NC0020648_Wasteload Allocation_19910411

NPDES DOCUNEMT SCANNING COVER SMEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0020648
Washington WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
201 Facilities Plan
Instream Assessment (67B)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
Aril 11, 1991
This document is printed oa reuse paper - igRaore any
content on the rezrerse side

�ehned� Cy�el i S Ala
-r o C4- G. mow, II - u � ' r%
,�, � p� D. , e e-nr] , l lti �-e wf s,
a f
���a ��Lerv✓ ��ia.f V��� ,(2e OGCuv✓rv�y.
/'.yYL�1Vi i(�r rY)oC�y�iV(0lti o SO 0
rur hudj w fi
%n v� 1 q c r) all �. oc v fv 0)Lfay �u
��� v ~ a�. Cv�he�-f' � 6�n�%i• f � 07�-0 �t� �-e v�-��- �h.e�e,le
Q o' , • �� nwi u �n lac' too),
IOLA Q"G 4/ SC I�C1ilGi (
M tA) C-
4t Q C.aAk'
o (GCGo ( 0
U f"zk/rNO�J ors% Yu- W f(/J c80</

Ci
' nned e - 5na�clo, 5s�1, a v%8, no ay��a�nsic�o
9q°�a %
2CJ
-q TN
lays - /�T3
WT P Bz)ad C/I-P c.

a'
O/- !✓/�Sh
�ssccc &/47-Qs
rr
-�eeey
Pic-
73) - S� 8
733- Pe.3

J
d
E, MEMO
DATE:
I
TO: I I l-65 V SUBJECT:
1- Yt1ee h /a7 / R I wrW.
Co�nsal �nt� C Y,6�- of a-kv\v\ es aH cl�ed�
�oW 't v, W1 A Q-k Ce-f' Le cA DEY `5 C�Gk51 o V-
nc�k +0 0-lb-) an e,�rV601&. FaciI ji akro4 -�"rwt
0� 6+ocJ SKOW*IAevOeAu d!cNavF is wo+
�c i rtc� 0-0 'i v o-6 o � 4W &eeK Cu 6dA- +iJ y C!,Iu i ► ).
1 OL6
A0 NJ-L+ Lk ve is '� q a 4o4-u Vie CP= T- 41�
CI+ 5e-em 5 1 i .1 re Call 4W v—.4� V� t�4 9 0J060 - t6 (A."r°O�vi Ma GYVif5 -b m-u+ 4L �kvPe years- zem 'QbLo �o Cv-,
Q hf� VAC+ 40-kL-�GuSed ov,e e?c Mb" Mk - i+ wa s
ww recow I
�.�o►ud � A �ti J Carlo UP)
W ,Lv� 0K6ev64av0*
c'P "w��l lti 5t�� VOLVI TIT I "A", °.
From:
North Carolina Department of Environment
Health, and Natural Resources
���,. �1 a-mea oaxcynea PToe

TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
1-3-
YkU 4
—� C a vwz P cam; ` L 0. � v`i� � in cc �dJ
q � p v�R
��.. ���t� �� �-��.aec;t��.�
See ', cy�e COUI C� 05e t6
c'0K6'( -- 'iowS
1-� vv\'os sue COUId look cA 00 dok--Gi
C MO UCH l� KA) v nxc� o K ib e i
44-t a.+ rou ►v1- ,6 r\-u d ea d v 4 (2)cGAS i d tA-
aDO O Ise., 0,10w-e a
�(A
U Q
From: tfa
�e�srn�o'w
`-t=y North Carolina Department of Environment
A
r�- Health, and Natural Resources e3 Printed onReryeEPaper

baD s
It, H3 u
wcrsk^ slb l� l
f�pc/we5t
Ib
nu I ®v. LU (4

/ -14.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 15, 1991
Memorandum
To: Dale Overcash
From: Carla Sanderson'
Through: Ruth Swanek QC5
Trevor Clement
Subject: Washington WWTP Renewal
NPDES Permit No. NC0020648
Kennedy Creek, Beaufort County
The renewal of Washington's NPDES Permit for discharge into Kennedy Creek was
completed by Technical Support in August, 1990. In the renewal, two sets of
limits were given to the facility (one set applies to the 1st three years of the
permit and the other applies to the permit thereafter - see attached). I would
like to recommend a new toxicity limit and a compliance schedule for the metal
limits applied during the facility's renewal process.
The following are the recommendations to be included in the permit:
Toxicity:
Acute Toxicity Testing Requirement (Quarterly- Feb, May, Aug, & Nov)
Fathead Minnow 24 hr - No significant Mortality
Acute test will be in effect for one year, then chronic test at 99% as
written on the attached WLA form will be in effect.
Cadmium chromium nickel cyanide. & lead:
Monitoring will be required for 12 months, then limits as written on the
attached WLA form will be in effect.
Chlorine:
Monitoring for chlorine will be required for three years then a limit of
17 ug/l will be in effect.
The acute toxicity testing requirement is being issued for one year since it
appears that toxicity violations are coming from the high chlorine concentra-
tions in the effluent. Plans for the construction of a dechlorination unit for
the Washington WWTP have been sent to the Aquatic Toxicology Unit of the Envi-
ronmental Sciences Branch showing the City's efforts towards reducing chlorine
toxicity.
cc: Ken Eagleson
Roger Thorpe
Jule Shanklin

FarLt� 16t yeAr ahi-Otic 4e6i3
Facility Name ZI ld,5h ir?� /o Permit # 1L1e6DO,4*e
ACUTE TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QRTRLY)
Fathead Minnow 24 hr - No Significant Mortality
The permittee shall conduct acute toxicity tests on a gyarwrly basis using protocols defined in .the
North Carolina Procedure Document entitled "Pass/Fail Methodology For Determining Acute
Toxicity In A Single Effluent Concentration". The monitoring shall be performed as a Fathead
Minnow (Dime hales r melaD 24 hour static test, using effluent collected as a 24 hour
composite. The effluent concentration at which there may be at no time significant acute mortality
in any two consecutive toxicity tests is 90% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina
procedure document). Effluent samples for self -monitoring purposes must be obtained during
representative effluent discharge below all waste treatment. The first test will be performed after
thirty days. �m issuance of this permit during the months of Ph n a a A60. Ate
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 TGE6C., Additionally, DEM Form AT-2 (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 dosefresponse 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 either these monitoring requirements or tests performed by the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream,
this permit 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 noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q 10 cfs
Permitted Flow' I., MGD
IWC% !fib
Basin & Sub -Basin a363
Receiving Stream
County r�
Recommended by:
ro Op
tW7.
'vw.
PRIOnjo
**Acute Toxicity(Fathead Minnow 24hr) No Significant Mortality at 90%, af M, Ava _ Alby ,
See Part �, Condition X.
-0

V a-4
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
February 1, 1991
To: File
From: Carla Sanderson
Subject: Washington WWTP Relocation
NPDES Permit No NCO020648
Beaufort County
In July 1990, a wasteload allocation for the City of Washington WWTP's NPDES
permit renewal was completed by Technical Support. As part of the recommend-
ations for renewal, the facility was asked to remove the discharge from Kennedy
Creek or make renovations to the treatment plant to meet tertiary treatment lim-
its (limits of 5mg/1 BODS, 1mg/1 NH3N, and 6mg/l DO), including 99% toxicity
limit and WQ standards for all toxics involved in the discharge.
In response to the Draft permit, the City choose to hold a meeting with DEM to
discuss the newly recommended permit limits and an alternate location for dis-
charge. The City decided to investigate a relocation to the Tar River just
upstream of Kennedy Creek. Therefore this WLA request for modification of the
permit was submitted to Technical Support.
Attempts to model the discharge to the Tar River were made using the Georgia
estuary model framework. Since there are too many gaps in the input information
at this time to get an adequate simulation of the system, the model was not used
to produce limits for the relocation.
The Washington WWTP is currently achieving close to tertiary treatment. Since
the City plans to relocate without any major modification to the treatment
plant, Technical Support will issue limits of 10 mg/1 BODS, 2 mg/1 NH3N, and 5
mg/1 DO. At an average design wasteflow of 1.57 MGD the plant is currently
achieving the following limits:
(Yearly Average 12/89 through 11/90)
BODS (mg/1) NH3N (mg/1)
1.95 0.77
(Maximum Monthly Average 12/89 through 11/90)
3.0
4.85
NH3N is above 2.0 mg/l monthly average two times in this year. All other times
the monthly�,average is 1 mg/l or below for NH3N.

W 1*
Information gathered from the "Interim Review (June -November 1988) of Baseline
Water Quality Data From The Pamlico and Neuse River Estuaries", NC Dept. EH&NR,
DEM, Water Quality Section, is as follows:
The Pamlico River has numerous fill kills associated with ulcerative mycosis
(UM) (a disease associated with deep lesions). Research has yet to determine
the actual cause of the disease yet some support the theory that environmental
stresses such as organic enrichment and low DO contribute to UM.
Most algal blooms in the lower Pamlico occur during winter or late summer.
Anoxia & hypoxia (which are common in estuarine systems) seem to be increasing
in the Pamlico. Reports of summer algal blooms on the Pamlico have increased in
recent years (probably due to increased monitoring associated with the Albemar-
le -Pamlico study and increased interest by the local population)
Nitrogen samples taken in the Pamlico showed that the highest concentrations are
located in the river near Washington.
BODS averages for all samples taken in the Pamlico were found to be the highest
at the Pamlico R. station near Washington (mean = 5.4 mg/1). Phytoplankton Den-
sity (up to 80000 units/ml) and Chlorophyll -a (up to 160 ug/1) were aslo sampled
in the Pamlico and found to be the highest at the Washington Station. These
results are most likely caused by the algal blooms occurring in Kennedy Creek
Pamlico River @ Washington 02084472
Mean CHL_a - 84.0 ug/l
Mean'Biovolume = 7949 mm3/mm3
Mean Density = 27346 units/ml

a /9 5
Cck�h n� cvcv i
ap ,8y?�LdCl ),(-
AI C 5-01) Y7&'0 ahaA . Gua6 vsec1 ------- a_. C6 7h .
a� 60D �//a e 0- 5- � 1 � a/�
,flop o4r �/�C�P Byn
Vea+o,e.. /ytr, Sfu/ets �h�= _Da5�/rnx/c�
�j vg-qu aqrn L.P/� o_vIovU-s'1�
UPS'i 14 bU n k 47"
ZAV
66
_�r�.e 1Qr��_ b,Uf ,-n.o�e,C sfw, � _ -��_ do�a-v✓
so-2) - �v - i C)
�D__%Je-r 0'7

files. Ent A C80f cv tiJ&)o
��VGt..fi 8n
d
GU�s 1-�n ter, GUGv_T
=1 f to
ve lo C4,h�o,5�
6t5 v /. g, C/ g. 5
�a-;�
V =
--

Mir 4 �+
Iq t'4 m�
lehq q-k volmv -
a5o qv.q� y,3
a tio, v aaa. 0 �.
G-
oC . ivg�I
/crnp OV 6JAdj
C)50
�l•/S
8,S
d�a�
u�s•y�
�•�
a�
�ad0
/ 85Mi
(37bg `i.a
7gao -'4008.rl
I D
5oi[o d0.3(o.2
7
2 3 a�
/saw
isav
s
c-&
to
c..

cF -66crl ,a
P
1
q.'14. 75
Yni Gov 6 WLOT P
:
�a7
.o
_ _a_,
-- ) ► below -- varile V5 CY
3
1 ''
�i obd VJWT
I
_
_
pn bo v vV 1
lVvy
y `
)3, d&
aA O'bo v
S
38,31
�a m &'Co y' Coc j
cl
�,cZ Clrflc�w, w
-
-
CO) GCA �� f

Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * DO COMPS & RESULTS * * *
02-04-1991 9:12 am
SEG
DO SAT
DO SAT
******
DO, mg/l
*******
#
---------------------------------------------------
mg/l
Pred.
- Field
= Excess
---------------------------------------------------
1
7.93
57.6
4.57
0.00
4.57
2
7.92
77.1
6.11
0.00
6.11
3
7.81
85.0
6.64
0.00
6.64
4
8.08
85.4
6.90
0.00
6.90
5
7.79
84.5
6.58
0.00
6.58
6
7.77
83.4
6.48
0.00
6.48
7
7.76
81.6
6.33
0.00
6.33
8
7.74
74.9
5.79
0.00
5.79
9
7.71
60.9
4.69
0.00
4.69
10
7.70
54.6
4.21
0.00
4.21
NOTE: New APHA Equation used for DO Saturation.
Table represents the RUN ALL Menu Option.
Model File Name = WASHING
04 UKV j--YLP 5=
I sf/k/a�;"CA f' �5pi nm i n�
,�/�
V 960= 0
d o- 5

Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * DO COMPS & RESULTS * * *
02-03-1991
---------------------------------------------------
5:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------
SEG
DO SAT
DO SAT
******
DO, mg/l
*******
#
---------------------------------------------------
mg/l
%
Pred.
- Field
= Excess
---------------------------------------------------
1
7.92
58.0
4.60
0.00
4.60
2
7.92
80.8
6.40
0.00
6.40
3
7.81
86.6
6.76
0.00
6.76
4
8.08
86.7
7.00
0.00
7.00
5
7.78
85.6
6.66
0.00
6.66
6
7.77
84.2
6.54
0.00
6.54
7
7.75
82.1
6.36
0.00
6.36
8
7.73
75.1
5.81
0.00
5.81
9
7.71
60.9
4.70
0.00
4.70
I10
---------------------------------------------------
7.70
54.7
4.21
0.00
4.21
---------------------------------------------------
NOTE:
New APHA Equation
used for DO Saturation.
Table
represents
the RUN
ALL Menu
Option.
Model
File Name = WASHING
`i CC,4
Tt/O�
6 pU

Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991 52C8
Washington WWTP Relocation �(p
Permit Modification 1991
* *
* DO COMPS
& RESULTS
02-03-1991
---------------------------------------------------
3:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------
SEG
DO SAT
DO SAT
******
DO, mg/l
*******
#
---------------------------------------------------
mg/l
Pred.
- Field =
Excess
---------------------------------------------------
1
7.88
56.0
4.41
0.00
4.41
2
7.88
49.4
3.89
0.00
3.89
3
7.76
46.1
3.58
0.00
3.58
4
8.03
46.2
3.71
0.00
3.71
5
7.73
42.8
3.31
0.00
3.31
6
7.71
40.5
3.13
0.00
3.13
7
7.70
41.2
3.17
0.00
3.17
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
NOTE:
New APHA Equation
used for DO Saturation.
Table
represents
the RUN
ALL Menu
Option.
Model
File Name = PAMWASH
mc&/ r?
0.3
(4) 0.0*
(5)
(U) 0.aa
(-1) 0.at

660:v.6
Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
-5�Md`" l
* * * DO COMPS & RESULTS
01-24-1991 1:14 pm
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
SEG DO SAT DO SAT ****** DO, mg/l *******
# mg/l % Pred. - Field = Excess
/1 7.88 77.4 6.10 0.00 6.10
2 7.88 79.6 -6.27 0.00 6.27
3 7.76 70.4 5.46 0.00 5.46
4 8.03 67.5 5.42 0.00 5.42
5 7.73 63.0 4.87 0.00 4.87
6 7.71 56.5 4.36 0.00 4.36
7 7.70 51.9 4.00 0.00 4.00
---------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------
NOTE: New APHA Equation used for DO Saturation.
Table represents the RUN ALL Menu Option.
Model File Name = PAMWASH
sat� U I �j
a4, e-%� j-Lk tp.4
w
oZ = 1.IS
3= o• u3
b• Sa
rOV ,54- P&M 19 fUGV�)
�✓)tOt %2ti6j -vIe6

!,Ayyt �j u P
iD arct
Ma
e C. .) 1
o - - aC,�
o
OL T
C�! ' S
An /�.n,:
�0.3 .cam
b.1 -
V/10 aid
,� '1 a
a -`-��� - 3
° -
- �-
- ! • 6
It
6.-4-
og 09
`'�
���.
•l�
-
Io o�
1.3
`�
�6 �.�
o•
.D
�� o��a
11-•S_ -
tea
4� C). II
G �3 -
1p
gvlog
to
`j, 5 6 .► w -t ,r. �(, cln - to c a,-h cs-y
--
���
-
E
SIv
& '0.
-act- ---
-ate- -- ib.
.oak
�c� - -
--� - --- --�--
—
o�VA
QTO - - - 5.9
��- -- -
-�
U-
,T
CS .5
U
t„
vpD
--
- - -
-
- -
- -
,
7 / 4-
- -
- - -
-
-- -

.'(� rnoo C)� �BMac� G u �lav�
paw
166 D,-
�hlbeid1 erns d0
TIQ T f j EL
,WrKlyu 8`�
y-. o
a 8. 5 4-q
C3
0.5-
4 I
a�.3 �•�'
c a-
0.5
5.1
`]-5
v
0•5
-)oMTAJA
a75-
01
G
OL 7
0 1
0. �
a 8.0 4
05
0.7
S0MnU4 `alb
)36o Qq-o S,
04
aaoo Q°I•b �,�
�a
o-�
2 lod .3
o a
0
T
.y �
9•s
..
56-

Avt,.Uco and Feb. 90
ParfiLr- o 7�. has had nu✓twvs P6A - lls a�55o6&Lwtk
Olc M iee �nyco51s CZIWJ aC�4beG6e veSolbn !t, deep le ors.
Lauer p(krK E Aeu5e ate 5161oc 00l° 'leal4
5ha.1/oc) of wiC6 NIT G(1�5%i � 9 j( eu) 3evv�. OtLA 7 tree/ ,�Vo k-d,
Q (� l
Tl e6eamk. o rL L)yn (prr rV7ur, � 7UuhP/ Ae m
has yu� 6 de�cq✓x." 4�v acAva-i, oao5e
6UM14 -/IyLmrt q-Ac Pir�lire7trnen (��re55Ps SUcI� a5 �i�j
low D. 4. 100i um.
dlia5i hlow10 kll, huA" Pam ?c) occu✓ duel c�,,'�
g-u ro^" . Am-x ia_ Poxia- CCOM r�
1 s erem , v l
�e9hia� c�nA 5(l5,�rxoJ O/U VAZge)(-alu
vw l�c�n G'c� �v aho
lounde� `wur" Bnfv Shdre (ocv-e,4-'D.O.
bG Iwo CAZt-�dl
P
CUY hQ h�'
YYYcv �rVKPrv`�1 vrle�plat,zJ I(�k d 5ea5e) alvi
OXc yeti, haW heew dekc � In
Lr- F;W la L vw P - �-h)
LA J i) rd4-t,-�

Cvrte4skLtj
M4)Pk , hao IJA V nu a
wA blzrrto Oat&vwNv" j�D -j kw ,
�un,�zn� an�e�t0
of US �IGcJ� 77 vvL RAoh-+npc ct>c Qtt- azAmac�e
e .Aui
rn�
,5+A.;h lrr #
ORO8g4a 7_ Porn& -co @ Rh5h,'Tu',�56 ydo p `>`5rnek/�o
�1(owp�.i�-a Cffnc.¢�n•hr.�,e-no �,er�-�Y�G O�B�an-��u-� f"
nvYlCfec{ err 34 -fo cMrytgzl
f yt 7�r� y o-w pa- Lcz -wao a 5. 3 °C
@
SUrfu"-A J.od na r �, , ra.q -�v 3.-1rn.Y/
L I A i - A(0U /0 5f o✓� #Daof�y4 �a
nudi" 9,5 75�, L�° 10.5 a5�"= 7.S 1d = 5•� s6 "-/a Y

wjc o''
e.--
` t,a0 ` i a: N 3 v = q�l, q1 �
`'l ly `� 5a' v_a• �y
so�t ��y�-: bolo p
V
_
d.. L,$' V `31�.oa
ti , 0c) ��
�,5� v= 113.69 nR�
�.� 8 D 3s°
t c,�, ,�- ;,o
c,v
./ ark 5ech UP - -
rd ws, 1��0
.-
s1 sec-hzr w= 11-DO
_
o d = •�' A=13•av�'s�
�-�►�- sec hom ii.i c
6 -ci •ti• 4 1 f-5�
VA
�vnyo�

t m J-5�
j = j Y=
8.3 V =
7 �i=3q,l3+s�
AT U5."I ts�
A= 3%lUt4

i
` e YYZ-aw �vn�
Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
(w �G}u' , r\'D D
DO COMPS
& RESULTS
01-24-1991
0:13 pm
SEG
DO SAT
DO SAT
******
DO, mg/l
*******
j'#
mg/1
%
Pred.
- Field =
Excess
=-=1-----7.79----77.2-------6.01-----0.00-----6.01
7.79
79.4
6.18
0.00
6.18
<2
3
7.58
69.4
5.26
0.00
5.26
4
7.83
66.2
5.18
0.00
5.18
5
7.54
61.4
4.63
0.00
4.63
6
7.50
54.4
4.08
0.00
4.08
7
7.48
49.7
3.72
0.00
3.72
---------------------------------------------------
NOTE:
New APHA Equation
used for DO Saturation.
Model
Table represents
File Name = PAMWASH
the RUN
ALL Menu
Option.

WW v
Georgia Esturary Model ,gp))s = 16
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * DO COMPS & RESULTS
Q1-24-1991 1:55 pm
7 -----
SEG DO SAT DO SAT ****** DO, mg/l *******
# mg/l Pred. - Field = Excess
---------------------------------------------------
1 7.88 77.7 6.12 0.00 6.12
2 7.88 84.5 6.66 0.00 6.66
3 7.78 82.1 6.39 0.00 6.39
4 8.05 80.7 6.50 0.00 6.50
5 7.76 78.2 6.07 0.00 6.07
A4se5
-- 6 7.73 71.6 5.54 0.00 5.54
0 7.71 61.4 4.74 0.00 4.74
---------------------------------------------------
INOTE: New APHA Equation used for DO Saturation.
Table represents the RUN ALL Menu Option.
Model File Name = PAMWASH

I engMendl
t;v6e Ugmer4
Georgia Esturary Model
6 e06n da , /tl o d
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* *
* DO COMPS
& RESULTS
01-24-1991
1:51 pm
SEG
DO SAT
DO SAT
******
DO, mg/l
*******
#
mg/1
Pred.
- Field
= Excess
---------------------------------------------------
1
7.88
77.4
6.10
0.00
6.10
2
7.88
79.8
6.29
0.00
6.29
3
7.78
79.9
6.22
0.00
6.22
4
8.05
78.9
6.36
0.00
6.36
5
7.76
76.6
5.95
0.00
5.95
�-- 6
7.73
70.7
5.47
0.00
5.47
(-.7
---------------------------------------------------
7.71
61.1
4.71
0.00
4.71
---------------------------------------------------
NOTE:
New APHA Equation
used for DO Saturation.
Table
represents
the RUN
ALL Menu
Option.
,Model
File Name = PAMWASH

Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * SEGMENT TRANSPORT MATRIX * * *
01-24-1991 0:06 pm
SEG
A(i-1)
(A(i) ]
A(i)+Vk
A(i+1)
#
MGD
MGD
MGD
MGD
--------------------------------------------------
1
-----
73.5
114.0
-5.9
2
-83.3
89.5
181.6
-4.0
3
-83.6
757.6
888.7
-674.0
4
-753.5
1788.0
1819.6
-1034.5
5
-1114.0
1753.6
1787.2
-639.6
6
-719.1
1620.1
1817.1
-901.0
7
-980.5
1904.2
2547.0
-----
The TRI-DIAGONAL MATRIX for CBODu.
Model File Name = PAMWASH

Georgia Esturary Model
Tar/Pamlico River: January 1991
Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * SEGMENT TRANSPORT MATRIX * * *
01-24-1991
11:48 am
--------------------------------------------------
SEG
A(i-1)
[A(i) ]
A(i)+Vk
A(i+1)
#
MGD
MGD
MGD
MGD
---i------
-------73.5------114.0--------5.9--
-----
2
-83.3
89.5
181.6
-4.0
3
-83.6
757.6
888.7
-674.0
4
-753.5
1788.0
1819.6
-1034.5
5
-1114.0
1753.6
1787.2
-639.6
6
-719.1
1620.1
1817.1
-901.0
7
-980.5
1904.2
2547.0
-----
--------------------------------------------------
The TRI-DIAGONAL
MATRIX for
CBODu.
Model
File Name
= PAMWASH
'Georgia Esturary Model
ITar/Pamlico River: January 1991
'Washington WWTP Relocation
Permit Modification 1991
* * * SEGMENT TRANSPORT MATRIX * * *
01-24-1991 11:48 am
SEG
A(i-1)
[A(i) ]
A(i)+Vk
A(i+1)
#
MGD
MGD
MGD
MGD
1
-----
73.5
123.8
-5.9
2
-83.3
89.5
203.9
-4.0
3
-83. 6
757.6
920.6
-674.0
4
-753.5
1788.0
1824.9
-1034.5
5
-1114.0
1753.6
1795.4
-639.6
6
-719.1
1620.1
1864.8
-901.0
7
-980.5
1904.2
2703.0
-----
The TRI-DIAGONAL MATRIX for NBODu.
Model File Name = PAMWASH

r
O1/30/91 ver 3.1
Facility:
NPDES Permit No.:
Statue (E$ P, or M):
Permitted Flow:
Actual Average Flow:
Subbasln:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
7010:
INC:
Stn'd / Bkq
Pollutant AL Cone.
(ug/1) WWI)
--------- -- -------- -------
Cadmium S 2.0
Chromium S 50.0
Copper AL 7.0
Nickel S 88.0
Lead S 25.0
l Zinc AL 50.0
y Cyanide S 5.0
Mercury S 0.012
Silver AL 0.06
Selenium S 5.00
Arsenic S 50.00
Phenols S NA
NH3-N C
T.R.Chlor.AL 17.0
Pollutant
Cadmium 9
Chromium S
Copper AL
Nickel S
Lead S
Zinc AL
.k. Cyanide S
Mercury S
Silver AL
Selenium S
Arsenic S
Phenols S
NH3-N C
T.R.Chlor.AL
City of Washington
NC0020648
M
2.1 mgd
1.5 mgd
'030307
Tar River
C-NSW
120.0 efs
2.67 s
Removal Domestic
Eff. Load
t (4/d)
92% 0.0
761, 0.6
821 0.7
324 0.2
Bit 0.6
774 2.0
59% 0.0
04
94% 0.1
0%
04
04
04
04
------------ ALLOWABLE PRDCT'D
Effluent Effluent
Cone. using
Allowable CHRONIC ACTUAL
Load Criteria Influent
(4/d) (ug/1) (ug/1)
16.49
75.037
0.195
137.40
1875.928
10.721
25.65
262.630
9.888
85.35
3301.634
13.070
86.70
937.964
8.495
143.37
1875.928
36.879
8.04
187.593
0.032
0.01
0.450
0.000
0.66
2.251
0.289
3.30
187.593
0.000
32.9E
1875.928
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
637.816
T 0 X I C S R E V I E W
I--------- PRETREATMENT DATA ------------- I ---- EFLLUENT DATA---- I
I
ACTUAL
PERMITTEDI
I
I
Ind. +
Ind. + I
FREQUENCY I
I
Domestic
PERMITTED
Domestic I
OBSERVED
of Chronic)
Act.Ind.
Total
Industrial
Total I
Effluent
Criteria I
Load
Load
Load
Load I
Cone.
Violational
(f/d)
(4/d)
(i/d)
(}/d) I
(ug/1)
(Rvio/tsam) 1
--------
0.0
-------
0.03
_________
0.0
------- I
0.039 1
________
--------- I
1
0.0
0.56
0.7
1.230 1
I 1
0.0
0.69
0.4
1.040 1
I N
0.0
0.24
0.2
0.410 I
I P
0.0
0.56
0.1
0.646 I
I U
0.1
2.02
0.4
2.370 1
I T
0.0
0.00
0.2
0.180 I
I
I S
0.0
0.06
0.0
0.094 1
I E
I C
I T
I
1
I O
I
I
3,000.0
I N
I
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
I
I
--------- MONITOR/LIMIT ---------
I
I
1--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S--
Effluent
Instream
I Recomm'd
using
Cone.
Based on
Based on
Based on
I FREQUENCY INSTREAM I
PERMIT
using
ACTUAL
PERMITTED
OBSERVED
1 Eff. Mon. Monitor. I
Influent
OBSERVED
Influent
Influent
Effluent
1 based on Recomm'd 7 I
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
Loading
Loading
Data
I OBSERVED (YES/NO) I
0.247
0.00
________
________
__---- - ________
I A
23.397
0.00
Monitor
I N
14.837
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I I A
22.098
0.00
I 1 L
9.728
0.00
Monitor
I Y
43.204
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I S
5.849
0.00
Monitor
I
0.000
0.00
I S
0.447
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I
0.000
0.00
I 1 R
0.000
0.00
E
0.000
0.00
I I S
0.00
I I U
79.96
Limit
I NCAC YES I L
I T
S
I
,% Cana (y 6'(6 wi4 �ioo4 Q-ovna6-h (- "u)f v )uE

O1/29/91 ver 3.1
Facility:
NPDES Permit No.:
Status (E, P, or M):
Permitted Flow:
Actual Average Flow:
Subbasin:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
7Q10:
IWC:
Stn'd / BKg
Pollutant AL Cone.
(ug/1) (ug/1)
---------
Cadmium
-- --------
S
2.0
Chromium
S
50.0
Copper
AL
7.0
Nickel
S
08.0
Lead
S
25.0
Zino
AL
50.0
Cyanide
S
5.0
Mercury
S
0.012
Silver
AL
0.06
Selenium
S
5.00
Arsenic
S
50.00
Phenols
S
NA
NH3-N
C
T.R.Chlor.AL
17.0
Pollutant
Cadmium S
Chromium S
Copper AL
Nickel S
Lead S
Zinc AL
Cyanide S
Mercury S
Silver AL
Selenium S
Arsenic S
Phenols S
NH3-N C
T.R.Chlor.AL
i�
Allowable
Load
(//d)
16.49
137.40
25.65
85.35
06.78
143.37
8.04
0.01
0.66
3.30
32.98
T 0% I C S R E V I E W
City of Washington
NC0020648
M
2.1
mgd
1.5
mgd
'030307
Tar River
I---------
PRETREATMENT DATA -------------- I ---- EFLLUENT DATA---- I
C-NSW
I
ACTUAL
PERMITTEDI
I
120.0
cfs
I
Ind. +
Ind. + I
FREQUENCY 1
2.67
t
I
Domestic
PERMITTED
Domestic I
OBSERVED
of Chronicl
Removal
Domestic
Act.Ind.
Total
Industrial
Total I
Eflluent
Criteria I
Eff.
Load
Load
Load
Load
Load I
Cone.
Vlolationsl
#
---- ---
(i/d)
--------
(4/d)
--------
(4/d)
-----
(i/d)
(;/d) I
(ug/1)
(9v1o/4eam)1
92%
0.0
0.0
--
0.03
-- --- --
0.0
-------- I
0.039 I
--------
---- ---- I
1
76%
0.6
0.0
0.56
0.7
1.230 I
1 I
02%
0.7
0.0
0.69
0.4
1.040 1
I N
324
0.2
0.0
0.24
0.2
0.410 I
1 P
81%
0.6
0.0
0.56
0.1
0.646 I
1 U
77%
2.0
0.1
2.02
0.4
2.370 I
I T
59%
0.5
0.0
0.46
0.2
0.640 1
I
06
1
I S
94%
0.1
0.0
0.06
0.0
0.094 1
I E
0%
I C
0%
I T
0%
I 1
0%
I
0
0%
I
I
3,000.0
N
I
ALLOWABLE
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
1
--------- MONITOR/LIMIT ----- ---
I
1--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S-- I
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent
Instream
I Recomm'd I
Cone,
using
using
Cone.
Based on
Based on
Based on
I FREQUENCY INSTREAM I
CHRONIC
ACTUAL
PERMIT
using
ACTUAL
PERMITTED
OBSERVED
I Eff. Non. Monitor. I
Criteria
Influent
Influent
OBSERVED
Influent
Influent
Effluent
I based on Recomn'd 7 I
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
jug/1)
(ug/1)
Loading
Loading
Data
I OBSERVED (YES/NO) I
-------
75.037
---------
0.195
--------
0.247
--------
0.00
--------
--------
---------I
----------------- I
I I A
1875.928
10.721
23.397
0.00
Monitor-
I I N
262.630
9.888
14.837
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I I A
3301.634
13.070
22.090
0.00
I I L
937.964
8.495
9.728
0.00
Monitor
I Y
1875.928
36.879
43.204
0.00
Mbnitor
Monitor
I I S
187.593
14.981
20.798
0.00
Monitor
Limit,
I I I
0.450
0.000
0.000
0.00
I I S
2.251
0.289
0.447
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I I
187.593
0.000
0.000
0.00
I R
1875.928
0.000
0.000
0.00
I E
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
I I S
0.000
0.00
I I U
637.816
79.96
Limit
I NCAC YES I L
T
S
CA- U MA 5 �)D I- 6 yL D Ut rY J-T
M-1yVV -w v;
hpt'Ab-I � 4V
Vq

01/29/91 ver3.1 T 0 X I C S R E V I EW
Facility: City of Washington
NPDES Permit No.: NCO020648
Status (E, P, or M) : M
Permitted Flaw: 2.1 mgd
Actual Average Flaw: 1.5 mgd
Subbasin: 1030307
Receiving Stream: Tar River I-------- PRETREATMENT DATA ------------- I----EFLLUENT DATA---- I
Stream Classification: C-NSW I ACTUAL PERMITTEDI I
7Q10: 120.0 cfs I Ind. + Ind. + I FREQUENCY I
IWC: 2.67 I I Domestic PERMITTED Domestic I OBSERVED of Chronicl
Stn'd / BIkIq I Removal Domestic Act.Ind. Total Industrial Total I Eflluent Criteria I
Pollutant AL Cc 0. J Eff. Load Load Load Load Load I Conc. Violationsl
(ug/1) (ug/1) I It (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) I (ug/1) (#vio/#sam)l
--------- ------- ----------- J-------- -------- --- --- ------------------- -------- I -------- --------- I
Cadmium S 2.0 I 92% 0.0 0.0 0.03 0.0 0.039 I
Chromium S 50.0 I 76% 0.6 0.0 0.56 0.7 1.230 I I I
Copper AL 7.0 I 821a 0.7 0.0 0.69 0.4 1.040 I I N
Nickel S 88.0 1 324r 0.2 0.0 0.24 0.2 0.410 I I P
Lead S 25.0 I 81% 0.6 0.0 0.56 0.1 0.646 I I U
Zinc AL 50.0 I 77?k 2.0 0.1 2.02 0.4 2.370 1 I T
Cyanide S 5.0 I 59% 0.5 0.0 0.46 0.2 0.640 I I
Mercury S 0.012 I 0% I I S
Silver AL 0.06 I 94% 0.1 0.0 0.06 0.0 0.094 I I E
Selenium S 5.00 I 0$ I I C
Arsenic S 50.00 J 096 I I T
Phenols S NA J 0$ I ( I
NH3-N C I 0$ I ( 0
T.R.Chlor.AL 17.0 I 09 J 3,000.0 I N
I I
I I
I I I
1--------------- ALLOWABLE PRDCT'D PRDCT'D PRDCT'D-------- MONITOR/LIMIT -------- I--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S--
I Effluent Effluent Effluent Instream I Recomm'd
1 Conc. using using Conc. Based on Based on Based on I FREQUENCY INSTREAM
I Allowable CHRONIC ACTUAL PERMIT using ACTUAL PERMITTED OBSERVED I Eff. Mon. Monitor.
Pollutant I Load Criteria Influent Influent OBSERVED Influent Influent Effluent I based on Recomm'd ?
I (#/d) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) Loading Loading Data I OBSERVED (YES/NO)
--------- -- I --- ------ ----------------- -------- ---------------------------------I-----------------
Cadmium S ( 16.49 75.037 0.195 0.247 0.00 I
Chromium S I 137.40 1875.928 10.721 23.397 0.00 Monitor I
Copper AL I 25.65 262.630 9.888 14.837 0.00 Monitor Monitor I
Nickel S I 85.35 3301.634 13.070 22.098 0.00 I
Lead S ( 86.II78 937.964 8.495 9.728 0.00 Monitor I
Zinc AL I 143.37 1875.928 36.879 43.204 0.00 Monitor Monitor I
Cyanide S I 8.04 187.593 14.981 20.798 0.00 Monitor Limit I
Mercury S I 0.01 0.450 0.000 0.000 0.00 I
Silver AL ( 0.66 2.251 0.289 0.447 0.00 Monitor Monitor 1
Selenium S I 3.30 187.593 0.000 0.000 0.00 I
Arsenic S I 32II98 1875.928 0.000 0.000 0.00 I
Phenols S J 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 I
NH3-N C I 0.000 0.00 I
T.R.Chlor.AL I 637.816 79.96 Limit I NCAC YES
I
I
,Uv\&�Ov- U 'vwi4- Mawi{av���1 be vecuidCcvde - to U
(v�u� �as�l prrY-�eeovwIV
ova. Qom6+;c UA�0,.04 604cA. ,q.156 qW wlowaW wouwl'
� 5 t0 U IM 0
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I A
IN
I A
I L
IY
IS
I I
I S
I
I R
IE
IS
IU
I L
IT
IS
I

�GrimeSlund
u,6 &:5 Flocs) oc&
Tar F
Trm kr5 Cr
lxherna�ic o0-r /paws �'Co 'vex
`74 AJ lo%tA9r - lxo�
Vd�Jfi1NV701V

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Mardn, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
October 8, 1990
Mr. Russell Waters
Director of Public Works
City of Washington
P.O. Box 1988
Washington, N.C. 27889
Subject: NPDES Draft Permit No. NCO020648
City of Washington WWTP
Beaufort County
Dear Mr. Waters,
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
I am responding to your letter sent September 17, 1990 to Mr. Dale Overcash
concerning the subject draft NPDES permit for the City of Washington. The draft
sent to The City of Washington August 31, 1990, was for renewal of the existing
permit (discharge location in Kennedy Creek) without modification. An applica-
tion for modification (relocation to the Tar River) was received by the Division
of Environmental Management (DEM) on September 4, 1990.
The Technical Support Branch is in the process of review for the relocation to
the Tar River. The City of Washington will be sent a separate draft permit for
notice when this review is complete.
The current discharge location for the City of Washington is in Kennedy Creek,
therefore, upstream and downstream monitoring samples are needed in the Creek.
Since the City is considering a relocation of the discharge, the permit for
renewal will be held until the relocation to the Tar River is evaluated. If the
City receives a permit for a discharge to the Tar River, and subsequently com-
mits to the relocation, the permit renewal will reflect the downstream sampling
location at the HWY 17 bridge. If the Tar River is not found to be an option
for the discharge, then the permit will maintain the requirement for instream
sampling at the mouth of Kennedy Creek.
Please contact me at [phone] if you have any further questions or
comments concerning this matter.
Sinc ely,�
J. Trevor Clements,
!�Asst. Chief
a er Quality Section
JTCA�
cc: Dale Overcash
Jim Mulligan
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Frnjal nnnnminiw AFir tiw Artinn Fmnln r

iWVV
iaai a..•
i �
LJO—+ JV
September 17, 1990
Mr. Dale Overcash, NPDES Permits Group
NC Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Subject: INPDES Draft Permit No. NCO020648
Comments pertaining to Draft Permit
Dear Mr. Overcash:
The City of Washington staff has reviewed the NPDES Draft
Permit (NC0020648) and have the following comments that we feel
are unjust for our wastewater treatment requirements.
i '
At a: meeting in the DEM Washington Regional Office, July 3,
1990, we discussed at length the need to move our discharge line
from Kennedy Creek to the Tar River due to the 7 Q 10 flow of
Kennedy Creek, but the draft permit requirements we received are
the same for the Tar River as Kennedy Creek. If the City of
Washington moved the discharge line into the Tar River, then the
effluent limitations for Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at
99% for the Tar River seems to be too much protection since we
will have',the added cost of Tertiary Treatment estimated to be
$1.2 million.
Also; the added downstream sample location at the mouth of
Kennedy Creek would require us to buy a boat and be very time
consuming. The Highway 17 Bridge sample location will give the
affects of our effluent if we discharge to the Tar River;
therefore; the Kennedy Creek sample location will not be needed.
CITY OF WASHINGTON - , P. O. BOX 1988 - WASHINGTON, N. C. 27889
C9191 946-1033

Page 2
Mr. Overcash
September;17, 1990
The City of Washington is committed to continue treating
its wastewater to the most contaminate removal rate possible
with its existing treatment process. If the proposed NPDES
Draft Permit requirements are -mposed upon the City of Washington,
we see nog benefit to move the discharge into the Tar River.
If wecanprovide additional information, please let me
know.
Sincerely,
�f
G
Russell Waters
Director of Public Works
RW/tb
PC: Roger'Thorpe, DEM-Washington

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section
September 19, 1990
MEMORANDUM
To:
Dale Overcash
�
Thorpe P-Y4v
0•^
Through:
Roger
From:
Kevin H. Miller
Re:
Revision to Draft ermit
City of Washington WWTP
Beaufort County
NC0020648
In a memo dated 9/6/90, Jule Shanklin requested either an
updated staff report or addenda regarding the revision to
the above -referenced draft permit with respect to relocation
of the discharge. The staff report dated 4/17/90 remains
substantially correct. Please amend the report as follows.
1. The City proposes to relocate the discharge within the
next three years from Kennedy Creek to the Tar River per
the attached map and outfall profile. The map is an
enlargement of a section of the USGS 7.5 minute
quadrangle "Washington, NC."
Location of proposed discharge:
Latitude: 35° 32' 48" N
Longitude: 77° 04' 46" W
2. Since the City has agreed to relocate the discharge, it
seems to be no longer appropriate to apply zero -flow
stream policy requirements. However, it is recommended
that the permit include a condition requiring the City to
complete the discharge relocation within three years of
the date of permit issue.
It is our understanding that the permit will be drafted to
include limits for the existing Kennedy Creek discharge as
well as revised limits for the proposed Tar River discharge.
The revised limits will be based on a modified wasteload
allocation that accounts for the differences between the Tar
River and Kennedy Creek in stream flow and assimilative
capacity.
Attachments
IN

•,,, _ � - -- _cam. �:.,.. � .�. 1• -_ -� -N,• , . •� \ �~� �` `\�� \� � • '�
7n6 or
Ito
�h. A #or
_ • f • • ♦•A • • ♦ I •.. • •
-••:�•• `�+� - ;-b- _ ��� 1— =•�'JrI �-- Wit, ,i, .t. •,- .J 'r \ ♦ ♦• • • ♦• •w O / 1 Jt ♦ • i�• � ♦ • • • •,•� i • , •.
to
Z.
s
4!2—
' 'bt ACr'J'�• r�' 1 •
No
J•
IN-
6)oo
`�— . FOUL
—_; _^ ,' Gam• Atlantic (C) 'A % -
_ l g
-_ __=�,u� - -9•• Daybeacons --o--- le , ♦'•. \ •,,,
ppifin
'— {tr- _ .,Ili I _ •• • ... - '•• •••., •••.•••• "N� \
11-y,1r� _.Il., ,,►r, ` jtf:��• ,y�,j�•-' c,''—..!�::— .._r'' .. f,.•.:.. •,1,,• ,/ ••, \ `�,'• City •`.
J.
- .till.. -'� ,.•Ir. �� . � •_ - -- - .,4r' . - • .. ' _.,.- -•-- .. ., � ... ri % I • I \ \ • ,
N No
.• (r_ ..._-- �\,a - J!.' • �_ iJt... • .. ,'a•• --1 ... r�l•1 •'la .. . - ,,Ir. • ..Ir. � • ' • \ � \ �.
i. �, 1 ,i, 1 fly r. .� 'i1 A. �'� ; — •`ra -y Castle (C) �1 �.
. / r1
•'' Ab. ,• • ' .. ' 1 •' 11 ,S - w'•' l 6 / L ' 111 , , -�• r SSS \\\
..to \ r/fyY•'I
.. ........ . .. ...............................

J0e Q`- ����`Q� 1/A 1 �i'o ✓E'-�ienfs
���INC.
'.RIVERS & ASSOCI ��:S, �•' � OF . �
En Ineers/Planners/Surveyors SHEET NO.
I07 E. 2nd Street P.O. Box 929 CALCUEEalTEO 8Y
GREENVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 278"� 'DATE - 1
35
CHECKED BY DATE
SCALE
? ;
......_........__........ ? ...... E ..... 5..........f....—..» ....._._..__.._.__......__�........_......................_..........�_...................�...... ......
..........
E
i
ii..........i.................................._........_---.....__.._..__._.._-_........:..........._.._....?......_.._..........I............................_._.......
.._................. i
....... _...._................i.................................................. .......
1� _ -
i
t i E i 1 .. .. ..... ......... .. ...
. i
E..... • --.... ... ! .„_w_......
........ ......
...... .... : ............ «w....i....._...:..-��y .A� .�«.�._.....«�._..._. _..[.» ....__ ......
? :
E _ i E ! i i i 'tom ; ♦`1 I s i
i f �_ , , i __ �—i�� ( � ._. I T. ice«--:_..._{_ , i- i• - i '--••-�_• �i - ..»_
.......
• ....
t
j ? e ; E + � I? i i i � i i �••� i +
. iIN t
-17
t i }
i r E e E E ...... ..... _._..j.........i_- _.�._—=___ i _. _ . _ _ ...... �..... _.
:
........... ........... ;..... ._i _.......
.._....._.......»..._�.. _....._. _ _ , ;....... i ..........--
..................... 13
„=--........!.......... ._....._............ E. _
—�. e
-- ;- E j i i• -' "yam x - •�{•• ! , 1 4--
s
__.. •.__.� �� y` •...... ..... 3 .._. :• ...... .-_.... .._.. . �.. .�.. E •.� ;
V • fi E i
..................' .... ... _. ..... _ ...... _ w.—._...__.. _...._- .. ..........{ ..
i? .__Q._.__--_......................_....... ........«..........?........... _......... �... _...
__.......__............................ i
r}- I.. 1.......__ ._.......
.. _...ice... '.. .•�.„�. __.. V .. ... ....„ ............... _.......... .......... ...... ....... ..... �. ........ ........._._....... 1
i
f
�.. r i
,
i E i ...... E ......�....._ _.....:..... _............. _.{...... _... ...........
......___._»_.„_....
:
........ _._........ i ................... { ....._ _». ---...
....... ...............__...._.. ...... ....... .__.. _..... T..._—_ ..__.—_._.... .. .i........ _. ............... ....-.........
.._—....... -........... .................................... .....„.
E o i
N E
+ 3 s t
1. 1
"om, 7 ZS46E�E?k Gaoa ".a 4"% L C,.+ HOE mu "a Hs--sao

9/6/90
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Roger Thorpe
FROM: Jule Shank in
SUBJECT: Washington W TP Upgrade (13.5->Tar)
NC0020648
Beaufort County
In lieu of an acknowledgement letter, I am hereby requesting either an
updated Staff Report or the necessary addenda to apply the in-house Staff
Report to the ongoing modification noted above. Please note the attached
tracking slip.
I
1�f r
10 � �`"r� ���`�Jr�•� l�
f
1

REQUE PIES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
DRAFT..
PERMIT NO.: NCO020648
PERMITTEE NAME: The City of Washington / Washington WWTP
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major -4 Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity:
2.12 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow):
Industrial (% of Flow):
Comments:
3.4* %
* See attached Pretreatment Form
STREAM INDEX: 28-104 PLOTTEI
RECEIVING STREAM: Kennedy Creek
Class: C-NSW
Sub -Basin: 03-03-07
Referee USGS Quad: E30SE, Washington (please attach)
County: Beaufort
Regional Office: Washington Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 9/30/90 Treatment Plant Class: IV
Classification changes within three miles:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
W 6 U YwA-e'r
Jule Shanklin
(�) i a (a3.1j
Date: 3/26/90
Date: 0
Date: b a -
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
CMS
3 Z!o qo
543q
Drainage Area (miZ) �) rtk_i a' Avg. Streamflow (cfs):
W 7Q10 (cfs) J tC cd Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 30Q2 (cfs)
Toxicity Limits: TWC _qCL % Acute4hronic
Instream Monitoring:
Upstream Location X
Downstream f Location
,a) LA
R(J C-Ou- ovvw
xb!.61tKenned 1
�LLMK4 Kenne� (A
Effluent
Characteristics
14-*-rnroe years
5OVK wi 1
Vine ytur3
vw/Wlw`
BOD5 (mg/1)
J 5
5 ] 0
NH3-N (mg/1)
Al
D.O. (mg/1)
5
LP
TSS (mg/1)
3 0
3 0
F. Col. (1100 ml)
006
ann
pH (SU)
T. h0 05 /1
(Mower
o2
rn, Cu /
a
05nfflium t&O
50
E O
Ali cite1(u34
8$
$g
cps\icu Cuyl)
5
5
Lead tog/I)
05
a5
E4+1uenf vnolxk-tar;n� +brCoPpai V n(345;(yet
F�L&Uj ML6f 6Vbmi+a"enyy1*neeri r r+u)i�i'hitl la mo0b
6 hOW; nc -n6 aJ-44- l A*6J e�e�sdgaAq e

N
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
July 5, 1990
TO: Trevor Clements
Technical Services
?Watiter FROM. Roger K. Thorpe, Quality Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
SUBJECT: Wasteload Allocation
City of Washington
Beaufort County
Attached is the signed wasteload allocation for the City of Washington. As we
discussed at our meeting on July 3, 1990, with the City, a wasteload allocation
for a discharge directly to the Tar River should be developed and shared with
the City. Also, the chronic toxicity test should be included on both Kennedy
Creek wasteload forms.
RKT:ekw
Attachment
R I P ED
J U L a 1990
TEC rt VAi. ITCV BRANCH

Request No.: 5639
------------------ WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM -------------------
Facility Name: The City of Washington
NPDES No.: NCO020648 RECEIVED
Type of Waste: 96.6% domestic / 3.4% Industrial WASHINGTON OFFICE
Facility Status: Existing JUN 1 21990
Permit Status: Renewal
Receiving Stream: Kennedy Creek
Classification: C-NSW b.E.M.
Subbasin: 030307 Drainage area: sq mi
County: Beaufort Summer 7Q10: 0.00 cfs
Regional Office: Waro Winter 7Q10: cfs
Requestor: Jule Shanklin Average flow: cfs
Date of Request: 3/26/90 30Q2: 0.00 cfs
Quad: E30SE
------------------- RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS --------------------------
Proposed Limits
Mon Ave (winter) Dal Max
Wasteflow (mgd): 2.12 Cadmium (ug/1): 2.0
BOD5 (mg/1): 15 Chromium (ug/1): 50.0
NH3N (mg/1): 4 Nickel (ug/1): 88.0
DO (mg/1): 5 Lead (ug/1): 25.0
TSS (mg/1): 30 Cyanide (ug/1): 5.0
pH (su): 6-9 Copper Monitor
Fecal Coliform (/100ml): 200 zinc Monitor
Silver Monitor
Toxicity Testing Req.. "_ '" I `' '^.__ `' ty > v. P4A da,e,,,,d 4e,
dtt .,It 4 A", ho
---------------------------- MONITORING fee -^------------------a
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: above discharge on Kennedy Creek
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: 1) below discharge at mouth of Kennedy
2) on Pamlico River at HWY 17
----------------------------- COMMENTS ------------------------------------
Recommend instream monitoring for D.O., conductivity, tempeaiture, and
fecal coliform. Recommend removal of discharge to zero flow stream.
Instream monitoring requirements will be dropped when facility agrees,
in writing to a schedule for removal of the point source discharge. k1`'
Facility must submit an engineering report within 12 months showing *VA
no alternative to discharge.
New limits imposed since discharge is causing noxious effects to the creek
and facility can meet more stringent limits. 3fiatiestt " -'� s "-� ^PG ary
SEE ATTACHED FOR LIMITS TO MEET IN THREE YEARS.
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment:
t'regional Supervisor:
Permits & Engineering:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY: JUL 05 1990
Date:
E 1/o/co
Date:
q p
Date:
Date:

Request No.: 5639
WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM -------------
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Quad:
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
pH (su) :
Fecal Coliform (/100ml):
T. Phosphorus (mg/1):
T. Nitrogen (mg/1):
Toxicity Testing Req.:
Upstream (Y/N): Y
Downstream (Y/N): Y
The City of Washington
NCO020648
96.6% domestic
/ 3.4% Industrial
Existing
Renewal
Kennedy Creek
C-NSW
030307
Drainage
area:
sq mi
Beaufort
Summer
7Q10:
0.00 cfs
Waro
Winter
7Q10:
cfs
Jule Shanklin
Average
flow:
cfs
3/26/90
30Q2:
0.00 cfs
E30SE
MENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS --------------------------
Limits to meet in 3 years
Mon Ave (winter) Dal Max
2.12 Cadmium (ug/1): 2.0
5 (10) Chromium (ug/1): 50.0
1 (1.8) Nickel (ug/1): 88.0
6 Lead (ug/1): 25.0
30 Cyanide (ug/1): 5.0
6-9 Copper Monitor
200 Zinc Monitor
2 Silver Monitor
4 (8)
6ee&4.k l o)
-- MONITORING -----------------------------------
Location: above discharge on Kennedy Creek
Location: 1) below discharge at mouth of Kennedy
2) on Pamlico River at HWY 17
--- COMMENTS ------------------------------------
Recommend instream monitoring for D.O., conductivity, temperature, and
fecal coliform.
Nutrient limits are necessary since algal blooms are evident above and
below the discharge.
Facility will not be able to apply for non -point source sharing program
for the Tar -Pam River Basin due to nutrient problems in Kennedy Creek,
which are assumed to be caused from this discharge, are a localized problem
If the discharge is piped to the Pamlico River, then this facility may
apply for the program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment:
'Regional Supervisor:
Permits & Engineering:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY: JUL 05 1990
Date: (e d
Date: 6 � b
Date: 2/r /so
Date: y

10/89
Facility Name PA4Q d W DO Pennit # W c>?W4
CHRONIC TOXICITY TESTING REQUIREMENT (QR'rRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity in any two consecutive toxicity tests,
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 concentrate n t which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality is % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure
document). Tfe permit holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish
compliance .W0 the permitcondition. The. first test will be performed fter thirty days from
issuance of this permit during the months of.:' . Effluent
sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted fin effluent discharge below
all treatment vrocesses.
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: Environmental Sciences 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 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 Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to dhe receiving stream, this
permit may be ire -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 noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 d cfs
Permited Flow MGD Recommended by:
IWC% _
Basin & Sub -basin D d
Receivin Stre
County (�!� �r Date
"Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at�%,rebM(AAASee Part, Condition .L .

Request No.: 5639
------------------- WASTELOAD ALLOCATION APPROVAL FORM -------------------
Facility Name: The City of Washington
NPDES No.: NC0020648
Type of Waste: 96.6% domestic / 3.4% Industrial
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Receiving Stream: Kennedy Creek
Classification: C-NSW
Subbasin: 030307 Drainage area: sq mi
County: Beaufort Summer 7Q10: Tidal cfs
Regional Office: Waro Winter 7Q10: cfs
Requestor: Average flow: cfs
Date of Request: 30Q2: cfs
Quad: E30SE
-------------------- RECOMMENDED EFFLUENT LIMITS --------------------------
Existing Limits
Mon Ave
Wasteflow (mgd) : 2.12
BADS (mg/1) : 30
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1): 5
TSS (mg/1) : 30
pH (su) : 6-9
Fecal ColiforT U100ml): 1000
T. Phosphorus (mg/1): Monitor
T . Nitrogen (mg/1): Monitor
---------------------------- MONITORING -----------------------------------
Upstream (Y/N): Y Location: Grimesland Bridge
Downstream (Y/N): Y Location: Pamlico Bridge
----------------------------- COMMENTS -------------------------
Instream monitoring for D.O., temperature, and conductivity

L...,f C4 j A; -,f lc-,,, 71.3 11 9 a
0
tA

RIVERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.-ENGINEERS / PLANNERS / SURVEYORS—GREENVILLE, N. C.
MEMO TO: FILE
FROM: TOM HOWELL
SUBJECT: WASHINGTON WWTP NEW NPDES PERMIT
DATE: 7/3/90
A meeting was held at the Regional Office of NCDEM to discuss the
new NPDES Permit. The following people attended:
Roger Thorp, Trevor Clements, Carla Sanderson, Jim Mulligan - DEM
.ferry Cutler, Russell Waters, Ed Gibson, Ed Burchins - City
Washington,
Tom Howells- Rivers and Associates
The following people made presentations:
Jim Listed problems in lower Tar River with oxygen
depletion and algae blooms. Identified site specific
problem in Kennedy Creek which makes permit limits more
stringent than Tar River.
Roger New Permit was being prepared.
Algae blooms in Kennedy Creek 87 & 88.
Kennedy Creek was considered zero flow stream. 7Q10 =
0 cfs.
Trevor New permit expiration date set so that all plants in
the basin come up for review at the same time - 1995.
Discussed draft policy on zero flow streams.
Suggested Washington consider relocation of discharge
to Tar River.
12 months t? do study about 0 flow.
5 BOD, 1 NH & N 4 & 8 and 0.5 phosphorus limits now.
May give Washington 3 years for toxics.
Metals and chlorine were discussed due to localized
issue of Kennedy Creek.
Carla New Limits
Low Flow 15 BOD 4 NH3 & in 3 Yrs 5 BOD 1 NH3
Kennedy Ck 30 TSS 30 TSS-
NSW Apply Phosphorus 2 & Total Nitrogen 4-8
in Tar 'P
if► 4 c 1990

RIVERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.-ENGINEERS / PLANNERS / SURVEYORS—GREENVILLE, N. C.
Metals - Kennedy Creek or Tar River.
2 Cd 88 Ni 5 CN 50 CR 25 Pb Parts per billion
CU, ZN, silver - No limit yet.
Bioassay Test (Toxicity Test) to be done
quarterly - limits better in Tar River.
Additional downstream and upstream samples within
Kennedy Creek - DO, Temperature, PH, conductivity.
State will not allow instream aeration.
Dechlorination required - if above action level by
1993. Washington will be above action level.
Roger Regional office will send waste load allocation to
Trevor.
Permit expires September 30.
3 months to new permit.
DEM will send an unofficial draft to Washington.
How will Tar Pamilco Foundation react to limits at
Tar River and Kennedy Creek.
Should the dechlorination schedule be tied to
relocating effluent - 3 years.
We left the meeting with the understanding that the City of
Washington would receive a new permit that would allow 3 years to
meet the new limits with dechlorination or alternate disinfection
and relocating the effluent to the Tar River.
CC: Russell Waters
Jerry Cutler
Roger Thorp
Jim Mulligan
Trevor Clements

J,)O UP5�4e)Mh
—baA CA&'VLQ UYVA
'(?A
��,.c i,�r.(.l ��c c�nc��'i �� ..Ci n.� i� al 5� l Uo�cY)
�uncvx.o� Cly�k.tt� lam,—�,u ,eaM � a.Q� ��
u 4
q-
ttx&VL/-/ k
f fl
© ' C �-�O - _V �4jajn� wsL-h a7u crud ol 6RAPtI6,
C
1..
.11, LV-Q

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Govemor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary May 16, 1990 Director
Mr. Sam R. Fowle, III
The Town of':Washington WWTP
P.O. Box 19.88
Washington,'N.C. 27889
Subject: Chlorine Toxicity
NPDES Permit No.NC0020648
Beaufort County
Dear Mr. Fowle,
Chlorine, a widely used wastewater disinfectant for the treatment of coli-
form organisms, often remains instream in residual amounts that may prove to be
toxic under critical low stream flow conditions. In the last decade, EPA
assessed the potential adverse effects of chlorine to the aquatic environment
and has taken steps to reduce the impacts through the development of federal
criteria. In 1986, EPA recommended that all states have a chlorine standard by
their next triennial review of water quality standards.
In revising its water quality standards in 1989, North Carolina developed
an action level for chlorine of 17 ug/l (freshwater classes only). In addition,
the fecal co�liform limit was reduced from 1000 colonies/100 ml to 200 colonies/
100 ml. Under a new DEM procedure, dechlorination and chlorine limitq are now
recommended for all new or expanding dischargers proposing the use of chlorine
for effluent disinfection. The Division is reviewing chlorine levels from all
existing dischargers as part of their NPDES permit renewal process.
Our records indicate that chlorine from your facility's effluent discharge
is considered toxic to the receiving stream under low flow conditions, i.e., the
amount of chlorine discharged causes a violation of the instream action level
for chlorine�(17 ug/1) under 7Q10 (the lowest consecutive 7 day average flow in
a 10 year period) conditions. Action should be taken to reduce the effluent
concentration of chlorine to an acceptable level. Based on your facility's
instream waste concentration of 100%, an acceptable level of chlorine in your
effluent is 17 ug/l. If this level is not feasible, you should consider dechlo-
rination or alternate methods of disinfection for your facility to ensure that
both chlorine and bacterial limits are met. In addition, if your facility plans
to undertake any phase of construction, dechlorination or alternate
disinfection should be included. However, please note that an authorization to
construct must be obtained from this Division prior to any alteration to your
treatment plant.
The Division is currently reviewing its water quality regulations pertain-
ing to chlorine. In the future, effluent limits and/or dechlorination may be
Poffudon Pmvendon Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

required of existing facility's with chlorine problems. If the chlorine levels
in your facility's effluent remain unchanged, a chlorine limit or a whole efflu-
ent toxicity testing requirement may be added to your permit limitations.
Please feel free to call Mr. Roger Thorpe of the Division's Regional Office
at [phone], if you have any questions or comments regarding this issue.
�Sincerely, j
Steve Tedder
Water Quality Section Chief
cc: Washington Regional Office
Central Files
WLA File

f
QU Wo 'Do nm6kc.
amb
Ji6lgb
0.303o7
C A Le-jw
`K t wmJ.t Creek
fi col; Kq Li wu� Vtt�.sfi'�c�._ (YXo�n"�ew�
U','6�4k Dzw cyvk8cA)
YlO��Co.Stn.�r�1, �
aU�c�9 b(Ooywd°
ux�.fi�to VecaCo�gvm(AtomP) - -boo ��4
cKLoivv�-j NA A) ,vo L
d is[ �or�eY `71'+mv�ae-gow.- qu _ o w Sand -t-o
hwh &Y, ah� _Ye -ice wi+fA- i5/4 avur�. �au'l�'J�_ w� II ►�+
,1xo-+ w 'l 1l szs � _ u� Q co�.� co � o i u�cj �-iti-Q-w�.
--
- - -z.. rms4 _t5/a %4 _►%-_ tw ��s_ - tom_ rtmtuv
sub-c..e
-s0uv�,e 9�r�n�
—
�Qo�a.�_
�v

Gklvnps/axdYid�.e_
TW.
(l D (rxtn) &W
—�cta-1
%rnw 40. (rn.ln) 66D
-Pr4
3 q0 13.
`7.'7 (6.b) l l
q0
lq�g 7g (6.a) -d b'
Ya 2
/��-- t l
_8,L (8:3)_-15
1-75
11.& M. (1
ill?
yqa 8.a,
9.$ (S.5) a.o
9a9
g.s�(,0.re
' �► �3. �'
11 %.1) C) (C
51/S
3.1 /o.7 M-1) L
Sao
Am KF. a,_
S
(57)
8y 2b. I s-a
.76.7
4 7 �d il
0.5
(pq a
h -?(,.-7 45
1, 6.y sl
a7.5
1Y-
3
Q.
.1
01 �25.1 A
3.'7 1.5 376
.96.(,
q,. 9
l0$
3/q ao Al 34 1.1
'20.5
4, 5
I. a—
93 S�

05/10/90 ver 3.1
Facility:
NPDES Permit No.:
Status (E, P, or M):
Permitted Flow:
Actual Average Flow:
Subbasin:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
7010:
IWC:
Stn'd / Bkg
Pollutant AL/Crt'a Corte.
(ug/1) (ug/1)
Cadmium S
Chromium S
Copper AL
Nickel S
Lead S
Zinc AL
Cyanide S
Mercury S
Silver AL
Selenium 5
Arsenic S
Phenols S
NH3-N C
T.R.Chlor.AL
Pollutant
Cadmium S
Chromium S
Copper AL
Nickel S
Lead 5
Zinc AL
Cyanide S
Mercury S
Silver AL
Selenium 5
Arsenic 5
Phenols S
NH3-N C
T.R.Chlor.AL
2.0
50.0
7.0
88.0
25.0
50.0
5.0
0.012
0.060
5.0
50.0
NA
17.0
Washington WHIP
NCO020648
E
2.12 mgd
1.57 mgd
30307.00
Kennedy Creek
C-NSW
0.00 cfa
100.00 Y
Removal Domestic
Eff. Load
a (4/d)
T O X I C S R E V I E W
1------- PRETREATMENT DATA ------------- 1---- EFLLUENT DATA---- I
I ACTUAL PERMITTEDI I
I Ind. + Ind. + I FREQUENCY 1
I Domestic PERMITTED Domestic I OBSERVED of Chronicl
Act.Ind. Total Industrial Total I Eflluent Criteria I
Load Load Load Load I Cone. Violationsl
(4/d) (4/d) (t/d) (4/d) I (ug/1) (4vio/4sam)1
924
0.03
0.00
764
0.56
0.00
824
0.69
0.00
324
0.24
0.00
81t
0.56
0.00
774
1.97
0.05
591
0.46
0.00
86%
944
0.06
0.00
BOt
80%
I-------------- ALLOWABLE
PRDCT'D
PRDCT'D
I
Effluent Effluent
Effluent
I
Cone.
using
using
I Allowable
CHRONIC
ACTUAL
PERMIT
I Load
Criteria Influent
Influent
I (4/d)
tug/1)
(ug/1)
(ug/1)
I 0.33
LY.000
0.188
0.238
1 2.73
.00
10.337
22.560
1 0.51
7.000
9.534
14.307
I 1.69
8.000
12.602
21.307
I 1.72
8.191
9.380
I 2.84
50.000
35.559
41.659
I 0.16
5.000
14.445
20.054
1 0.00
0.012
0.000
0.000
I 0.01
0.060
0.279
0.431
1 0.33
5.000
0.000
0.000
I 3.27
50.000
0.000
0.000
1
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
17.000
-----
0.03
--------
0.01
-------
0.039
I ------
1 0
------- I
I
0.56
0.67
1.230
1 e#AU
I I
0.69
0.35
1.040
I
I N
0.24
0.17
0.410
I V
I P
0.56
0.09
0.646
I,{Q9,0
I U
2.02
0.40
2.370
I
I T
0.46
0.18
0.640
1
I
1
IS
0.06
0.03
0.094
1
I E
C
IT
II
I 0
I
I
I N
I
PRDCT'D
I
I
------- - MONITOR/LIMIT --------- I-ADTN'L
I
I
RECMMTN'S-- I
Instream
I
I
Cone.
Based on
Based on
Based on I
Recomm'd INSTREAM I
using
ACTUAL
PERMITTED
OBSERVED I
FREQUENCY Monitor. I
OBSERVED
Influent
Influent
Effluent I
Effluent Recoam'd 7 I
(ug/1)
Loading
Loading
Data I
Monitor. (YES/NO) I
0.00
Monitor
1
__----- ________ 1
NO 1 A
0.00
Limit
Limit
I
NO I N
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
)
MONTHLY NO I A
0.00
Limit
Llttl_t
I
NO L
0.00
Limit
(L t
I
NO I Y
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I
MONTHLY NO I S
0.00
Limit
rm3
I
NO I I
0.00
I
NO S
0.00
Monitor
Monitor
I
MONTHLY NO I
0.00
I
NO I R
0.00
I
NO I E
0.00
NO I S
0.00
NO I U
0.00
I NO I L
0.00
1 NO I T

KENNEDY CREEK, BEAUFORT CO.
Sampled by C. Tyndall, R. Bland 880907 1500
880923 1400
Water quality samples were collected from Kennedy Creek
because of elevated pH and dissolved oxygen readings. The water also
appeared greenish. On September 7th, northeast winds backed up
water in Kennedy Creek. These samples collected upstream (KC-1)
and downstream (KC-2) of the Waste Water Treatment Plant
contained "bloom" levels of phytoplankton. Olisthodiscus carterae, an
xanthophyte, often associated with high chlorophyll -a levels,
comprised over 66 percent of the biovolumes in these samples.
Corresponding chlorophyll -a levels of 91 and 120 99/1 (respectively)
further supported bloom conditions. The algae were responding to the
high levels of total nitrogen (2.06 mg/1 & 2.15 mg/1) and total
phosphorus (0.23 mg/1 & 0.25 mg/1) present in early September.
Samples collected near the end of the month contained high
densities of Cyclotella species 3, a small to medium sized centric
diatom, and cryptophytes.
High total phosphorus concentrations were still present on
September 23rd. Excessive chlorophyll -a concentrations of 64 µg/1
were recorded at both stations, indicating bloom conditions.
DOMINANT SPECIES BY BIOVOLUME
KC-1 SPECIES
880907
OLISTHODISCUS CARTERAE
CRYPTOMONAS EROSA REFLEXA
CRYPTOMONAS OVATA
TOTAL BIOVOLUME = 3,868 mm3/m 9
DOMINANT SPECIES BY DENSITY
SPECIES
nT ISTHODISCUS CARTMAE
OCHROMONAS SPECIES 3
CHROOMONAS MINUI A
TOTAL DENSITY = 12,097 units/ml.
CLASS BIOV. % BIOV.
XAN
2,542
66
CRY
433
11
CRY
415
11
CLASS DENS. % DENSITY
XAN
4,717
39
CHR
1,965
16
CRY
1,179
10
sm

DOMINANT SPECIES BY
BIOVOLUME
KC-2 SPECIES
880907
CLASS
BIOV.
%BIOV.
OLIST'HODIS IJSCA_RTERAE
XAN
6,214
84
TOTAL BIOVOLUME = 7,377 mm3/m3
DOMINANT SPECIES BY
DENSITY
SPECIES
CLASS
DENS.
% DENSITY
OLIM)DISf JJS CARTERAE
XAN
11,529
50
0HROOMONAS MiNI1TA
CRY
2,533
11
OCHROMONAS SPECIES 3
CHR
2,533
11
CYCLOTELLA SPECIES 2
BAC
2,184
9
TOTAL DENSITY = 23,233 units/ml
DOMINANT SPECIES BY BIOVOLUME
KC-1 SPECIES
880923
CLASS
BIOV.
%BIOV.
CYCLOTELI A SPECIES 3
BAC
1,123
44
0—=MONAS EROSA
CRY
323
13
-C—RY—FrOMONAS EROSA REFLEXA
CRY
216
9
QMOOMONAS CAUDATA
CRY
208
8
TOTAL BIOVOLUME = 3,868 mm3/m3
DOMINANT SPECIES BY DENSITY
SPECIES
CLASS
DENS.
% DENSITY
CYCLOTELLASPECIES3
BAC
11,364
59
CYCLOTELLA SPECIES 241
BAC
3,232
14
TOTAL DENSITY = 22,797 units/mi.
DOMINANT SPECIES BY BIOVOLUME
8 8 0 923 SPECIES
8809
CLASS
BIOV.
% BIOV.
CRYP'1'OMONAS EROSA REFLEXA
CRY
2,595
36
CYCLOTELLA SPECIES 3
BAC
1,981
28
CRYPTOMONAS QVATA
CRY
664
9
TOTAL BIOVOLUME = 7,203 mm3/m3
M.

DOMINANT SPECIES BY DENSITY
SPECIES
• u1I
'••U.• i 1eIJ.i
TOTAL DENSITY = 37,034 units/ml.
CLASS DENS. % DENSITY
BAC 23,583 61
CRY 3,144 8
-87-