NC0026271_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2018 (119)

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
September 17, 1996'
MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Sledge
FROM: D. Rex Gleason2"�
I
PREPARED BY: Richard Bridgeman �?
SUBJECT: Special Order by Consent
Town of Taylorsville
NPDES Permit No. NCO026271
.EMC WQ 96-12
Alexander County
Enclosed please find a'Special Order by Consent package which
includes the SOC document with attachments. A copy of the package
is also.enclosed.
Please advise if additional action or information is needed.,
Enclosure
RMB

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION.
COUNTY OF ALEXANDER
IN THE MATTER OF )
NORTH CAROLINA )
NPDES PERMIT )
NO. NCO026271 )
HELD BY THE TOWN )
OF TAYLORSVILLE )
SPECIAL ORDER BY.CONSENT
EMC WQ NO. 96-12'
Pursuant to provisions of North_ Carolina General Statutes (G.S.)
143-215.2 and 143-215.67, this Special Order by Consent is entered
into by the Town of Taylorsville, hereinafter referred to as the
Town, and the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission'.
an agency of the State of North Carolina created by G.S. 143B-282,
and hereinafter referred to as the Commission:
1. The'Town and the Commission hereby stipulate the following:
(a) That the Town holds. North Carolina NPDES Permit
No.N00026271 for operation of an existing wastewater treatment
works and for making an outlet therefrom for treated
wastewater to Lower Little River, Class C waters of this State
in the Catawba River Basin, .but is unable to comply with the
final effluent limitations for Flow, Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BODO , and' Total Suspended Residue'(TSR) set forth in the
Permit. Compliance will require preparation of plans and
specifications for and construction I and operation of
additional treatment works.
(b) That noncompliance with final. effluent limitations
constitutes causing and _contributing to pollution of the
waters of this State named above, and the Town is within the
jurisdiction of the Commission as set forth in G.S. Chapter
143, Article 21.
(c) That the Town desires to cause of allow the discharge of
170,000 gpd of additional wastewater to the treatment works,
and that the discharge of such additional wastewater will not
result in any significant degradation of the quality of any
waters.
(d) That the Town has secured financing for planning- and
construction for treatment works which, when constructed and
operated, will be 'sufficient to adequately treat the
wastewater -presently being discharged and the additional
wastewater desired to be discharged, to.the extent that the
Town will be able to comply with final permit effluent
limitations.

EMC SOC WQ No. 96-12
Page Two. _
(e) ,Since this Special Order is by Consent, neither party
will file a petition for a contested. case or for judicial
review concerning its terms.
2. The Town agrees to pay the North Carolina Department. of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources the sum of $500.00 in
full settlement for alleged violations of G.S. 143-215.1 and NPDES
Permit No. NC0026271. The payment shall be submitted to the
Director of the Division of Water Quality,P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27626-0535, within thirty (3-0) days of the signature
of this document by the Town. The Town agrees to waive its right
to an Administrative Hearing or remission of civil penalties for
the above settlement amount.
3. The. Town, desiring to comply with the permit identified in
paragraph l(a) above, hereby agrees to do the following:
(a) Provide the- Mooresville Regional Office. of the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality, located at 919 North Main
Street, Mooresville, NC 28115, with a list of all additions .of
flow under the Town's ..Special Order, and update this list each
time flow is added to the system.
(b) Undertake the following activities in accordance with the
indicated time schedule:
1) Submit request for authorization to construct and
plans and specifications for facility upgrade to 0.83 MGD
by October 25, 1995. MET; Authorization to Construct
issued April 4, 1996.
2) Begin construction of facility upgrade -by August 1,
1996. MET
3) Complete construction of facility upgrade by May 31,
1997.
4) Attain compliance with final effluent limitations by
August 31, 1997.
(c) Comply with all terms and conditions of the permit except
those effluent limitations identified in paragraph 1(a) above.
See Attachment A for all current monitoring requirements and
effluerit'limitations..' The permittee may also be required to
monitor for other parameters as deemed necessary by the
Director in future permits or administrative letters.,

EMC SOC WQ No. 96-12
Page Three
(d) During the time in which this Special Order by Consent is
effective, comply with the interim effluent limitations
contained in Attachment A. The following reflects only the.
limitations that have been modified from NPDES requirements by
this Order:
Permit Limits:
Parameters Monthly Average -Weekly Average
Flow 0.43 MGD NA
BODS 30.0 mg/l 45.0 mg/l
TSR 30.0 mg/l 45.0'mg/l
Modified Limits (SOC):
Parameters Monthly Average Weekly Average
Flow 0.60 MGD NA
BOD5. 45.0 mg/l 60.0 mg/l
TSR 45.0 mg/l 60.0 mg/l
(e) No later than 14 calendar days after any date identified for
accomplishment of any activity listed in 2(b) above, submit to the
Director of the Division of Water Quality, written notice of
compliance or noncompliance therewith. In the case of
noncompliance, the notice shall include a statement of the
reason(s) for noncompliance; remedial action(s) taken, and a
statement identifying the extent to which subsequent dates or times
for accomplishment of listed activities may be affected.
(f) Enforce -the North Carolina State Building Code as it applies
to Water Conservation (Volume,II-Plumbing, Chapter 9, 901 General
Requirements - Materials; 901.2 Water Conservation, and Table
90,1.2.2 - Maximum Allowable Water Usage For Plumbing Fixtures).,
(g) Develop and adopt sewer use ordinance limits for non -
conventional pollutants. Implement the pretreatment program as
approved by the Director, including. the enforcement of both
categorical pretreatment standards and local limits.
(h) Identify any Infiltration and Inflow problems associated with
the facility and establish a program to correct.

EMC-SOC WQ No. 96-12
Page Four
4. The Town agrees that unless excused under paragraph"5, the Town
will pay the Director of the'Division of Water Quality, -by check payable
to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health" and Natural
Resources, stipulated penalties according to the following schedule for
failure to meet the. deadlines set out in ,paragraphs 3(b) and- 3(e), or
failure to attain compliance with the effluent limitations/monitoring
requirements contained in Attachment A:
Failure to meet a schedule date
Failure to -maintain compliance with
any modified limit contained in the
SOC.
Failure"to achieve compliance with
final effluent limits at final
compliance deadline.
Monitoring frequency violations
Failure to submit progress reports
$100/day for the first 7
days; $500/day
thereafter
$1000/violation
$2000.00
$100 per omitted value
per parameter
$50/day for the first 7
days; $250/day thereafter
5. The Town and the Commission agree that. the stipulated penalties are
not due if the Town satisfies the Division of Water Quality that
noncompliance was caused solely by:
a. An act of God;
b. An act of'war;
C. An intentional act or omission of a third party; but this
defense shall not be available if the act or omission is that of an
employee or agent of the defendant or if the act or omission occurs
in connection with a contractual relationship with the permittee;
d. An extraordinary event beyond the permittee'.s. control.
Contractor delays or failure to obtain funding will not be
considered as events beyond the permittee's control; or
e. Any combination of the above causes.
Failure within 30 days of receipt of written demand to pay the persons,
or challenge them by .a contested case petition pursuant to G.S. 150B-23-,
will be grounds for a collection action , which the Attorney General is
hereby authorized to initiate. The only issue in.such-an action will be
whether the 30 days has elapsed.

EMC.SOC WQ No. 96-12
Page Five,
6. In accordance with the provisions of G.S. 143-215.67(b) the
Commission allows the Town to accept the additional waste specified
below to its waste disposal system:
170,000 gpd of additional wastewater. The nature of the additional
flows is such that -.the waste characteristics do not. exceed. those
generally associated with- domestic waste or are pretreated to
domestic strengths. Waste of greater than normal domestic strength
may be accepted if the parameter(s) that exceed normal domestic
strength wastewater are not those for which interim limitations
have been developed, and it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the Director that the additional waste will not adversely affect
the treatment efficiency of the treatment system for any modified
parameter or result in the violation of any other permit
limitation. All new and proposed industrial waste tributary to 'the
system must be controlled using all needed mechanisms including,
but not limited to, adoption and implementation of industrial waste
control and pretreatment ordinances. No wastewater can be accepted
which will add toxic pollutants. in quantities not generally
associated with domestic wastewater characteristics, unless the
acceptance of the additional wastewater can be supported through
appropriate analyses. acceptable to the Director.
7. This Special I order by Consent and any terms, conditions and interim
effluentlimitations contained herein, hereby supersede any and all
previous Special Orders and Enforcement Compliance Schedule Letters, and
terms, conditions, and limitations contained therein issued in
connection with NPDES Permit No. NC0026271.
B. Any Violation of terms of this Special Order.Ly Consent, including
paragraphs 3(b) and 3(e) above and Attachment A shall terminate
paragraph 6 of this Order and any authorized additional waste not
previously connected to the system shall not thereafter be connected
until the necessary sewerage system improvements have been completed
and placed.in operation.
9. Noncompliance with the terms of this Special Order by Consent is
subject to enforcement action in addition to the above stipulated
penalties, including injunctive relief pursuant to G.S. 143-215.6C.
10. , The Town, upon signature of the Special Order by Consent, will be
expected to comply with all schedule dates; terms, and conditions of
this document.

EMC SOC WQ¢No. 96-12
Page Six
11. This Special Order by Consent shall expire on November 30, 1997.
F
ow
rn of Ta arsv' e:
Date 9�-; -4
le)
For the North Carolina Environmental Management .Commission:
Date
Chair of the Commission

EMC SOC WQ NO. 96=12
ATTACHMENT A
TOWN OF TAYLORSVILLE
NPDES'PERMIT NO. NCO026271
ALEXANDER COUNTY
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS -Interim
During the period beginning on the effective date of this Special order. and lasting until August 31, 199.7, the
Town of Taylorsville is authorized to discharge from outf all serial .number 001.-_Such discharge shall be limited
and monitored by the Town of Taylorsville as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Mass -based limits C6 centrationi--based limits
(lbs/day)- -(units as specified) Measurement Sample * Sample
Mon. Avg. Daily Max. Mon. Avg. Weekly Avg, Frequency Type.. Location
Fly 0.600 MGD Continuous Recording I or E
BOD,.5 Day, 200C **. 45.0 mg/l _ 60.0 mg/1 Weekly composite B
Total Sus nded.Residue ** 45.0 1 60.0 1 Weekly Composite E
NH3 as N (Apr 1'1 - October 1 17.8 mg - Weekly Composite E
NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31) 2/Month Composite. E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0/100 ml 400.0/100 ml Weekly Grab E
Total Residual Chlorine 2/Week Grab E
Temperature Weekly. ;Grab E
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN) Quarterly Composite E,
Total Phosphorus Quarterly Composite, E
Copper. Monthly Composite E
Cyanide Monthly Grab E
Zinc Monthly Composite E.
Chlorides Monthly Composite E
Chronic Toxicity *** Quarterly Composite E-
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent
** The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15$. of the respective
influent value (85% removal).
*** Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F @ 4.4%J, January, April, July and October; See Attachment B.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard unite nor greater than 9.0.8tandard units and shall be monitored weekly at the
effluent by grab sample.. t
There shall be no•.discharge of -floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Note: -Parameters noted in bold underlined lettering above are.the only parameters modified as part of this SOC.

J
EMC SOC WQ NO. 96-12
ATTACHMENT B
TOWN OF TAYLORSVILLE
NPDES PERMIT NO..NC0026271
ALEXANDER COUNTY
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL,PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall- at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test
procedures outlined .in:
1). The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North
Carolina Chronic Bioassay Procedure - Revised *. September 1989) or
subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of
reproduction or significant mortality is 4.4% (defined as treatment two in the
North Carolina procedure document). The permit holder shall perform quarterly
monitoring using this procedure to establish' compliance with the SOC condition.
The tests will be performed in the months of January, April, July, and October.
Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the.NPDES permitted
final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this SOC 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: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of Water'Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
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 single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified
limits, then monthly monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a
single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test requirement will revert
to quarterly -in the months specified above.
Should any test'data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the
North Carolina Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the
receiving stream, this SOC may be reopened and -modified to include alternate.
monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document,
such as minimum control organism survival and appropriate environmental controls,
shall constitute an'invalid test and will require immediate retesting (within 30
days of. initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will
constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.

SPECIAL ORDER BY CONSENT.(SOC)
REGIONAL OFFICE CHECKLIST
Town of Taylorsville
NPDES Permit No. NCO026271
Alexander County
EMC SOC WQ No. 96-12
A. This SOC was requested because the Town has .been almost_
consistently in noncompliance with Permit Flow limit, and has
also violated BODS and TSR limits. The ongoing construction
project will probably result in violations of the Permit final
effluent, limits for BOD5 and TSR.
B. Town's WWTP consists of a bar screen, flow splitter-box, dual
Imhoff tanks,.dual.dosing tanks,- dual trickling filters, an
aeration basin, a. secondary clarifier, an aerobic digester,
sludge drying beds, and chlorine disinfection facilities.,
C. Facility discharges to Lower Little River, Class C waters in
the Catawba River Basin.
D. There have been* no documented downstream water quality
impacts.
E. An instream assessment was conducted (report attached).
F. Current 12-month MP screen printout attached.
G. The last compliance inspection was conducted on July 25, 1995;
the facility was given marginal ratings for Facility Site.
Review, Self -Monitoring Program, and Operations & Maintenance.
H. A Municipal- Compliance Initiatives Program Performance
Evaluation was conducted by the Division's Construction Grants
and Loans Section (Report dated March 1995). The Report notes
equipment failures/deficiencies which need to be corrected,
but also suggests that, facility operation and maintenance
needs to be improved.
I.. During expansion activities .existing treatment units will be
taken out of service for modification, rehabilitation, or
conversion; therefore, the potential for violations exists.
This Office agreed with the permittee proposed interim. limits.

J. Proposed construction schedule dates were modified.by this
Office to result in quicker completion of facility
upgrade/expansion. Since the NPDES permit had already.been
modified to provide for an expansion to 0.83 MGD, and since
the permittee had, already received an authorization to
construct, several unknowns did not have to be factored in.
K. The construction project consists of the following:
- Demolition of two existing dosing siphons and six sludge
drying beds.
Conversion of two trickling filters into aeration basins
with diffused air.
Conversion of two Imhoff tanks into aerobic sludge
digesters.
- Conversion of one aeration basin into a sludge digester.
- Construction of a clarifier.
- Construction of chlorination and dechlorination chambers,
with chlorine and sulfur dioxide feed systems.
- Construction of a grit chamber.
- Construction of a recycle pumping station and a scum pump
station.
L. SOC includes an up -front settlement of $500.00, which_ was
determined by Raleigh staff.
M. N/A
N. Stipulated penalties are consistent with.guidelines.
0. Facility monitors in.accordance with,NPDES permit.
P. Toxicity limit does not need to be relaxed.
Q. Permit Part III, Condition I: includes pretreatment program
development requirements. Program development was supposed to
have proceeded to a point where a request, for program approval
could, by Permit requirement, be submitted by September 1.,
1996. The DWQ has issued a permit to. the only significant'
industrial user, Taylorsville Garment Finishers, Inc. When
implemented, the approved .pretreatment program will be a
modified program; therefore, the DWQ should be providing
assistance in program development -Most Most of the required
elements have been submitted; however, the development of SIU
permit limits and the allocation tables are dependent on a
reliable headworks analysis (HWA) based on site specific data.
A HWA has been submitted, but apparently the Pretreatment Unit

has requested additional information and has suggested that a.
delay in conducting. another HWA until the new WWTP is
operational would be appropriate.
R. The Permit is not under adjudication.
S. Funding sources consist of Community Development Block Grant
funds of $684,710, Appalachian Regional Commission funds of
$200,000, and local government funds of $132,500.
T. Resolution was included in the SOC application:
U. Permit and SOC limits pages have been compared.
V.. All MET schedule dates are so.indicated.
W. SOC shell remains intact.
X. Spell check ran.
Y. There are no special circumstances concerning the issuance or
denial of this SOC.
Z. This Office recommends that the EMC enter into the Order.
Preparer : Date:
0

Instream Assessment for Spruce Pine SOC
'page.2
Analysis and Discussion.
An instream assessment was performed using the, Level B model framework. The
Carolina Glove Co. (0.015 MGD,'BOD5 = 30 mg/1), is located 1 mile upstream of the
Taylorsville WWTP and was. included at the beguming of the model. The current design
flow of the Taylorsville WWTP is 0.430 MGD, however the yearly average flow of
0.4315 was used as the pre-SOC flow. The post SOC flow is 0.6015 MGD, which allows
for 170,000 GPD of I/L The SOC limits recommended at 0.6015 MGD are 45 mg/l of
BOD5 and 45 mg/l of TSS.
`Two models were run at the flows of 0.4315 and'0.6015 MGD. Waste inputs into
the models for the Taylorsville plant included 90 mg/l CBOD (45 mg/1 * 2.0) and NBOD of
80.1 mg/l (existing NH3 limit of 17.8 mg/1 * 4.5). The model results predict the DO
minimum of 7.43 mg/l to occur at the Carolina Glove outfall. However, the difference of
predicted DO at the Taylorsville.outfall at the SOC flows were 7.76 and 7.61 mg/l,
respectively. This is a difference of 0.15 mg/l in the instream DO levels and does not
demonstrate a significant depression of the insuvam DO level per 67(b) criteria.
Recommendation
Based on the model results, the Instream Assessment Unit,recommends approval
of the 170,000 GPD of additional,wasteflow for the Taylorsville WWTP and the SOC
limits of 45 mg/1 of.BOD5 and 45 me of TSS. All other permitted limitations, and
effluent and instream monitoring requirements shall remain the same as in the current
NPDES permit
cc: Dianne Wilburn .
Central -Files
WLA' File

650I SES%IOK
READY FOR
INPUTGKEX88/MP
COMPLIANCE'EVALUATlON
ANALYSIS
REPORT PAGE i
+
PERMI.--NC8O2627i
PIPE--OOi
REPORT
PERIOD:
95O8-9�O7 LOC--- E
.
FACILITY--TAYLOR%VILLE,
TOWN-WWTP
DESIGN FLOW--
.4380 CLASS-2
LOCATION--TAYLOR%VTLLE
REGION/COUNTY--03
ALEXANDER
50050
00310
08530
00610
31616
50060 TGP3S GOCAO
MON7H
Q/MGD
BOD
RE%/TJ%
NH3+NH4-
FEC COLT
CHLORINE CERI7DPF TEWP
LIMIT
F .4300
F 30.00
F 30.0
17.80
F 208.0
NOL KOL
95/09
95/09
.4158
.5O93F
22.v2
17.27
14.6
26.3
8.11
3.96
ii
2
1.28O 27'0O
2.0 25.5O
95/10
LIMIT
9501
.486OF
F .4300
.4565F
24.0C
F 38.00
27.58
31.IF
F 30.0
25.7
5.90
KOL
2.83
5
F 208.0
i
i.687 21.2O
NOL NOL
1.75O 16.0O
95/12
96/01
3621
'
.5113F
7.22
14.90
� �
,
il.2
4.2O
4.34
. O
O
2.O0O
i87 i1.25
96/02
96/03
LIMIT
96/0u
06/05
.47W
.4273
F .4300
.3620
.4057
0.26
6.25
F 30.00
8.82
19.70
9.9
13.7
F 30.0
14.0
15.7
4'05
1.02
17.00
3.86
5.96
O
O
F 200.0
0
O
1.60
2 08O i3.5O
NOL 40' W.
i.862 15.7�
1.O5O 20.0O
96/06
AVERAGE
.4442F
.4420
11.92
i5.31
iK?
16.A
5.74
5.08
i
i
2'00O 25.75
i.893 ________ i8.i9
MAXIMUM
1.3670
50.00
57.0
ii.50
350
2.000 ________
MINIMUM
.2430
3.60
2.0
.14
L[%ETHAN
.300 ________ ?.�0
WI�
MGD
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
0/100ML
MG/L PASS/FAT DEG.0

0800" 0016Z
OgEll 0OU91 000099 006s'? 00s'sh 0OWL
Mph" VISO, OLISA vsky'l 00960 LUZ 15VAEAV
03M, ouvo, WAS 0000' 0016's OVL'9
&A -VA
MN 1 C." ki. "i 01 ll..+! 016 1 A T
QU607 204G, WWI 6800''
0soll MOP 00,66 OOM''
&.0, 0800' OYU 0000' oos"wy L'9-1-L
0190" 0600' OWS6 osow.
06LO' QW01 00,904 0000' 2091-S OW16
5 0 6 1W i
0000 0021' 00"M h"LWL
0924, OsEl, 0olvs 0000' 0OLVE OLYZ L'9-01
'ION VON 0 i C.1 i`...� !ON 0"9 K6 11 w 1
00'6L MEW
1 If.) P.-J. 'ION 1ON 0'9 0'6 KNI i
3NQ HUM M1301HO 3GINVAj -101-SOHd N W10i H 1UND4,11
Z... 040 Who 01600 OU00 S9900 00900 00VOC..''.
M--AiNnoo/NovsH 31WAS8O1AVl--N011V3O 1
z--ssvl3 GORY --MOIA NOTSM dlMM-NMOl
I --- 001 10961SOS6 0010% MW too_-Wd hW9zoO3N__llwH3d
z 150:1 MOM SISAIMV NOMMAD MNVl`IdWO.`.:);
96110/60 dw/ssx,

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 6, 19% N.C. DEFT. OF
ENVIRONMENT. HEALTH,
& NATURAL RESOURCES
MEMORANDUM
JUN 10 1996
TO: D. Rex Gleason
FROM: Jacquelyn M. Nowell ^N DIVISION Ot EN'�'B�NuENTAL A I),5E1{ENT
MOBUSME RE&WHAL OFFICE
=U: Donald L. S
Ruth Swanek.
Carla Sanderson
SUBJECT: Instream Assessment for SOC 67(b) Request
Taylorsville WWTP (EMC WQ # 96-12)
NPDES Permit No. NCO026271
Alexander County
Summary and Recommendation
The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the request for an instream assessment
for the Taylorsville WWTP: The Town is requesting a Special Order of Consent (SOC)
duringimprovements to the wastewater treatment plant. The existing design flow is 0.430
MGD, and there are future plans for expansion to 0:83.0 MGD. The total requested SOC
flow is 170,000 GPD, which includes excess inflow/infiltration (I/I) occurring at the plant
for a total SOC flow requested limit of 0.600 MGD. The SOC limits requested are BOD5
= 45 mg/1 and TSS of 45 mg/l.
The results of the Level B model analysis indicated that according to the EMC 67
(b) criteria, the predicted dissolved oxygen concentration, in the Lower Little River was not
significantly affected by the additional flow. The EMC 67 (b) criteria, which states that the
discharge will not decrease the DO minimum by more than 0.5 mg/l or will not extend the
stream length of the DO minimum below the standard by more than 0.5 miles, was not
violated with the addition of 170,000 GPD. Our analysis determined that the facility can
accept the additional flow under the requested SOC limits.
•.T�
The Town of Taylorsville discharges into the Lower Little River in the Catawba
River Basin and has a stream classification of C. The summer 7Q10 flow has been
estimated using USGS regression equations to be 14 cfs with an average flow of 88 cfs, .
A review of compliance evaluation data shows that from January 1995 to February
1996, Taylorsville has had six contraventions of the flow limit, three contraventions of the
BOD5 limits and one of the TSS limit. This seems to be a continuation of historical
problems the plant has had meeting these parameters. The yearly average wasteflow of the
plant is 0.4315 MGD, which exceeds the design capacity.

Table 1. Instream Assessment Summary for the Town of Taylorsville
Design Capacity
0.4300 MGD
Pre-SOC Flow
0.4315 MGD
SOC Flows Requested
0.1700 MGD
Pre-SOC + SOC Flows
0.6015 MGD
Headwater conditions:
s7Q10 flow
14 cfs
w7Q10 flow
25 cfs
Average flow
88 cfs
Design Temperature
25 °C
CBOD
2.0 mg/l
NBOD
1.0 mg/l
DO (90% saturation)
7.44 mg/1
Wastewater Inputs:
Pre- SOC Wasteflow 0.4315 MGD
Requested SOC Wasteflow(s) 0.1700 MGD
Recommended SOC Wasteflow(s) 0.6015 MGD
CBOD 90 mg/l
NBOD 80.1 mg/1
Model Output Summary
Qw DO Net Distance DO Net
(MGD) min. Change <5.0 mg/1 Change
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mi.) (mi.)
0.4315 7.76 NA 0.0 NA
0.6015 7.61 0.15 0.0 0.0