NC0025453_Instream Assessment_19850116

NPDE!; DOCYMEN'1' SCANNIN6 COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0025453
Clayton WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Application
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
January 16, 1985
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reverse side

i-/60-5r5
/ cl
U-a,97 ,1 5,0 c-
o3oyo0�-
Qw = 0. 5 9 &VZ (axj
add, -hana P VQ Sao ,�VpD = ©, o 5 �
-16 4,7P = o. Aoki'k a
Bo D = a I. y ' Co 60,D V
,Do = 7• 83
?1- 72-)
�a 7 �sscrr� soC- /Fr, /98f - 313��Plo
LA) r 7r t 3J l3�
c.o Y i-[ 5pon Dorm tQ --i; t2- =
�oxlo 6 AeAll
36 8' 735
�n0Jal m ataA4/tL-
�Ye�a7�r-nf aA,,mO 3/9/$y
` rj,nj Ilm AJ 143 -3
�=5

= ham Hotsnis �uj �4gHdy wn ��—ia—��
b4� l/*, /-t atia not �ASe
/M5f I-eepn-f-Iy. A5 ho- 50ppnf &auH- = a>,
c&5e ,6 f-Lq, Z Z `Y6 /n A,,,-n / 7.
Tke `n kthf ^.e."v or) 17,40 `G u-� 9/rrtf�
IiMI !-�- or- y5 4:�G '60Aj.
U 51 n Ar704)V:2 /ilO-t�
/"a.0,Z5 V-e10, OSX= 0.Z5
Q (t° Qau (LOZZ a : -
Qv) NCO -7/10(to= , 15
L -,R,+
V10001 Ll=0,3
rvl Zan4)e7 vto-tj iT ),nOk5
iu on� VUn t-k yhp�
+0 ti.A I a,k e.
y5/n�G.
k) / 4gPl to' /tl-e
/y
l iY7 O O(�Y j IJIJ✓11 �✓1 = 7• JCG
SIB = 41 � QAuntzo�/.9
L- 34 , osl
b; O K
560 ,-ft-
Crrek
Y+ J GGtn ✓S�na '00 J f���t�nf��/ K2-
550C,

DISCHARGER 1 CLAYTON SOC
RECEIVING STREAM
WASTEFLOW
1 .59
1 SEG NO I
REACH
I SEG MI I
DO I
CROD I
NFOTJ I
FLOW I
I 1 1
1.
1 0.001
7.761
55.991
0.001
1..111
1 1 1
1
1 0.101
6.581
53.861
0.001
i.131
1 1. 1
1
I 0.201
5.681
91.811
0.001
1.141
1 1 1
1
1 0.301_
4.991
49.861
0.001
1.161
1 1 1
1.
1 0.401
4.481
47.981
0.001
1.171
1 1 1
1
1 0.501
4.111
46.181
0.001
1.191
1 1. 1
1
1 0.601
3.841
44.461
0.001
1.201
1 1 1
1
1 0.701
3.671
42.811
0.001
1.221
1 1 1
1
1 0.801
3.571
41.231
0.001
1.231
1 1 1
1
1 0.901
3.521
39.711
0.001
1.251
1 1 1
1
1 1.001
3.511
3R.261
0.001
1.261
1 1 1
1
1 1.1.01
3.541
36.861
0.001
1.281
1 1. 1
1
1 1.201
3.601
35.521
0.001
1.291
1 1 1
t
1 1.301
3.671
34.241
0.001
1.311
1 1 1
1
1 1.401
3.761
33.001
0.001
1.321
1 1.501
3.861
31.821
0.001
1.341
I 1 I
L
1 1.601
3.971
30.681
0.001
1.351
I 1 I
1
1 1..701
4.081
29.591
0.001
1.371
I 1 1
1
1 1.801
4.201
28.541
0.001
1.381
I 1 I
1
1 1.901
4.321
27.531
0.001
1.401
I 1 I
1
1 2.001
4.441
26.561
0.001
1.411
1 1 1
1.
1 2.101
4.561
25.631
0.001
1.431
1 1 1
1
1 2.201
4.681
24.731
0.001
1.441
I 1. 1
1
1 2.301
4.801
23.871
0.001
1.461
1 1. I
1
1 2.401
4.911
23.041
0.001
1.471
I 1 I
1
1 2.50L--
5.021
22.241
0.001
1.491
I 1 I
1
1 2.601
5.131
21.471
0.001
1.501
I 1 I
1
1 2.701
5.241
20.731
0.001
1.521
a,5-,3 =2.Z
Lbrn In = 3 5

DISCHARGER CL,AYTON
RECEIVING STREAM 2
WASTF..FLOW
.64
1 BEG NO I
REACH
I BEG MI I
DO I
CROP I
NROP I
FLOW I
I 1 I
1
1 04001
7.761
56.761
0.001
14191
I 1 I
1
1 06101
6.571
544641
0.001
1.211
I i I
1
1 0,201
5.651
52.61.1
0.001
1.221
I 1 1
1
1 0.30L-
4.941
50,661
0.001
1.241
I 1 1
1
1 0.401
4,421
48.791
0,001
1,251
1 1 1
1
1 01501
4.041
47.001
0.001
1.271
I 1 I
1
1 00601
3,761
45.281
0,001
1.281
I 1 1
1
1 0.701
3,581
434631
0.001
1,301
I 1 1
1
1 0.801
3.471
42.091
0.001
1,311
I 1 1
1
1 0.901
3,421
40,531
0,001
1.331
1 1 1
1
1 11001
3,411
39,071
0.001
1.341
I 1 1
1
1 1,101
3.441
374671
0.001
1..361
I 1 1
1
1 1.201
3.491
36.321
0.001
1,371
1.
1 1,301
3.561
35,031
0.001
1.391
1 1,401
3.651
33.781
0.001
1.401
1 1.501
3.751
32,591
0.001
1,421
I ].
1
1 1,601
3.861
314441
0.001
1,431
I 1 I
1,
1 1.701
3.981
30,341
0.001
1..451
I 1
1,
1 1.801
4.101
29.281
04001
1,461
I 1 1
1
1 1.901
4.221
28.251
00001
1,481
I 1 I
1
1 24001
4,341
27,271
0.001
1.491
I 1 I
1 2.101
4.461
26,331
0.001
1.511
1 2,201
4,581
25,421
00001
1,521
1 2.301
4.701
24,541
0.001
1..541
I 1 I
1
1 2,401
4.811
23,701
0.001
1,551
I 1 I
1
1 2,501
4.931
22.891
0.001
1,571
1 2,601_
5.041
22.111
0.001
1.581
I 1 I
1
1 24701
5,151
2.1,361
00001
1.601
rAot--�-= 2.6 -. 5 = 2.3
Flbm,n' 3. y

• r
*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
DISCHARGER
CLAYTON SOC
SURDASIN «
030402
RECEIVING STREAM
UT LITTLE CRK
STREAM CLASS:
C
7010
.2 CFS
WINTER 7010
CFS
DESIGN TEMPERATURE
25 DECREES Co
WASTEFLOW «
.59 MOD
ILENGTHISLOPE 1 VELOCITY IDEPTH I KI I KI I K2 I K2 I Kn I
IMILES IFT/MI I FPS I FT I /DAY 1 @20 I/DAY 1 @20 I/DAY I
I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I
SEGMENT 1 1 2.701 16*001 0.115 .I 0.87 1 0,49 1 0.39 1 3.711 3.321 0#001
REACH I I I I I I I I I I I
*** INPUT DATA SUMMARY ***
I
FLOW I
CBOD I
NBOD I
D.0,, I
I
CFS I
MC/L I
MG/L I
MO/L I
I
SEGMENT 1 REACH I I
I
I
I
!
1
!
I
1
WASTE 1
0.915 1
67.800 1
0.000 1
7.800 1
HEADWATFRSI
0.200 1
2.000 1
0.000 1
7.560 I
TRIBUTARY 1
0.000 1
0,000 1
0.000 1
0.000 1
RUNOFF * I
O*t50 1
2,000 1
0.000 1
7.560 1
* RUNOFF
FLOW IS
IN CFS/MILE

i
Nc cxoa 5us3
/D f
ECE�vED c o u R I E R
J AN •� � 1°a5
Asheville Raleigh
Mooresville Washington
Fayetteville Wilmington
Winston-Salem
-- ------------------------ --
TECNNICAI SERV1�� U0 Z
DIVISION OF E14'VIRORIENTAL MANAGEMENT e 0
Date: January 9, 1984
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Regional Supervisor
FROM: Coordinator
Enforcement S EmergencyResponse
SUBJECT: Document Review and Recommendation
Case Name: Town of .Clayton
Case Number: EMC WO 81-72 Ad
County: Johnston
Please review the attached document for factual accuracy and provide
regional office recommendations if appropriate. As it may be necessary for
regional staff to testify on the facts contained in the document at an ad-
ministrative hearing, careful review of these facts is most important. For
F&D's, your review should conclude with a recommended amount for civil penal-
ty assessment.
Your review should be returned to this office by: zzJ
If you are unable to complete your review in the time allotted, or
if the matter can be handled more easily by phone, please call (ESER)
L. Page Benton, Jr. at 733-7015 before the above date.
Document Type: Additional Instructions:
FeD Review
Remission Request
Adrative Bearing
S
4Other•
6 ) SOC: By copy of this memo a request.for instream assessment
is made to Tatility Performance Unit
i

Town of Clayton
no
POST OFFICE BOX 777
CLAYTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27520
R.• eT
..� *
,December 28, 1984
Director
Division of Environmental Management
Department of Natural Resources & Community Development
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Re: Request for SOC Revision
Town of Clayton
Dear Sir:
This letter is to formally request your agency's revision of our Special
Order by Consent to permit an additional 50,000 gallons per day of flow
to be tributary to our present wastewater treatment facility.
Our request is supported by the following enclosed documents:
1. an engineering report prepared by our consultant engineer;
2. copies of the Clayton Town Board minutes showing the Board's
approval of project funding, and appointment of myself as
official representative for this request;
3. a listing of projects which the Board has designated to receive
the permitted capacity upon your approval.
The Town of Clayton is currently ranked 11th on the current year funding
list for 201 Wastewater Facility construction, and we are working very
actively with Johnston County and our unincorporated industries in order
to_revise.nur.201 plan and receive this funding.
Rkease.mota that the projects list (Item #3 above) includes only domestic
wmstewater;.and no•potential..£or any toxic waste discharge is apparent.

Director, Division of Environmental Management
Page 2
December 28, 1984
Thank you for your consideration. Please feel free to contact me or our
consulting engineer (Mr. Gene B. Cobb, Ragsdale Consultants, P.A., 5009C
Western Boulevard, Raleigh, NC 27606, telephone [phone]) if you have any
questions or need further discussion in any way.
SSW/ch
Enclosures
Sincerely,
Steven S. Weatherman
Town Manager
cc: Mr. Gene B. Cobb
DEM Raleigh Regional Office
a

CLAYTON SOC WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
The following projects were designated by the Town Board for the
50,000 gallon SOC Request.
1) Restful Manor, 40 beds @ 150gpd/bed
Dan Sanderford 6,000 gpd
2) Greenwood Apartments, U.S. 70 & Fayetteville Street
Durwood Stephenson & Associates
40 units 300 gpd/unit 12,000 god
3) Satterfield Duplexes, Champion Street
David Satterfield
4) West Clayton Area Sewer
43 units 300 gpd/unit 12,900 gpd
60 + units 300 qpd/unit 19,100 qpd
TOTAL 50,000 gpd

Town of Clayton
�yl
. POST OFFICE BOX 777
CLAYTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27520
i, FRAN DAVIS , Town Clerk of the Town of Clayton,
North Carolina hereby certify that the attached is an actual
excerpt of the Town Council meeting, Page 5, December 3, 1984.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and have caused
the official corporate seal of said Town of Clayton to be affixed,
this the 31st day of DECEMBER, 1984.
FRAN DAVIS, TOWN CLERK

Minutes - December 3, 1984
Page 5
Mayor Bailey clarified the motion by saying the EPA grant would be for 1.2235
million dollars, the Town's portion 1.37456 million and the County's portion
$828,640.
He also expressed his appreciation for the County Commissioner's time and
consideration of this matter.
Mayor Bailey then called for a special meeting to be held Monday, December loth
at 7:30 P.M. to include all out of town customers if possible to discuss a proposed
rate increase in water & sewer.
The Council then discussed with Gene Cobb the status of the SOC Revision request.
Mr. Cobb stated that a resolution was needed to appoint someone as a desiqnated
agent for the SOC Revision request.
It was aqreed that Steve Weatherman, Town Manager would be the designated agent.
Mr. Cobb also stated that he needed a firm list of commitments on sewer capacity
for the SOC Revision.
A motion was then made by Councilman Glenn Lee and seconded by Councilman Doug
McCormac to appoint Steve Weatherman as designated agent and that 50,000 gallons
be committed on the rehab work and $55,000 come out of the it. sales tax.($18,000
of this to include the west end of Clayton and the rest for new construction)
for the SOC revision. Motion carried.
Mr. Jesse V. Corbett was present and addressed the Council concerning the Town
putting a new sewer line on Andrew Street. He stated that it cost him $1182 to hook
up, which _consist of running . a line to _the tap that the Town _had provided.
Mayor Bailey informed Mr. Corbett that the Town ran the new sewer line to correct
a problem in that area and that the line that was there was too small.
He also stated that the Town just recently discovered that the line Mr. Corbett's
apartments were hooked up to was a private line, not belonging to the Town. This
was causing the house beside of the apartments to have a sewer problem because
the apartment's sewer was running to the line the house was tied on to.
o
Attorney *Kermeth Hinton .-advised the Council that whether the sewer line was public
or private. the :Town vas,-, st111-ma-t ..r.esponsible for paying for a line to connect
the ­avartments..
Con=uhity. Development Audit
--A -copy of _the- Community Development Audit .for Grant Number 82-C-6233 was presented
�Eo :the nncil ':f= :-the:ix-;rP_view..
Mayor Bailey informed those present that the Christmas parade would be held this
year on December 8th at 3:00 and that the Town's Christmas party for the employees
would be December 21st at 12:00 P.M. at the fire department.

4k, North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources &Community Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Joseph W. Grimsley, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 24, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: Lars Godwin, Water Quality Supervisor
Raleigh Regional Office
FROM: Forrest Westall, Head
Monitoring & Technical ervices Branch
SUBJECT: Town of Clayton
NPDES Permit No. NCO025453
Special Order by Consent
In -Stream Assessment
Per your request, a Level B analysis was done for the Town of Clayton
discharge to Little Creek, a Class "C" stream in the Neuse River Basin.
Self -monitoring reports from January to June, 1981 indicate the following
average values for the effluent characteristics listed below:
Parameter
Average
Flow
0.534 MGD
BOD5
44 mg/1
NH3-N
15 mg/l
BODultimate*
104 mg/l
D.O.
not available
Fecal Coliform
10 - millions/100 ml
TSS
47 mg/l
pH
7.2 S.U.
The impact of the discharge on Little Creek was assessed for present operating
conditions and for an increase in flow of 68,000 gpd. The same treatment
efficiency was assumed for both flow rates. No effluent D.O. values have
been reported during the past three years. In order to evaluate the effects
on the stream of varying effluent D.O., a sensitivity analysis was performed
using values of 0 and 5 mg/l in the model to represent a typical range in
the plant's performance.
*BODultimate = BOD5 + 4 x NH3-N
P. O. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Memo - Lars Godwin
Page 2
August 24, 1981
Little Creek extends a total of .6..4 miles before its confluence with Swift
Creek. At a distance of 2.4 miles below the Clayton outfall, Little Creek
widens into a pond 0.3 mile long and 400 feet wide. Table I demonstrates
the impact of present and proposed flows on this situation. Under MO
conditions at the present discharge rate assuming effluent D.O. is 5 mg/l,
Little Creek is predicted to be anaerobic from a point 0.7 miles below the
outfall to 0.1 mi into the lake. With the flow increase, this zone is predicted
to begin 0.1 mile upstream. For effluent D.O.'s of zero, the anaerobic zone
will extend for 2.5 miles, from the outfall to 0.1 mi into the lake for both
flow conditions. The D.O. standard of 5 mg/l will be violated under all
modeled conditions from the outfall to a point 0.2 mile into the lake. Due
to the long travel time of water in the lake, the D.O. is predicted to
completely recover by the time water leaves the lake. There are no violations
predicted to occur below the lake in Little Creek.
Self -monitoring reports confirm the predicted impact at present operating
conditions of the Clayton discharge. The stream below the outfall is severely
degraded, even at streamflows greater than 700. June and July reports from
this year (1981) indicate low D.O. values upstream, probably due to very low
flows and exertion and impact of a benthic demand in this low-lying swampy
region.
If you have any questions, please call.
cc: dy Williams
Arthur Mouberry

Table I. Effect of Clayton WWTP on Little Creek Under Critical
Low Flow Conditions.
Wastef 1 ow
Effluent D.O.
Extent of Stream Degradation
(miles D.O. <5 mg/1)
Extent of Anaerobic Zone
0.534 MGD
0.602 MGD
0 mg/l 5 mg/l 0 mg/l 5 mg/l
2.5 miles 2.6 miles 2.6 miles 2.6 miles
outfall to outfall to outfall to outfall to
0.2 mi into 0.2 mi into 0.2 mi into 0.2 mi into
lake lake lake lake
2.5 miles 1.8 miles 2.5 miles 1.9 miles
outfall to mp 0.7 to outfall to mp 0.6 to
0.1 mi into 0.1 mile 0.1 mile 0.1 mile
lake into lake into lake into lake

Table ll. Self -Monitoring Reports
Avg. Upstream Avg. Downstream
Month D.O. D.O.
July 1981
4.4
2.6
June 1981
3.1
2.3
Sept. 1979
6.6
4.3
August 1979
5.2
2.0
July 1979
6.5
4.4
Upstream Station: NC42 bridge, 0.2 mi above discharge.
Downstream Sta: SR 1560 bridge, 1.9 mi below discharge.

Summary
The Town of Clayton discharges -to Little Creek, a Class C stream in
the Neuse River Basin. At the point of discharge, USGS has estimated the
700 flow to be 0.05 cfs. The drainage area at this site is 5.6 sq mi and
the average flow is about 6A cfs.
The discharge is 6.4 miles abovethe confluence of Little Creek and Swift
Creek. Little Creek flows 2.4 miles before entering a small lake which is
0.3 mile long and 400 feet wide. The discharge is predicted to cause D.O.
violations for this upper reach and 0.2 mile of the lake, at both present
and proposed plant flows. In addition, an anaerobic zone 1.8 miles long
under present flow and 1.9 miles long under proposed flow will occur under
7Q10 streamflow and critical temperature.

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 17, 1981
MEMORANDUM
TO: Forrest Westall
Head, Technical Services
:Pea&�3
FROM: Lars D. Godwin
Water Quality Supervisor
Raleigh Regional Office
SUBJECT: Town of Clayton
NPDES Permit No. NC0025453
Special Order By Consent
Johnston County
The Town of Clayton has requested a Special Order By Consent to allow
additional sewer extensions. The existing facility is a 0.6 MGD trickling
filter plant with dual nitrification units which discharges into Little Creek
a class "C' stream in the Neuse River Basin. The following list represents
the latest self monitoring monthly average (Jan. - June, 1981):
Parameter
Flow
BOD5
TSS
Fecal Coliform
NH3 N
D. O.
pH
Average
.534 MGD
44 mg/1
47 mg/l
variable (10-millions)
15 mg/1
not available
7.2 s. u.
The additional waste flow from the proposed sewer extensions and connec-
tions will be 68,000 gpd. The above data should be used to evaluate potential
stream degradation, i. e. impact on water quality of the proposed additional
wastewater. Your analysis will be used to evaluate the proposed SOC under the
provisions of G. S. 143-215.67 (b).
LDG/mp
CC: Ted Mew

SOC �r �laUj%M — Z41e- Cre--c-K
L",V15
&.11-
C�Gal�
% -
�? - 5 ad
All,cr��e
Yi D'�f W�(�
Sd1d?�
�irCcl�il�.�iGCD�'�//�idNS
�Wd. 4,t)
2- mc-e w-e o(oz ose-
J
P' .,hn,
tG-

S16�2� �►� �lD�,uz� re�ci� js /�,o2�P%z'�, C��c��ecd
J'or-
1-5
USGg �7-7,71 LiH. leC a.A)6 (Z
/Io - o �0� �� ;S.sa �q- = , c 5 (eSof c1S��� � �Of 9 y,�l�
ax
7/10 o e 7
,x : 3 7
j�C7(9 7801
I 7/16 b
i
1ll
p
?fro
L,Wk- Cv-( I
Lelov
/57
/4 1� m �7tl wo-/
Li �tle C r h r1A) I i S#-77
�70 V;-

Jlp
is
v
t
aC4
ol-77 a RV
(o 57
QA-VG A-Vco
q
: 1� 6AP
zy
to, p:2).
4c, ev 0 5 br.,.ce d � "3 (e-)
s �% ��r►-� 1-� �l ro w� s f'I&v Oa(A? o7'0
ve-, 10 C
(� 5 �rP,a � G� I �� � /�'l �% Y �'1 G� r-d �o /� c��raG ��-�`st� c � � -
y �
f� ,f
'tN4 5,k6 SOW 0(2�
002. Z9 0
is
mall�
6, 5 5J s� 6eI c cl J �b
Cleo.h G

�
O � �
a '
a i
//00 5� -fl I
of 7 q/ o hf5CA , hlcltl-c�++Jr- . s3�o� W
v af 0.vCa-t,5-3`f =
Vr'
CrL)
,00/3J, 5
/OS0cFs 4 1 s-a�c�s
vo /� I-rp 5
P,L'.PAc4 3 oi s'-Zpis G s �r��`-y
4-X>
e a r sAu?,,U
o r /�5 ilkz/ now , /'7G� �G�e s