes,
9. Location of nearest dwelling: >100 feet
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Unnamed tributary to
Devil's.Fork.
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: French Broad 040302
C. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
uses: Stream drains agricultural land. 7Q10 = 0.2 cfs.
Heavily silted and vegetation removed from banks
periodically.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted 0.042 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity) --
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? 0.042 MGD
C. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity 10,000 GPD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two years:
NONE A/C will be necessary for expansion.
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: Existing
treatment facilities consist of an influent pump station, a
2900 gallon equalization basin with bar screen, a 2000 gallon
sludge holding tank, a 10,000 gallon aeration basin with
return sludge, a 2200 gallon, 36 square foot clarifier with a
4.5 ft. effluent weir; a 240 gallon chlorine contact chamber
with tablet chlorinator, V-notch weir, and gravity outfall
line. No continuous recording flow meter or cascade aerator
was installed. Water meter readings can suffice for total
flow at current plant capacity. This information was
gathered from on site measurements. No certification of
construction has been received.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: n/a
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Chlorine, ammonia,
household chemicals.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): n/a
in development approved
should be required not needed
Page 2

2.. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: None
specified. Contract operator typically contracts with a septage
hauler to pump the sludge and transport to the City of
• Hendersonville WWTP.
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DEM
Permit Number
Residuals Contractor
Telephone Number
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP PFRP OTHER
c. Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): II
4. SIC Codes (s) : 4952
Wastewater Code(s) of actual wastewater, not particular facilities
i.e., non -contact cooling water discharge from a metal plating
company would be 14, not 56.
Primary 05 Secondary 08
Main Treatment Unit Code: 0607
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds
or are any public monies involved. (municipals only)? no
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
none
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please
indicate) none
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all
of the non -discharge options available. Please provide regional
perspective for each option evaluated.
Spray Irrigation: Technically feasible on adjacent farmland.
Page 3

Connection to Regional Sewer System:.None available.
Subsurface: Not likely to be economically feasible for permitted
flow.
Other disposal options:
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The existing permit allows 0.042 MGD. However A/C and
existing plant is for 0.010 MGD. Current flows at the facility,
which is in the initial stages of development, are in the range of
1000 - 2000 GPD. The permittee submitted justification for flow
in 1993 when the permit was renewed.
The permit should be renewed.
- &a� �1��
Signature of Report Preparer
W ter Qualit Regional Supervisor
c� � 1 /6—
Dat
P
Page 4