NC0020401_Permit Issuance_20060419

NPDES DOCVwENTw1CtANffINC COVER SHEET
NC0020401
Hickory - Northeast WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type: '
Permit Issuance 2
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
201 Facilities Plan
Instream Assessment
(67B)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
April 19, 2006
This document its printed on reuse paper - ignore ang
content on the reYerse side

•
I
Mr. Mick W. Perry, City Manager
City of Hickory
P.O. Box 398
Hickory, North Carolina 28603
. • Michael F. Easley. Governor
William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
April 19, 2006
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NC0020401
Hickory - Northeast WWTP
Catawba County
Dear Mr. Perry:
Division ers p onnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the
subject permLt. Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This
permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1
and the Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Ag ncy dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently amended).
The permit authorizes the City of Hickory to discharge up to 6.0 MGD of treated
wastewater from the Northeast WWTP to the Catawba River (Lake Hickory), a class WS-V and
B water in the Catawba River Basin. The permit includes discharge limitations or monitoring
requirements for flow, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), •
ammonia, fecal conform. bacteria, total residual chlorine, arsenic, chromium, cyanide, nickel,
phenols, and chronic toxicity.
The following modifications from the August 31, 2005 draft permit will be included in
the final permit:
• They daily maximum limit for phenols of 25.2 ug/1 will be changed to a weekly
average limit for protection against chronic toxicity effects instream.
• The daily maximum limit for arsenic will be revised from 373 ug/1 to a weekly
average limit of 252 ug/1. This revision is based on the new North Carolina human
health standard for arsenic as a carcinogen for protection of streams classified for
usage as a water supply (WS). The human health and WS standard for arsenic is
10 ug/1 and was adopted in April 2003 during the last triennial review of North
Carolina's water quality standards. The Hickory NE WWTP discharges to the
Catawba River (Lake Hickory, which has a class of WS V and B from Highway 127
downstream to Oxford Dam). The stream classification of B is for primary
recreation, including frequent or organized swimming. North Carolina regulation
NCAC2B 0.0203 states that "all water quality based effluent limitations ...for
Ns r Caro ina
?aturaII
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Letter to Mr. Perry
Page2.
direct or indirect discharges of waste ...will be developed by the Division such that
the water quality standards and best usage of receiving waters and all downstream
waters will not be impaired".
The August 31, 2005 draft permit had an arsenic limit calculated from the
freshwater standard of 50 ug/1. The use of the lower arsenic standard of 10 ug/1
in the calculations will produce a more stringent effluent limit for protection of
human health against this carcinogen.
• The weekly average limit for cyanide should not have been included in the draft
permit and will be deleted. Only the daily maximum limit for cyanide of 22 ug/1 for
the protection of water quality against acute toxicity effects will remain.
• The weekly average limit for nickel will be revised based on the North Carolina
water quality standard for nickel in streams classified for usage as a water supply
(WS) . The water supply standard is 25 ug/1, and the draft permit had a nickel limit
calculated from the freshwater standard of 88 ug/1. The new nickel weekly average
limit will be 186 ug/1 and the daily maximum limit of 261 ug/1 will also be
included for protection against acute toxicity effects. The water supply standard of
25 ug/1 for nickel should have been applied in all previous Northeast WVVTP
permits but was inadvertently omitted during effluent limits calculations.
The arsenic, cyanide and nickel limits are based on analyses of submitted effluent
data that indicated there was reasonable potential to exceed the water quality
standards.
• The limits for total chromium will be corrected to a weekly average limit of 373 ug/1
and a daily maximum limit of 1022 ug/1. The draft permit included only a daily
maximum limit of 373 ug/1. The limits are based on an analysis of submitted
effluent monitoring data that indicated there is reasonable potential to exceed the
water quality standard.
• A total residual chlorine limit of 28 ug/1 has been added to reflect the Division's
current policy for protection against chlorine toxicity instream. The limit for total
residual chlorineshall become effective upon completion of the installation of a
disinfection system but no later than thirty six (36) months from permit issuance
(June 1, 2009) due to the extensive plant upgrades and renovations. The City
must submit a detailed schedule of construction and timelines for the renovations.
If a method different than chlorination/dechlorination is used, the total residual
chlorine limit will not be applicable.
■ The special condition requiring a nutrient optimization study will be removed since
Hickory's upgraded treatment plant will be designed to include Biological Nutrient
Removal facilities. Although the Division has agreed to remove the nutrient
optimization study based on the City's future commitment to biological nutrient
removal and the City's aggressive pretreatment program (ref. Hickory letter dated
April 5, 2006), the Division still encourages Hickory to investigate potential
treatment modifications to reduce nutrients during the transition.

Letter to Mr. Perry
Page 4
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. The Division may require
modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the
legal requirements to obtain other permits, which may be required by the Division of
Water Quality, or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area
Management Act, or any other Federal or Local governmental permits may be required.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms.
Jacquelyn Nowell at telephone number [phone], extension 512.
f
Attachments
cc: Mooresville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection
EPA/Region IV Attn: Marshall Hyatt
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
PERCS/Jon Risgaard e-copy
NPDES Permit File
Central Files

Letter to Mr. Perry
Page 3 - -
-
The following items listed in the draft permit of August 31st will remain the same:
• The deletion of the daily maximum lint for toluene from the permit based on an
analysis of submitted effluent monitoring data that indicated there is no
reasonable potential to exceed the water quality standard. Toluene will continue to
be monitored in the Pretreatment Program's Long Term Monitoring Plan.
• The deletion of monthly monitoring for selenium and lead based on an analysis of
submitted effluent monitoring data that indicated there is no reasonable potential
to exceed the water quality standard. Selenium and lead will continue to be
monitored in the Pretreatment Program's Long Term Monitoring Plan.
Regarding the City' s comments on the 7Q10 flow used for the Hickory Northeast
WWTP, historically the Division has used the minimum instantaneous release from the dams
as equivalent to a 7Q10 flow in the Catawba chain lakes. North Carolina regulation 15A
NCAC 2B .0206 (b) states "In cases where the stream flow is regulated ... where there are
acute toxicity concerns, an alternative flow such as the instantaneous minimum release may
be used on a case by case basis." A review of files and notes indicated that the Division used
a 7Q10 flow of 0.8 cfs when the discharge was into Falling Creek because the outfall's
location did not receive the "flow through" benefit from the Catawba. River. In 1988, after the
relocation into the mainstem of the Catawba River, a 7Q 10 of 60 cfs was used in the
wasteload allocations for the Hickory NE WWTP as the minimum instantaneous release from
the Rhodhiss Dam. This flow included 7Q10 flows from two rivers upstream of the Northeast
plant since the minimum instantaneous release from the Rhodhiss Dam is actually 40 cfs.
While the City of Valdese is located upstream of Hickory and has a higher 7Q10 flow
used in its allocation, it is also upstream of the Rhodhiss Dam. The estimated 7Q10 flow
used at Valdese is based on the minimum instantaneous release from Lake James Dam and
the flow from several large tributary rivers between the Lake James dam and the Valdese
discharge point. However, since there is a dam between the two dischargers that regulates
the flow downstream of Valdese, the same 7Q10 flow estimate of 228 cfs,cannot be used for
Hickory.
There are ongoing discussions in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
relicensing process that may have some effect on the flows used in the Catawba Lakes. Since
the relicensing has not been completed and all pertinent information has not been received,
we cannot at this time vary from existing Division procedure on 7Q10 flows in the Catawba
chain lakes. We may reevaluate this issue upon completion of the relicensing process and
during the next renewal cycle. The City can submit to the Division any historic stream flow
data and dam release information that has been compiled and it will be reviewed when the
issue of Catawba River flows is addressed.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this
permit are unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon
written request within thirty (30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must
be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina
General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit
shall be final and binding.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards
and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
City of Hickory
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Hickory - Northeast WWI?
310 Cloninger Mill Road
Hickory
Catawba County
to receiving waters designated as Catawba River (Lake Hickory) in the Catawba River
Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit skull become effective June 1, 2006.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on April 30, 2010.
Signed this day April 19, 2006.
71 a l•- Al . Klimek, P.E., Director
Di ' ion of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit Number NC0020401
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are
hereby revoked, and as of this issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number
is no longer effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this
facility arises under the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included
herein.
City of Hickory, is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue operation of a 6.0 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting of the
following treatment units:
• Influent sampler
• Parshall flume
• Dual influent bar screens
• Grit chamber
• Four rectangular and one circular primary clarifiers
• Eight aeration basins (total volume - 2,000,000 gallon)
• Two circular secondary clarifiers
• Chlorine disinfection
• Dechlorination
• Post aeration
• Two gravity belt thickeners
• One sludge holding tank
The facility is located at the City of Hickory Northeast WWTP, 310 Cloninger Mill
Road, Hickory, Catawba County, and;
2. Discharge treated wastewater from said treatment works at the location specified on
the attached map through outfall 001 into Catawba River (Lake Hickory), which is
classified WS-V and B water, in the Catawba River Basin.

Latitude:
Longitude:
Quad #:
Stream Class:
Receiving Stream:
Permitted Flow:
Facility Information
35° 47' 54" Suh-Basin:
81° 18' 00"
D 13 SE (Bethlehem)
WS-1V & B
Catawba River
6.0 MIGD
03--08-32
Faci
Loca
North
City of Hickory Northeast W WTP
NC0020401
Catawba County

Permit Number NC0020401
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge treated wastewater from outfall(s) 001. Such discharges shall be
limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristic!
Limits
Monitoring Requirements
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample
Location1
Flow
6.0 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5-day, 20°C2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
I, E
Fecal Coliform
200/ 100m1
400/ 100m1
Daily
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature
Daily
Grab
E
Total Residual Chlorine3
28 µg/L
Daily
Grab
E
pH4
Daily
Grab
E
NH3-N
3Meek
Composite
E
Total Arsenic
252 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Chromium
373 µg/L
1022 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
E
Total Cyanide
22 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Nickel:
186 µg/L
261 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
E
Phenols
25.2 µg/L
Weekly
Grab
E
Total Copper
-II- 2./Month
Composite
E
Total Silver
G(I+if-'-:?JMonth-
`
' Composite
E
Total Zinc
6,11T;
i'. Mat t# -•`'
Composite
E
Total Nitrogen
(NO2-N + NO3-N + TKN)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Monthly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen6
Variable
Grab
U, D
Fecal Coliform6
Variable
Grab
U, D
Temperatures
Variable
Grab
U, D
Conductivity6
Variable
Grab
U, D
Footnotes:
1. Sample Location: I- Influent, E — Effluent, U- Upstream at NC Hwy 127 bridge, D- One mile downstream of
the outfall.
2. The monthly average effluent BODs and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (i.e. 85% Removal).
3. Limitation/monitoring requirement applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection. See A(4) Special
Condition to Supplement to Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements.
4. The pH of the effluent shall not be less than 6.0 nor greater than 9.0 (on the standard units scale).
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) at 13%: January, April, July, October (see A. (2.)).
6. Variable is defined as follows: Samples collected three times per week during June 1 through September 30
and once per week October 1 through May 31.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit Number NC0020401
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. (2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or
significant mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 13%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised
February 1998r or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent
Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be
performed during 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 proesses.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a
failure or ChV below the permit limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be
performed at a minimum, in each of the two following months as described in "North
Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February
1998) or subs quent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric
mean of the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or
survival and the lowest concentration that does have a detectable impairment of
reproduction or survival. The definition of "detectable impairment," collection methods,
exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are specified in the "North Carolina Phase
II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent
versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the
Effluent Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed,
using the parameter code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value.
Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences
Section no later than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is
made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical
measurements and all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory
supervisor and ORC or approved designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent
toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.

Permit Number NC0020401
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity
monitoring is required, the permittee will complete the information located at the top of the
aquatic toxicity (AT) test form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number,
county, and the month/year of the report with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment
area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the Environmental Sciences Section at
the address cited above. -
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
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
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, minimum control organism reproduction, and
appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require
immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than the last day of the month
following the month of the initial monitoring.
A. (3.) TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE
The limit for total residual chlorine shall become effective upon completion of the installation
of a disinfection system but no later than 36 months from the issuance of the permit (June
1, 2009). If a method different than chlorination/dechlorination is used, the total residual
chlorine limit will not be applicable.

Permit Number NC0020401
A.(4.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the table
below (in accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). The annual effluent pollutant scan samples shall
represent seasonal (summer, winter, fall, spring) variations over the 5-year permit cycle. Unless
otherwise indicated, metals shall be analyzed as "total recoverable." Additionally, the method detection
level and the minimum level shall be the most sensitive as provided by the appropriate analytical
procedure.:
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved ocygen
Nitrate/Nitrite
Kjeldahl nitrogen
0il and grease
Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Acrylonitrile
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Chloroform
Dichiorobromomethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichl aroethane
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
1,1-dichloroethylene
1,2-dichloropropane
1,3-dichloropropylene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
1,1,1-tric h l o ro et h an e
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid -extractable compounds:
P-chloro-m-cresol
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Base -neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chloronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1,2-dichlorobenzene
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2,4-dinitrotoluene
2,6-dinitrotoluene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Fluoranthene
Fluorene •
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-tichlorobenzene

Permit Number NC0020401
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- DMR-PPA1 or in a form approved
by the Director, within 90 days of sampling. A copy of the report shall be submitted to Central
Files at the following address: Division of Water Quality, Surface Water Protection Section,
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617

Hickory Northeast WWTP
Subject: Hickory Northeast WWTP
From: Larry Horton <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:47:45 -0400
To: Jackie Nowell <Jackie.Nowell @ ncmail.net>
Jackie,
The planning document (201 Facilities Plan) indicates that the upgrade will include
BNR. The design calculations in Appendix G are based on the Carrousel A2C System.
Sergei performed the NPDES Unit's review of the 201 Facilities Plan and commented on
the plan. His comments have been resolved. If you need to see the 201 Facilities
Plan, he may still have the copy that we sent to him for review.
I talked with Cecil today and he confirmed that plans & specs have not been submitted
for an A-to-C yet.
Let me know if you need additional information.
Larry
1 of 1 4/20/2006 2:01 PM

Hiekoty
Where Business and Pleasure Grow Together
Public Utilities
April 5, 2006 ITY
City of Hickory
Post Office Box 398
Hickory, NC 23603-0398
Phone: [phone]
Fax' 8243234403
email: [e-mail]
Ms. Jacquelyn M. Nowell
NC DENR — DWQ — NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
riorkl [1 E
11Y,
MAY - 9 2006
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit NC 0020401; Hickory, Northeast WWTP
Dear Ms. Nowell:
The purpose of this correspondence is to respond to your request for additional information for
renewal of the NPDES Permit referenced above. The items, which I will specifically address, are
A. (3) Total Residual Chlorine and A. (4) Nutrient Optimization Study of the Special Conditions
in the Draft Permit.
The requirement for Total Residual Chlorine is basically a requirement to provide for
dechlorination if chlorine is used for disinfection. This requirement is being implemented on all
non -discharge permits along the Catawba River; therefore, we have anticipated adding it to
existing facilities, which are not going to be modified in the near future. The Northeast WWTP is
nearing completion of design for a complete upgrade and process change; therefore, we are
requesting an extension to the 18 to 24 month time limit, which has otherwise been used for
implementing this new parameter limit. The permitting and construction schedule we are
anticipating is to make submittal for permits in April or May of 2006, receive permits to construct
the proposed facilities in late fall of 2006 or early winter of 2007, bid project for construction in
spring of 2007 and complete construction in spring or fall of 2009. The construction schedule of
the facility details a phased construction sequence due to working around an existing/active
wastewater treatment facility. The first phase of upgrade construction includes addition of
chlorination and dechlorination chambers and addition of a cascade aerator for
dechlorination and raising dissolved oxygen levels prior to discharge.
GREATER
HICKORY
METRO

Ms. Jacquelyn M. Nowell
April 5, 2006
Page Two
A permit requirement to add dechlorination outside of this schedule will be an undue financial
burden to the City of Hickory Public Utilities Department and will result in a tremendous expense
that will be eplaced by a new process with the upgraded facility. This expense is avoidable by
granting us 6 months to implement the improvements with upgrading of the Northeast WWTP.
The second point is for completion of a Nutrient Optimization Study at the facility. The City of
Hickory has a very aggressive and thorough Pretreatment Program, which is very active in the
system searching for problematic constituents. Total Phosphorus, Ammonia and Total Nitrogen
are all parameters, which are investigated by this division. The upgraded treatment facility has
been designed to include Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) facilities as a part of the process.
Again, the requirement to further study the existing treatment plant's effectiveness of treatment
will be an unnecessary expense to the Public Utilities Department. BNR chambers are designed at
the head of each treatment train. We respectfully request that this permit condition be lifted and
required for the new facility.
Thank you for your consideration and assistance. Should you have any questions, please do not
hesitate contacting me at [phone] or via e-mail at kgreer @ci.hickory.nc.us.
Sincerely,
Kevin B. Greer, PE
Assistant Public Services Director
pc: Mick Berry, City Manager
Chuck Hansen, PE/Public Services Director
Keith Rhyne, ORC/Northeast WWTP

.nyMY.}J�M�nryyeR'�M:tlO�+r.Vn4wMer...+,/a�.n.nsJ.(wF('^••as: u�f. u . f
ilieko
Where Business and Pleasure Grow Together of
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Fri 1 5 2006
February 8, 2006
Ms. Jackie Nowell
NCDENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Comments to Draft NPDES Permit
City of Hickory -Northeast WWTP (NPDES # NC0020401)
Hickory, NC
HSMM Commission No. 60467
Dear Ms. Nowell:
.. L. j.,�.
The City of Hickory has reviewed your letter dated January 27, 2006 and the accompanying draft
NPDES permit for the Northeast WWTP (NPDES # NC0020401). We believe several items still
require addressing prior to proceeding to finalize the permit. The following lists these items
along with the City's proposal for how to address each.
1. Arsenic and Nickel
This draft permit includes a daily maximum limit of 75 ug/1 for arsenic and 186 ug/1
for nickel. We believe these should be weekly average limits instead of daily
maximum limit. Please review the reasonable potential calculations and modify these
as appropriate.
We also note that the water quality standard for both the arsenic and nickel reasonable
potential calculations in this draft permit is different from the standards used in the
previous draft permit dated August 31, 2005. Your letter states that this is due to the
water supply classification of this portion of the Catawba River. There are two water
supplies located in Lake Hickory, one for Hickory and one for Long View. Both of
these have existed in their present locations for a number of years and both of these
are located upstream from our discharge point. We note that this classification has
not been applied in previous reasonable potential calculations for our discharge. We
ask the NCDENR provide a more detailed explanation for applying this more
stringent water quality standard to our discharge at this time.
GREATER
HICKORY
METRO

Ms. Jackie Nowell
February 8, 2006
Page Two
2. TRC, Nutrient Optimization Study, and 7Q10 Flow
We have reviewed your response on these issues. At this time, we feel that a meeting
between NCDENR and the City of Hickory is most appropriate to discuss these three
issues in greater detail. It is our sincere desire to come to an agreement with
NCDENR that is equitable for both parties involved. We are available to meet with
you at any time in the next several weeks. We request that the representatives from
NCDENR that are responsible for making decisions on these issues attend. Please
contact me with several possible dates for a meeting so that we can determine which
date(s) will allow our representatives to attend as well.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kevin B. Greer, PE
Assistant Public Services Director
Enclosures: None
pc: Jonathan P. Hunt, HSMM
David DePratter, PE/HSMM

Hickory North East
Subject: Hickory North East
From: "Cecil G. Madden" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:57:02 -0500
To: Jackie Nowell <Jackie.Nowell @ ncmail.net>
CC: "Larry Horton, P.E." <[e-mail]>, "Daniel Blaisdell, P.E."
<Daniel.Blaisdell @ ncmail.net>
Hello Jackie,
We are working with HSM&M on a project to upgrade Hickory's existing NE WWTP. An
engineering report is in house and under review. While a FNSI has been drafted, the
technical review is not complete, so the FNSI cannot be issued. Generally the scope
of the project is to provide a major upgrade of each of the treatment units with no
increase in Ole 6 MGD capacity. At this point we anticipate that the Engineering
Report will be approved sometime in the first quarter of 2006. The engineer has
advised that plans & specifications will not be available until May 2006. We
anticipate providing funding sometime in the first six months of 2007. Construction
would not likely start prior to early 2007.
Regards,
Cecil
1 of 1 1/27/2006 3:58 PM

DWO POINT SOURCE Fax:[phone]
Oct 19 2005 15:45
P. 06
Departxexi.t of Erx riroxtuter1t arid Natural 12esourccs
Division of Water Quality
Fact SI„eet For NPD S Permit 1".4Q0204O1
Faosytty iarc rmatioa;
Applicarit/P .,duty Name:
Appttcutxt Address:
P acl7tty Addreas:
Perrraltteet Flow:
Ty ] e of Waste:
Traciltty/.11`armit StSt�.t19:-;
Ccm.13aty:
MlsCC alledlli
Reecei ,ialg Stream:
stream C1asQ18cattora:
303(4) Bated?:
Subbasira:
Drtllnusge Aram. (fait)
summer 7 91 O cells) -
W1ritex- 71;;t1O (cra):
Avera4ga Flow (cfs):
1-WC (%):
Primary SIC Code:
Reg1Ox?a1 Q£8.0e:
usO.S 8uacI:
PCrmtt Wx1tar:
Datc:
City of Hickory
P_G_ Box 395, Hickory
SR 1.400. Hickory
6_0 MGM,
M. 1clpal (t omeetio as -id Imduatrla])
Ftmewal
Catawba
Catawba River
ws-- r ai ci
No
03-0a-32
1225 min
g0 (lselbatrow.m. Eialeaaa)
N/A
N/A
139b
4,962
Moorcav111a
D 13sE
'Jack:10 lvowall
August 26. 2005
tiqt
Tlae City of Hiciscary, la rcquastirag rc3=1Lcwa7. oif ttae NPD permit for ttie Noit1-ieast
WWI'P. The 6_0 MGYZa 'ai:astewaY.er treatmerrt ja18i: •t d1ac1'`ax'$ea into ttaa Catawba Rlvar
(I. .lea Hickory) • "The; Aplarit eurreatiy aervea appx c1X z+tel3r 10. 2O0 vex -morals- he
ts-eatmar t plarat taaa'al. Vretraatmaat Progiram aril a L.c x g Term Monitarlrig 1.1A^ as it
racaives flow from ttia fo114wiag Slgralflcarrt Irad . trial I.Taara (SITJa) (aaa Table 1)-
i
Hick. y- Northeast W WTP Pact Shcbt
IVPDES. Rat -taw al
. Pwgw 1

O WO PO I
NT SOURCE
Fax:[phone]
Oct 19 2005 15:45 P.07
Takata 1. 0,ignifeaxxt Ixzduetrial Users di_ecliargixng to the City of Flic1 axy-Nort1seasst
WVI 1`P.
Irsclustary Flow sli'sollzarged to
PO'j,'W
Z33cicoxy Dyeing anal Wins ding 0.0154 MEOW/
Company
irrycs Ntegloaal Medical. evictor O.OaO 11&4343:, (2 outfaalla)
S.K. enamels O.00OIa 3101G?p
alsurta e TeKshselogy 0-096 DftQD
Co essaryI_ I lracua.itur 0.031 MQD at casstfails)
Wills 130.rsiory Mills 4tul el misuse
rosaceous:RI appiicatioa as mined)
Wastsrvitcr generated treated using an extended. air plant cori$istirig of the
foIIowirig treatment }mile:
IMI-utettxt
mail fl j m lcr
Dual 1ailuprit•bar scree sB
Grit c oass I
Four rectaxagillar Erna acme circular prisasry ^c alit eras
Fight searsatica4 bassiris (total valurr e — 2.000.000 gallosa)
rwQ clarc tar econdEs
ary clarifiers
Chlorines c 1 1' ection
D olalorin�tio�ri
Post sexes on
Sludge generated at lth facility is thtclt erred prior to transport to he Cityr's.
co=npostfrig fadllty. 'T1-i Sol1Orwsrng treatment malts are used to rcuicrigoge the sludge
gCncrsatQd at the faci`11ty
I'wvo gravity bfs1t thiclreracrm
One sludge holdlxig tArik
;
Currents* streasm Cfsasz l+oas
The xeocsivixag streams Asa ; o Catawba River or Lease • Hickory. The receiving stream at
the discharge paint lisa classste WS V and S water in the Catawba River Sasin Lalse
Hickory fits a ruri-of river ixupouxmdmerct located between L 1a Rlaocib1lss acid Lookout
9hasals9 La1ce Ciro► the Cat��ba River. The Hickory Narthesuert WW rP i,s located in the
siegm x .t from NC Hi1xIralr. 2? to Oxford Dam and this s<segment is not rated far aquatic
life. recreation ue►e! support rating for this segrnent is "supporting". T1,.e main
pareametcris of corncera. live re documented as clsloropl7'11 a. 7otutriarsts arsd dissalvad
oxygen. Secause Hickory le its danger of becorx+1 g impaired
by eutrphication (p 9r 2¢O.4 Cataw:rba Sassitm plan_)
Duke Power is conduci:ltlop ari axteissive ulster quality model in. the Catawba River
mainete►m and pre7iMirs Lr V results indicate that point source nutrient limits may be
riecassayr in the future ito reduce tame impact on Lake R1-3.4oci1siss and Lake Hicls+o=y.
8aeed can dais inforrrsatiort tame Division ism requiring that The City of T3iclzory conduct a
nutrient optimization. study on. Clio Northeast WWTP. The optimization study should
• Hlcicosy- TTortiacast WWTP Pact Stactet
zZrnaES ILRserral
. Page 2

DWQ PO 1
NT SOURCE
Fax:[phone]
Oct 19 2005 15:45 P.08
tderatiyy ac source$ of toted phoesphortas ("TP) and total nitrogen (T1) and evaluate how
to reduce siind these inputs to the plant. In addition. the faculty should
review do =rag/at:tonal and treatment tcohniques to det45rra3aac if TP and 'X rezaaval is
be rasExxiaYzi d The Optimization study will be due ooze year from the eiXectivc date
of the Seal permit- ;
Iaastseaasza Zsdosaaitorilaa.
The current. permit lrequires the facility to monitor diseaalved p c rgcn. focal conform.
tempera.) u e. axed cors,Q.ucTA.vity upstream, and downstream of the diseh ge paints'.
There wire no cxceedanccs of the water quality staridard49 irsaireem.
•� es far the iaz sire m sampling rcquir.• m eritp-
'I2zere are no proposed cYsr-ti g P�8
1C43,m3p13azaco Sa ssamIatas!-3r
Overall. facility's corimp14A.ft ee with permitted Limits appears satisfactory. Permit
violeatiOnrs atCad actla�rja trl4J.aa are' noted below:
NOV for Suspejnded Residue (TS ) violation in. Nov. 2004 — Civil aeseaea►emeat paid
in Feb. ZOOS
NOV foriSODB sad Ts , ix,. Feb. 2004 — Civil, ssaserg.tnimex_t paid iu..Jzixe 2004
NOV for fecal coltform iJan. 2004 — Civil assosssm xit paid is .Juzam 2004
NOVs fax totalsuspc:adon d residue aaa`d phezzolea reported for Auguert 200E violatioria.
NOV for phersoles violati%aaz ire May 2002. — Civil assessment paid in Oct. 2002
Moist recant com a evaluation inepeOtion by the Mooresarille RLegioasal Office
canductpd 8/25 2005.. Facility appeared to be properly operated rid well mcairsta►ined
Tonicity Tesstiasg
Current Requirement: Chronic Teaticity (Cerlodapbx3Ja) P/F at 13942. Testing conducted
cluriug the months of April. July. and October -
The facility has coams9ist ; zstly passed ail quarterly chronic toxicity tests sixsco 2001.
I2ecomxa endat mn.: Rene we1 of Chronic Toxicity (Ccriodaph_nta.) P/F at 1396. ,Jan. April.
.Jubr. Oct. I
Nsa.$ Al�Tlei-YSIS
DSO L� POT�L�I'�AL
Data fax the fo]lowlxng Parameters was reported in the discharge clones: lAmo mad. liag ports
and a. FtPA wEwas Arsenic, Cadixxiusrs. Chram.tuCapp
er. per. Cyanide.
. MOlybdcrx+033.1 Nickel. Phenols. Silver. Selenium. Toluene. srid Zinc_
Rsasonablo poter .tiai 4133aLlyiste was conducted based on data from .l rmary 2004
through June 2005. Results and data analysis are eatt .ched.
Arseic results I
a�had 84 reported values and 30 were below the detectio ► level.
There wee reasonable potential to exceed the allowable can acesntrat ion. A deafly
ass3:aussa 1. mil of 378 zzg/1 will be added ea the perazdt.
Cadmium results had eighteen (18) reported values laud all were .below the
detection level_ • There was no reasonable potential tocxceT the allovin able
coacex tratiozs. Continue quarterly mariitorirsg through
Hickory- YVorthem t YVW'VP Duct Si -ice t
NFDES Iiervoweal
Pware 3

DWO POIN
T SOURCE
Fax:[phone]
Oct 19 2006 19:46 P.09
Chromium rc&ults had eighteen (18) reported values axed 12 were below the
detection level. There 1/171313 reasonable peteatYai to exceed the allowable
coaeeot ratism. A dauily auvtimeuse MIMIC of 373 sag/1 will be added to the
pe smit.•
Cogger reesuites bad. 36 reported valued and 12 wore below the detection 1eve1.
There was reaesorsable potential toe teed the allowable er n<ceneratiori. TWloo
per month Zrsoaitorlag will reziesula im the permit.
Cyanide seat —later heal 36 reported values 'and 25 were below the detection level.
T1-iez a was reassemble potential to exceed the alto .sable eoriccxztration. A daily
reisocizzimaz limit of 22 ug" 411ad weeekeiy average limit of 38 isg/l will be
added to the( permit.
•
Lead results had 19 reported values said S were below the detection level.
There was no 'reasonable potential to exceed the allowable concentration.
Maatliiy monitoring cam bo dropped from the permit. Coat'lauo gtsartorly
e CMCI itorieng 'tisa.ougls the LZ'MEo.
Mercury- re:esu xlta had 18 reposed valuca and none were below the doteel:Ian
leiv�el. 'There wags 3C3.o rcaesoriablc potential to exceed time allowable
coracox3.tratior1 o 89 rig11. Cozztirlue quarterly max itor1x2g through the LX5 1=0.
Molybde rsuizkk results had 18 reported vraluoes and one was below time: detection
level. There was no reasonable potential to exceed time allowable
coxzcentratloiz. Contizzue quarterly xaoaaitoririg through the LTMP.
Nickel results 1. r`i 18 reported values send fifteen were below the detectiara
Ievel. Z'.haxe we. reausoxzable potential to exceed the allowable coaccatratlori_
A; daisy mauciL iz+s, limit of 262 iig/1 end as. vsecar1y average Resit of 6iS8 sag/1
t+ i311 bo aoadded. tp tlao peimit.
i
P1ieriol re sujto 71 reported wires and Be were below the detection level.
There wzzas rcasorsablo potential to exceed the allowable cone n ratioxi,. XAro t
of 28-2 tag/1 wil. rcercusin iaa the permitt.
3'ele3sium r+ee.sult>9 had 18 reported valuca and 17 were below the detection
level_ There was no reasonable potential to exceed the allowable
eoxxceatrattoaz. DMzoath.1y momitorlasg cam bo dropped from the permit.
Coatimact quarterly moaitoriasg through the 1.11-
envrs resa31te 1-1.614 36 reported values anct none were below the detection level_
There was rissusOriable potential to emceed the allowable corm entratioa for the
action level. Tvgioo per month moaitoriag am be condemned is the poraait-
hlue rie: reozalts1 rand 78 reported welter and 70 were below the detection. level.
There was rio reaasorzable potential to exceed the o]lewable coricentratiozz of 82
ug/1. Daily, maximum limit ceeaa bo dsoppod from the permit. Coatisauo
ciras+-terly moaltoriag through the LT" .
I = '
2ixzc results. had 36 reported values and none were below the detection level.
Texe was reas►ariable potential to exceed the allowable acute coaccatratiolz of
the actions love*. Twice pens month monaitorizeg eaua bo eoatiaMscd is Pesranilt i
Hickory- 1Voctbcast WVVTP Pact 1 1uar+t
AXPDES Rss+cwal
Paipv 4

CI WO PO
NT SOURCE
Fax:[phone]S
Oct 19 2005 15:46 P.10
a]POYf.,L7 CHAMCIIEr : ,
The follovvi g rraoditinatioas Earn recommended Tor the renewal of the permit:
• Addition of Totsl:P eeidual Chlorine Limit of 28 ug/1 due to DWQ procedure that
requires llx iit'for all facilities us1x g chlorine as dismfects_*•+t. Prastc311ty will be
given as 18 maxztli compliance ecbedule to meet the Limit.
• Deletion of daily raximuras ]1xr 1t for toluenes based on no reasonable potential •
to emceed the allowable coneeratrz tioxx.
• Deletion of raonthly mcxiitorirxg far selenium and lead based on no resusoraable
potential to rgcecd the allowable concentrations_
• ditto= of daily •pri.a.reveurn limit of 262 ug/1 sand areelzly avere►g@ limit of 856
u/1 for raiclscl based on reasonable potential to exceed the allowable
racentratioxi. 1
• As}3dittom of daily ' x** ui•+'■ limit of 22 ug/1 and weelcty avca:-age limit of 38 vg/1
for cyanide based F xx reasonable potential to 4=rrenecl. the elliowabla
ear>Len tratLaxa4s. i
• Addition of daily maximum limit of 873 ug/1 for clxromi* 1.m based on reasonable
potential to cxoccd the sas llawable canccrxtratiora.
• Addition of daily asa ixnu '*'+ lix::iit of 373 ug/1 for arsenic based on reasonable
potential to emceed the allawsbl'c coaceaatratiosz_
• The d adition of the+*•+ts axai effluent pollutant seaxx as rd equireby EpA fax major
mi taipa1 ciicae rages.
• *nutrient ent a an:U attan study will be d1 se one year Srom the eSective data of the
Lineal Pri }-
4
P'ropvsad Schcdulc fir Iioramit Issuaacel
Draft Pc rmit to Public oticc:
Permit chedtaled to 1 Issgs.a e:
1 s
State IC/mat/ant
If you have any quemtio a oars any of trap abase information or on the attaa1+ed permit.
please' o ;sue = ct Jaclzi/e Nowell at [phone] ext. 512.
August t S 1. 2006.
October 24. 2008
1•TAME•
81ie Oft
NAME: DAZE:
H
t
i
1
1
i I
I ltckoxy- Nartlie sket W W'TP Pact Sktract
rwrmas rrerre rw.a
Peagr 5 . •

DWQ POINT SOURCE Fax: [phone] Oct 19 2005 15:47 P. 11
Etergelsmsal Officio= CiasalmemiL
l• ,,./tit diezt m67,7( . .6.444.1.M get c7a-441.34‹, 4.1 / #ettql
ate. At4i.e.A.4 01 c.,;t JPtie p
10.f1.1-ek Guel%64-- a-110741-4'1.; *2' #4444 (I)
ee. +c_.‘ .,44. VLet4_
6/p(
e
3. 71te_ Alt,
)1-0 ae,;(4
'Iv 0: i 41,4) a eall4lAj- 6 " I e I t '' e i 1 i 1 •
•,'
7 / 0 I tilt) ealke Old
C " 1 - 1 6e)' 1 t I Wi . - . A : 4 7 / 'tt'- Y I t A • ' C i a 0 / t 4 4 - t y
641-a'Y e-7 ciat-ffs:4
Hicicary- r4art.u.e ssevlArt7, Pact
. Win:MS Ettnnawal
Sheet
Y.
d .
61 A 0., ez4 At-Zeree-d A-e- 4s1V0,-:4-
;1:-)/ (-1/ eJ et)ett4 oiturL,
A) Nea-_ pl---4„,e___ 7'_etA)
DArTE:
04e4 C1914e0be-A. >tete,
4tt2Q16 kii-te- ittSer>=4;,0

•
ADDENDUM TO FACTSHEET
Received comments from EPA and City of Hickory on the draft permit. DEH concurred with
the issuance of the permit. ESB had no comments on the draft.
EPA comments were as follows:
1. The permit application shows that method 245.1 was to used for Hg,
instead of Method 1631E. Does the permit need to have a condition
specifying that this method must be used and that monitoring using it
should occur more quickly than other parameters since the application
was deficient?
2. Since the City has a pretreatment program, the fact sheet should
contain the std language that says that program will continue to be
implemented.
3. Shouldn't total suspended residue be expressed as TSS?
4. For cyanide and nickel, because the daily max values are more
stringent, they control. I understand why the weekly avg numbers are
needed, but they seem superfluous.
NPDES response:
#1 -Based on reviewing the DMR data, the facility started using method 1631E in 2004 and
is still using it through July 2005, that was the period of data used in the RPA. I think that
they are now aware that the new mercury method must be used.
#2 - I will input language that the pretreatment program must be continued into the
factsheet.
#3 - I will change "residue" to "solids".
#4 - I will delete the weekly average values for Cn and Ni. The facility will have daily
maximum values only.
City of Hickory comments were as follows:
1. Cn and Ni daily max. and weekly avg. limits are reversed. Since the daily max. values
were lower than the weekly averages, the City thought that the daily max. should be
the weekly averages.
NPDES response- Initially I agreed with the engineers during a telephone conversation,
however after consultation with my supervisor, Susan Wilson. The daily max. limits
given were correct, however the weekly average limits should not have been given. I will
delete the weekly average limits for CN and Ni and only the daily maximum limits will be
given.
2. Facility requesting three years for construction and addition of ton cylinders for the
chlorination and dechlorination. Indicated that this would be ongoing and is
necessary to meet the new 28 ug/1 limit. Mentioned that Clean Water Act allows
them 3 years for compliance with new limits due to renovation to plant.
Hickory- Northeast WWTI' Fact. Sheet
NPDIES Renewal
Page 7

NPDES response - 4/12/2006 jmn -While the facility does have an existing
chlorination/dechlorination system, Hickory has submitted written justification on
April 5, 2006 for needing three years to complete major plant upgrades and
renovations, including installation of biological nutrient removal facilities. Based on the
timelines presented and the fact that chlorination and dechlorination ch mbers will be
installed in the first phase, NPDES will concur with the three year comp ance schedule.
However, there will be no extensions from the date of June 1, 2009 when the TRC limit
must be meet.
3. They want the requirements of the optimization study in writing. Current language
in letter will be added as a permit condition.
NPDES response -Based on the installation of BNR facilities in the plant renovations,
the requirement for a nutrient optimization study will be removed from the permit.
4. Request that 7Q10 of their receiving stream (Lake Hickory be revised upward from 60
cfs to 228 cfs which is the same as the Town of Valdese located upstream of them.
NPDES response: According to the best information that we have, the 7Q10 of 60 cfs
used for Hickory Northeast is based on the minimum instantaneous release from the
Rhodhiss Dam of 40 cfs plus estimated summer 7Q10 flow from two rivers above the
Hickory' NE discharge.
While The City of Valdese is located upstream of Hickory and it is also upstream of
the Rhodhiss Dam. The estimated 7Q10 flow used at Valdese is based on the minimum
instantaneous release from Lake James Dam and the flow from several large tributary
rivers between the Lake James dam and the Valdese discharge point. The flow released
from that dam in addition to all the tributary flows, totaled the 228 cfs flow that is used
for Valdese. However, since there is a dam between the two dischargers that regulates
the flow downstream of Valdese, the same 7Q10 flow estimate of 228 cfs, cannot be used
for Hickory. There are ongoing discussions in the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) relicensing process that may have some effect on the flows used in
the Catawba Chain Lakes. Since the relicensing has not been completed and all
pertinent information has not been received, we cannot at this time vary from existing
Division procedure on 7Q10 flows.
Permit limits corrections:
1. Arsenic limit in draft permit was calculated using the incorrect WQ standard. The
daily maximum limit for arsenic will be revised from 373 ug/1 to a weekly average
limit of 252 ug/l. This revision is based on the new North Carolina human health
standard for arsenic as a carcinogen for protection of streams classified for usage
as a water supply (WS). The human health and WS standard for arsenic is 10
ug/1 and was adopted in April 2003 during the last triennial review of North
Carolina's water quality standards. The August 31, 2005 draft permit had an
arsenic limit calculated from the freshwater standard of 50 ug/l. The use of the
lower arsenic standard of 10 ug/1 in the calculations will produce a more
stringent effluent limit for protection of human health against this carcinogen.
2. The City of Hickory Northeast WWTP discharges its wastewater into Lake Hickory
(Catawba River). This waterbody is classified WS V and B, which state that the
best usage of the water is waters that are protected as water supplies which are
generally upstream and draining to WS-IV waters or waters previously used for
1
Hickory-- Northeast LVWTI' Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
.I'agc' 8

drinking water purposes or waters used by industry to supply their employees but
not municipalities or counties, with NCAC .02b 0.0218 (1) (h)(i) states that water
quality standards (maximum permissible concentrations) to protect human health
through water consumption and fish tissue consumption for non -carcinogens in
Class WS-V waters: Nickel: 25 ug/1. Should have used 25 ug/1 for WS class in the
reasonable potential analysis, instead of 88 ug/1. Revised Ni limits will be a
weekly average limit of 186 ug/1 and a daily maximum limit of 261 ug/1.
3. The total chromium limit will be corrected to a weekly average limit of 373 ug/1
and a daily maximum limit of 1022 ug/1 for protection of against chronic toxicity
effects and acute toxicity effects.
State C5ntact
NAME:
S s�
DATE: 8/UUC,7
�L Ir GR E -j-
( N- Z/S (off L.-a -t1-
Hickory- Northeast WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 9

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Hickory - Northeast WWTP
NC0020401
Time Period 1/2004-6/2005
Qw (MGD) 6 WWTP Class IV
7Q10S (cfs) 60 /WC (%) 7Q10S 13.42
7Q 10W (cfs) 60 @ 7Q 10 W 13.42
3002 (cfs) 225 ' 3002 3.9693
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 225 @ QA 3.9693
Rec'ving Stream Catawba River (Lake Hickory) Stream Class WS-IV and B
Outfall 001
Qw=6MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WOS/
Chronic
94 FAV1
Acute
n
N Da Max Pred Cw Allowable Cw
Arsenic
C
10
ug/L
34
4
4839.3
Acute: N/A
_________
Chronic: 252
________________
RP to exceed chronic allowable conc. Recommend limit be
placed in permit. Also continue in LTMP.
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
18
0
1.4
Acute: 15
______________________________
Chronic: 15
___
No RP 10 exceed chronic allowable conc.
Continue in LTMP
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
ug/L
18
6
11407.2
Acute: 1,022
Shows RP to exceed both alllowable concs. Recommend
limit be placed in the permit
Chronic: 373
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
36
24
151.8
Acute: 7
Shows RP to exceed both allowable concs. Recommend
continued 2/month monitoring b/c action level.
Chronic: 52
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
36
11
92.3
Acute: 22
Shows RP to exceed both alllowable concs. Recommend
limit be placed in the permit
Chronic: 37
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
19
16
17.5
Acute: 34
_____________________________________________—
Chronic: 186
No RP to exceed either alllowable. Recommend monitoring
be dropped. Continue in LTMP
Mercury
NC
0.012
0.0002
ug/L
18
18
0.0547
Acute: N/A
_ _ _ ___ ___
Chronic: 0.089
___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___________
No RP to exceed chronic allowable conc.
Continue in LTMP
Molybdenum
A
3.500
ug/L
18
17
238.7
Acute: N/A
______________________________
Chronic:88.177
No RP 10 exceed chronic allowable conc.
Continue in LTMP
Nickel
NC
25
261
ug/L
18
3
11,160.0
Acute: 261
__________________________
Chronic: 186
Shows RP to exceed the chronic alllow. Conc. Recommend
be placed in the permit
Phenols
A
1
N
ug/L
71
2
27.6
Acute: N/A
_ _ _ _ — — —limit
Chronic: 25.2
— — — — — — — —
Shows RP to exceed the chronic alllow. Conc. Recommend
continuation of limit in the permit
Selenium
NC
5.0
56
ug/L
18
1
9.0
Acute: 56
____ _______________________
Chronic: 37
No RP to exceed either allowable conc. Recommend
monitoring be dropped. Continue in LTMP
Silver
NC
0.06
AL
1.23
ug/L
35
6
243.2
Acute: 1
___________________________
Chronic: 0.45
Shows RP to exceed both alllowable conc.. Recommend
continued 2/month monitoring b/c action level.
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
36
36
Acute: 67
418.5 __________________________
Chronic: 373
Shows RP to exceed both alllowable concs. Recommend
continued 2/month monitoring b/c action level.
• Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
20401rpa2005.rev01112006,rpa
2/7/2006

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
1
Arsenic
Date Data 13DL=1/2DL Results
Jun-2005 < 5.0 2.5 Std Dev. 97.2737
< 5.0 2.5 Mean 19.5176
< 5.0 2.5 C.V. 4.9839
< 5.0 2.5 n 34
6.0 6.0
6.8 6.8 MuIt Factor = 8.4900
< 5.0 2.5 Max. Value 570.0 ug/L
< 5.0 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 4839.3 ug/L
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
Dec-2004 < 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
Oct-2004 < 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
5.8 5.8
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
< 5.0 2.5
Jul-2004 570.0 570.0
-1-
20401 rpa2005.rev, data
8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
3
4
5
Cadmium
Chromium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 < 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.1179
2 < 1 0.5 Mean 0.5278
3 < 2 1.0 C.V. 0.2233
4 < 1 0.5 n 18
5 <', 1 0.5
6 <' 1 0.5 Mult Factor = 1.4200
7 Dec-2004 < 1 0.5 Max. Value 1.0 ug/L
8 <' 1 0.5 Max. Pred Cw 1.4 ug/L
9 Oct-2004 < 1 0.50
10 < 1 0.50
11 < 1 0.50
12 < 1 0.50
13 < 1 0.50
14 < 1 0.50
15 < 1 0.50
16 < 1 0.50
17 < 1 0.50
18 <'S 1 0.50
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Dec-2004
8
9 Oct-2004
10
11
12
13
14
15
16 Mar-2004
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Date
Jun-2005
Data
BDL=1/2DL Results
2 1.0 Std Dev.
2 1.0 Mean
2 1.0 C.V.
64 64.0 n
2 1.0
2 1.0 Mult Factor =
2.7 2.7 Max. Value
2 1.0 Max. Pred Cw
2.0 2.0
2.0 1.0
2.0 1.0
2.0 1.0
6.0 6.0
2.9 2.9
2.0 1.0
840.0 840.0
2.0 1.0
2.0 1.0
197.2987
51.6444
3.8203
18
13.5800
840.0 ug/L
11407.2 ug/L
- 2 -
20401rpa2005.rev, data
8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
6
8
Copper
Cyanide
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Jun-2005 9.5 9.5 Std Dev. 15.0657
< 38 19.0 Mean 18.1194
23 23.0 C.V. 0.8315
< 38 19.0 n 36
13 13.0
< 38 19.0 Mult Factor = 2.3000
< 38 19.0 Max. Value 66.0 ug/L
54 54.0 Max. Pred Cw 151.8 ug/L
4 4.4
38 19.0
4 3.6
38 19.0
Dec-2004 38 19.0
17 17.0
28 28.0
38 38.0
Oct-2004 38 19.0
2 1.0
4 4.0
38 19.0
7 6.5
38 19.0
8 8.4
38 19.0
11 11 11.0
66 66.0
26 26.0
8 7.5
r u, 11 11.0
xy 8 7.7
J
55 55.0
4 4.4
P.� 30 30.0
7 6.8
4 4.4
3 3.1
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 < 5 5.0 Std Dev. 5.6912 1
2 < 5 5.0 Mean 6.3056 2
3 10 10.0 C.V. 0.9026 3
4 < 5 5.0 n 36 4
5 < 5 5.0 5
6 < 5 5.0 Mult Factor = 2.4300 6
7 < 5 5.0 Max. Value 38.0 ug/L 7
8 6 5.0 Max. Pred Cw 92.3 ug/L 8
9 < 5 5.000 9
10 < 5 5.000 10
11 < 5 5.000 11
12 7 5.000 12
13 Dec-2004 < 5 5.000 13
14 < 5 5.0 14
15 8 5.0 15
16 < 5 5.0 16
17 Oct-2004 < 5 5.0 17
18 < 5 5.0 18
19 < 5 5.0 19
20 < 5 5.0 20
21 < 5 5.0 21
22 < 5 5.0 22
23 < 5 5.0 23
24 < 5 5.0 24
25 < 2 5.0 25
26 < 2 5.0 26
27 < 2 5.0 27
28 2 5.0 28
29 6 5.0 29
30 4 5.0 30
31 Mar-2004 38 38.0 31
32 < 2 5.0 32
33 4 5.0 33
34 14 14.0 34
35 < 2 5.0 35
36 2 5.0 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
61 61
62 62
63 63
64 64
65 65
66 66
67 67
68 68
69 69
70 70
71 71
72 72
20401 rpa2005.rev, data
- 3 - 8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
9
10
Lead
Mercury
Date Data
Jun-2005
Dec-2004
Oct-2004
BDL=1/2DL Results
0.270 0.270 Std Dev.
0.670 0.670 Mean
0.270 0.270 C.V.
0.430 0.430 n
0.560 0.560
0.970 0.970 Mult Factor =
1.100 1.100 Max. Value
2.100 2.100 Max. Pred Cw
0.790 0.790
0.001 0.001
3.330 3.330
1.000 0.500
4.910 4.910
1.710 1.710
1.000 0.5
1.36 1.4
1.10 1.1
2.68 2.7
1.00 0.5
1.2405
1.2501
0.9924
19
3.5700
4.9 ug/L
17.5 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 0.0088 0.0 Std Dev. 0.0060 1
2 0.0070 0.0 Mean 0.0100 2
3 0.0064 0.0 C.V. 0.6070 3
4 0.0226 0.0 n 18 4
5 0.0090 0.0 5
6 0.0096 0.0 Mult Factor= 2.4200 6
7 Dec-2004 0.0039 0.0 Max. Value 0.023 ug/L 7
8 0.0050 0.0 Max. Pred Cw 0.055 ug/L 8
9 Oct-2004 0.0055 0.0 9
10 0.0027 0.0 10
11 0.0037 0.0 11
12 0.0117 0.0 12
13 0.0062 0.0 13
14 0.0131 0.0 14
15 0.0128 0.0 15
16 0.0197 0.0 16
17 0.0100 0.0 17
18 0.0215 0.0 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
61 61
62 62
63 63
64 64
65 65
66 66
67 67
68 68
69 69
70 70
71 71
72 72
20401rpa2005.rev, data
- 4 - 8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
11
12
Molybdenum
Nickel
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Jun-2005 13 13.0 Std Dev. 15.9603
11 11.0 Mean 19.7111
24 24.0 C.V. 0.8097
78 78.0 n 18
23 23.0
11 11.0 Mult Factor= 3.0600
Dec-2004 20 20.0 Max. Value 78.0 ug/L
24 24.0 Max. Pred Cw 238.7 ug/L
Oct-2004 22.0 22.0
5.0 2.5
25.0 25.0
20.0 20.0
6.3 6.3
14.0 14.0
22.0 22.0
12.0 12.0
12.0 12.0
15.0 15.0
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 187.7748 1
2 < 5 2.5 Mean 47.6944 2
3 15 15.0 C.V. 3.9370 3
4 6 6.0 n 18 4
5 c 5 2.5 5
6 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 13.9500 6
7 Dec-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 800.0 ug/L 7
8 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 11160.0 ug/L 8
9 Oc1-2004 < 5 2.5 9
10 < 5 2.5 10
11 < 5 2.5 11
12 < 5 2.5 12
13 < 5 2.5 13
14 < 5 2.5 14
15 c 5 2.5 15
16 Mar-2004 800 800.0 16
17 c 5 2.5 17
18 < 5 2.5 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 26
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
36 36
37 37
38 38
39 39
40 40
41 41
42 42
43 43
44 44
45 45
46 46
47 47
48 48
49 49
50 50
51 51
52 52
53 53
54 54
55 55
56 56
57 57
58 58
59 59
60 60
61 61
62 62
63 63
64 64
65 65
66 66
67 67
68 68
69 69
70 70
71 71
72 72
20401rpa2005.rev, data
- 5 - 8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
13
14
Phenols
Selenium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Jun-2005 < 20 10.0 Std Dev. 1.8771
< 20 10.0 Mean 10.0704
20 10.0 C.V. 0.1864
< 20 10.0 n 71
< 20 10.0
20 10.0 Mult Factor = 1.1600
< 20 10.0 Max. Value 24.0 ug/L
< 20 10.0 Max. Pred Cw 27.8 ug/L
< 20 10.0
20 10.0
< 10 5.0
10 5.0
11 11.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
20 10.0
< 20 10.0
Dec-2004 < 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
<, 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
Oct-2004 < 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
• 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
24 24.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
< 20 10.0
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 < 5 2.5 Std Dev. 0.7778
2 < 5 2.5 Mean 2.6833
3 < 5 2.5 C.V. 0.2899
4 c 5 2.5 n 18
5 < 5 2.5
6 < 5 2.5 Mult Factor = 1.5600
7 Dec-2004 < 5 2.5 Max. Value 5.8 ug/L
8 < 5 2.5 Max. Pred Cw 9.0 ug/L
9 Oc1-2004 < 5 2.5
10 < 5 2.5
11 < 5 2.5
12 6 5.8
13 < 5 2.5
14 < 5 2.5
15 < 5 2.5
16 < 5 2.5
17 < 5 2.5
18 < 5 2.5
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Date
1 Jun-2005
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 Dec-2004
14
15
16
17 Oct-2004
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
- 6 -
20401rpa2005.rev, data
8/30/2005

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
15
Silver
Zinc
Data BDL=1/2DL Results
< 2 1.0 Std Dev. 11.0769
< 25 12.5 Mean 6.5800
• 2 1.0 C.V. 1.6834
<; 25 12.5 n 35
3.5 3.5
25 12.5 Mult Factor= 3.8600
<s 25 12.5 Max. Value 63.0 ug/L
< 2 1.0 Max. Pred Cw 243.2 ug/L
< 25 12.5
< 2 1.0
2 2.3
< 25 12.5
3 3.1
<' 25 12.5
< 25 12.5
6 5.5
<: 25 12.5
<; 2 1.0
< 25 12.5
<< 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
63 63.0
< 2 1.0
<: 2 1.0
<'. 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
2 1.0
c 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
9 8.9
< 2 1.0
< 2 1.0
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Jun-2005 72 72.0 Std Dev. 40.1765
2 85 85.0 Mean 101.2778
3 97 97.0 C.V. 0.3967
4 90 90.0 n 36
5 98 98.0
6 84 84.0 Mult Factor = 1.5500
7 74 74.0 Max. Value 270.0 ug/L
8 105 105.0 Max. Pred Cw 418.5 ug/L
9 96 96.0
10 106 106.0
11 99 99.0
12 85 85.0
13 Dec-2004 120 120.0
14 136 136.0
15 160 160.0
16 133 133.0
17 Oct-2004 73 73.0
18 108 108.0
19 28 28.0
20 103 103.0
21 70 70.0
22 91 91.0
23 110 110.0
24 97 97.0
25 93 93.0
26 100 100.0
27 270 270.0
28 92 92.0
29 120 120.0
30 100 100.0
31 Mar-2004 85 85.0
32 170 170.0
33 83 83.0
34 28 28.0
35 110 110.0
36 75 75.0
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
20401rpa2005.rev, data
- 7 - 8/30/2005

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Facility Name
NPDES #
Qw (MGD)
7010s (cis)
1WC(%)
Rec'ving Stream
Stream Class
Hickory -NE WWTP
NC0020401
6
60
13.42
Catawba R. (L Hickory)
WS-IV and B
FINAL RESULTS
Toluene
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUE!
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw #VALUEI
3.473
82.0
.2.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.4
372.6
3.4
5.6
52.2
5.6
0
0
13
13
0
0
0
Max. Value
0
1 0.5 <1
2 0.5 <1
3 0.5 <1
4 0.5 <1
5 0.5 <1
6 0.5 <1
ug/I 7 0.5 <1
ug/l 8 0.5 <1
9 0.5 <1
10 0.5 <1
ug/I 11 0.5 <1
ugA 12 0.5 <1
13 0.5 <1
14 0.5 <1
ug/I 15 0.5 <1
ug/1 16 0.5 <1
17 0.5<1
18 0.5 <1
ug/l 19 0.5 <1
ug/l 20 0.5 <1
21 0.5 <1
22 0.5 <1
ugll 23 2.3 2.3
ug/l 24 1.8 1.8
25 1.3 1.3
26 0.5 <1
ug/I 27 0.5 <1
ug/l 28 0.5 <1
29 0.5 <1
30 0.5 <1
ug/l 31 0.5 <1
ug/1 32 0.5 <1
33 0.5 <1
34 2.3 2.3
ug/1 35 0.5 <1
ug/1 36 0.5 <1
37 0.5 <1
38 0.5 <1
ug/1 39 0.5 <1
ugfl 40 0.5 <1
41 0.5 <1
42 0.5 <1
ug/l 43 0.5 <1
ug/1 44 0.5 <1
45 0.5 <1
46 0.5 <1
ug/l 47 0.5 <1
ugf 48 0.5 <1
49 0.5 <1
50 0.5 <1
ug/I 51 0.5 <1
ug/I 52 1.8 1.8
53 0.5 <1
54 0.5 <1
55 0.5 <1
56 0.5 <1
57 1.5 1.5
58 0.5 <1
59 0.5 <1
60 0.5 <1
61 1.5 1.5
62 1.8 1.8
63 0.5 <1
64 0.5 <1
65 0.5 <1
66 0.5 <1
67 0.5 <1
68 0.5 <1
69 0.5 <1
70 0.5 <1
71 0.5 <1
72 0.5 <1
73 0.5 <1
74 0.5 <1
75 0.5 <1
76 0.5 <1
77 0.5 <1
78 0.5 <1
Parameter=
Standard =
Toluene
11
n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS
Std Dev. 0.408193228
Mean 0.632051282
C.V. 0.6
Paramet
Stands
Mutt Facial
Max. Value
Max. Pred
Allowable C
2.3 irg/I
3.473 pg/I
81.97 lig/I
8/29/2005

Hickory -Northeast WWTP
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (I
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (ug)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 6.5 :1
60
6
9.3
17.0
0
13.42
126.68
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (m
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/1o0m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (m
60
6
9.3
1.0
0.22
13.42
6.03
60
6
9.3
1.8
0.22
13.42
11.99
8/30/2005

•llickory•
re Business and Pleasure Grow Together
October 7, 2005
Ms. Jackie Nowell
NCDENR / DWQ / NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Re: Comments to Draft NPDES Permit
City of Hickory -Northeast WWTP (NPDES # NC0020401)
Hickory, NC
Dear Ms. Nowell:
The City of Hickory has reviewed the draft NPDES permit for the Northeast WWTP (NPDES #
NC0020401) and we believe several items require addressing prior to proceeding to finalize it.
The following lists these items along with the City's proposal for how to address each.
1. Part I. Section A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS.
Based on our review of the reasonable potential spreadsheet and the derived permit
limits, the daily maximum and weekly average concentrations for both total cyanide
and total nickel are reversed. During the telephone conversation on September 30,
2005 between the City's engineer, Mr. Jonathan Hunt with HSMM, and NCDENR,
you concurred with this. The table should be revised to reflect a weekly average of
22 µg/L and a daily maximum of 38 µg/L for total cyanide. Likewise, the table
should be revised to reflect a weekly average of 261 µg/L and a daily maximum of
656 µg/L for total nickel.
;;1=`CoS 111IOd
kill .'i i�} " 31.'i'rh - Zi!30
500Z v ! 130
1i0
i:t_W_I��.�]�)
GREATER
DICK RY
METRO

Ms. Jackie Nowell
October 7, 2005
Page Two
2. Part I. Section A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS and Part I. Section A. (3). TOTAL RESIDUAL CHLORINE.
The Northeast WWTP currently uses gaseous chlorine for disinfection and sulfur
dioxide for dechlorination. In order for the WWTP to meet the specified limit of 28
gg/L, it will be necessary for the WWTP to significantly expand its dechlorination
system and storage area. Plant operators indicate that ton cylinders will be required
along with new, larger delivery lines, valves and headers. Since there is limited space
in the existing dechlorination chemical storage area, a new storage area for the ton
cylinders will also be required. Since a complete and total renovation of the existing
facility is currently under design, which will include onsite generation of sodium
hypochlorite for disinfection and sodium bisulfite for dechlorination, the expansion of
the existing system and the construction of a new dechlorination chemical storage
area would be an unjustified expense at this time. We note that the Clean Water Act
allows for up to three (3) years to achieve compliance with new effluent limitations.
Therefore, we request that the compliance schedule for the total residual chlorine
limit be extended for the full three (3) years allowed by the Clean Water Act so that
compliance can be achieved through the upcoming renovation of the WWTP.
3. Page 2 of cover letter of draft NPDES permit, final bulleted item.
As mentioned, a complete renovation of the existing WWTP is currently under
design. The new treatment system will include biological nutrient removal along
with provisions for additional treatment. During the telephone conversation on 30
September 2005, between the City's engineer and NCDENR, you indicated that a
brief report identifying sources of total phosphorus and total nitrogen and describing
how the new WWTP will be capable of nutrient removal would be sufficient to
comply with the requirement to conduct a nutrient optimization study. You further
stated that no implementation of optimizing techniques would be required following
the nutrient optimization study. Please confirm the methodology and anticipated
implementation in writing.

Ms. Jackie Nowell
October 7, 2005
Page Three
4. Reasonable Potential Methodology (7Q10 Flow).
The 7Q10 flow that is currently utilized by NCDENR is a relic of past NPDES
permits when the discharge from the Northeast WWTP was to Falling Creek, a
tributary of the Catawba River. In 1988, the discharge was relocated to the main
channel of the Catawba River within Lake Hickory. The decision to relocate the
discharge at considerable expense to the City was largely driven by the expectation
that effluent limitations would not be as stringent since the main channel of the
Catawba River provides greater dilution than Falling Creek. However, following the
relocation of the discharge, the 7Q10 flow used in reasonable potential calculations
has never been adjusted upward and, therefore, effluent limitations imposed upon the
WWTP have been unnecessarily stringent. This has placed an unnecessary burden
upon the City. Not only does the City incur a significant expense from laboratory
analyses that would otherwise be unnecessary, the more stringent effluent limitations
increase the risk that a process upset will lead to a permit violation and result in an
enforcement action against the City.
We request that the NCDENR modify the Northeast WWTP's NPDES permit to
reflect a 7Q10 flow of at least 228 cfs. We note that the reasonable potential
calculations for the Town of Valdese's WWTP are based on a 7Q10 flow of 228 cfs.
The Northeast WWTP's discharge is located downstream from the location of the
discharge from the Town of Valdese's WWTP to Lake Rhodhiss. In fact, several
tributaries converge with the Catawba River between the two discharges, only
increasing flows downstream. Furthermore, the location of both discharges share
similar characteristics. Both the discharge from the Northeast WWTP and the
discharge from the Town of Valdese's WWTP are located within the main channel of
e Catawba River, approximately 7 miles upstream from the respective dam and
e ch discharge is located well downstream from the beginning of the lake to which it
enters.

MM. Jackie Nowell
October 7, 2005
P .ge Four
We further note that the 7Q10 flow used for the Falling Creek discharge was based on
the minimum instantaneous release from the Rhodhiss dam since, in the view of
NCDENR, the location of the discharge to Falling Creek would likely not receive the
flow through benefits of a location within the main channel. Although this may have
been a reasonable approach for the previous location, it does not accurately reflect
actual mixing conditions at the current discharge location. Clearly, a minimum
instantaneous release from a dam is a much more conservative value than a 7Q10
flow, the time scales being vastly different. The City of Hickory only wishes to
receive the benefit of greater dilution of its effluent from the Northeast WWTP's
effluent in the form of a 7Q10 flow that accurately reflects actual mixing conditions
at the point of discharge. Therefore, we again request that the NCDENR modify the
Northeast WWTP's NPDES permit to reflect a 7Q10 flow of at least 228 cfs.
Thank you in advance for your assistance and consideration towards this draft permit. Should
you have any questions, please do not hesitate contacting me at [phone] or via e-mail at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Kevin B. Greer, PE
Asst. Public Services Director/ Public Utilities
i
pc: Chuck Hansen, PE, Public Services Director City of Hickory
Jonathan P. Hunt, HSMM
David *ratter, PE/HSMM
HSMM NPDES & Reading Files

, .
/1-.4„4
AC- *?,./
fr-A
aeicid4 b re,
__0(
/ Mi-ii&
0 gaftexz r �l4Ae .ZL
®,i3s16/E, 7 t- f ig
1,..i //,,' (14 e,-, .2,
_La)
os
4J, c,..a,,,_ —7/4e) „.4,
,,,tilizz,
jk.ir5 —
'- ,, .i, e
a4ey /�a- Ii kee(-4 - i,-
ofv '�
L PVl 1. vxei4)
T) (52,M4 I 2- A---- l',/t/
e f91w
010‘ )-fki-^' /6) j
z4r
d'' '7"
,-/L-k v9-
z z $

,fp-G
//z41-'6 9' 04'6-0
...._...-*
�` ffS LC j <TA sze-r',4 'k 4, /„,,,
gi
7pio

IV sr41.t,
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
� yw REGION 4
o�Q ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
x�F ,02 61 FORSYTH STREET
vl4< ARo1 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
rtt3 0 2000
Ms. Jackie Nowell
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Draft NPDES Permit
Hickory Northeast WWTP - Permit No. NC0020401
Dear Ms. Nowell:
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR NPDES MOA, we have completed review of the
proposed permit specified above and have no comments or objections to its conditions. We
request that we be afforded an additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made
to the proposed permit prior to issuance or if significant comments objecting to it are received.
Otherwise, please send us one copy of the final permit when issued.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Marshall Hyatt, Environmental Scientist
Permits, Grants, and Technical Assistance Branch
Water Management Division
FE3 1 3 2006
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable . Printed with Vegetable oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)

JsoED STip.elk S
YY
a � �
o Q
0
it
PROS EC
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
c J' 1 S 7005
Ms. Jackie Nowell
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Draft NPDES Permit
City of Hickory — Northeast WWTP- Permit No. NC0020401
Dear Ms. Nowell:
In accordance with the EPA/NCDENR NPDES MOA, we have completed review of the
draft permit specified above and have no comments or objections to its conditions. We request
that we be afforded an additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made to the
draft permit prior to issuance or if significant comments objecting to it are received. Otherwise,
please send us one copy of the final permit when issued.
If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Marshall Hyatt, Environmental Scientist
Permits, Grants, and Technical Assistance Branch
Water Management Division
OCT 2 4 2005
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Olt Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)

Re: Fw: cpmments on NC00204101, Hickory NE WWTP
Subject: Re: Fw: comments on NC0020401, Hickory NE WWTP
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:09:10 -0400
To: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
thanks for addressing my comments. I will send a no comment letter.
Marshall
1 of 1 10/18/2005 4:30 PM

Re: Fw: comments on NC0020401, Hickory NE WWTP
Subject: Re: Fw: comments on NC0020401, HickoryNE WWTP
From: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:39:53 -0400
To: [e-mail]
[e-mail] wrote:
don't think I've heard back from you re this yet
Forwarded by Marshall Hyatt/R4/USEPA/US on 10/06/2005
Marshall
Hyatt/R4/USEPA/U
S
09/06/2005 02:05
PM
08:39 AM
To
[e-mail]
cc
Subject
comments on NC0020401, Hickory NE
WWTP
hope these are useful. will you be able to respond to these by Sept
16? thanks Marshall
1. The permit application shows that method 245.1 was to used for Hg,
instead of Method 1631E. Does the permit need to have a condition
specifying that this method must be used and that monitoring using it
should occur more quickly than other parameters since the application
was deficient?
2. Since the City has a pretreatment program, the fact sheet should
contain thelstd language that says that program will continue to be
implemented.
3. Shouldn't total suspended residue be expressed as TSS?
4. For cyanide and nickel, because the daily max values are more
stringent, they control. I understand why the weekly avg numbers are
needed, but they seem superfluous.
Hello Marshall,
Regarding your comments on the subject permit:
#1 - Based on reviewing the DMR data, the facility started using method 1631E in
2004 and is still using it through July 2005, that was the period of data used in the
RPA. I think that they are now aware that the new mercury method must be used. #2
I will input language that the pretreatment program must be continued into the
factsheet.
#3 - I will change "residue" to "solids".
#4 - I will delete the weekly average values
have daily maximum values only.
Please let me know if additional info is needed.
for
Cn and Ni.
and the facility will
1 of 2 1/11/2006 11:49 AM

ATA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
August 31, 2005
Britt Setzer
NC DENR / DEH / Regional Engineer
Mooresville Regional Office
Jackie M. Nowell
NPDES Western Pi ogram
Review of Draft NPDES Permit NC0020401
City of Hickory/ Northeast WWTP
Catawba County
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
RECEIVED
Mooreavftt' p Office
SEP 012005
NCDENE.
Public Water SiApt;L'J
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the draft permit and return this
form by October 7, 2005. If you have any questions on the draft permit, please contact me
at the telephone number or e-mail address listed at the bottom of this page.
RESPONSE: (Check one)
Concur with the issuance of this permit provided the facility is operated and maintained
properly, the stated effluent limits are met prior to discharge, and the discharge does not
contravene the designated water quality standards.
Concurs with issuance of the above permit, provided the following conditions are met:
Opposes the issuance of the above permit, based on reasons stated below, or attached:
Signed ///f GGC.%' 7_ / •✓lp�
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919 733-5083, extension 512 (fax) 919 733-0719
VISIT US ON THE INTERNET @ http://h2o.enr.state.nc.usINPDES Jackie.nowell@ ncmail.net
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

;;; STATE OF;
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL.
''-MANAGEMENT
'COMMISSIONN.-:
• 1 NPDES UNIT' :'
1617 'MAIL' SERVICE -
• -CENTER°:
RALEIGH, NC
NOTIFICATION OF .:6
INTENT TOISSUEA
NPDES. WASTE', WATER..
•
PERMITr_
On the . basis of thorough
staff review andapplica-:
tion .of ' NC' General ,Stat
ute . -143.21,:I Public.°aaw
92-500'and 'other .`lawful
standards _ and . regula-
tions,.,the North',Carolina,
Environmental :Manage
ment ' Commission'' pro-
poses to Issue:a National-:
Pollutant .r.Discharge.
.Elimination= System.
(NPDES) T wastewater,:
discharge permit to the •
person(s) listed: below, ef-
fective 45 -days :from the.
:publish datea.of:. this .: no -
lice. s
Written comments •. re- -`
?garding' the•`.:proposed
permit. wit be" accepted
until •30 'days.: after the
publish- date of this 'no
-
Ace. !- :All •`comments: re
ceivet;prior' to" that ':date
are`, considered in?thee:Th
pal °'determinations re
garding the.• proposed
permit.-,::.' The' Director: of
the NC.Division of Water;
•.Quality:,::may:•. decide to
-hold,_a: public meeting: tor
the': proposed- permit. •
should; -the Division re
calve a : significant:. de-
;greeofpublic interest. >:--
Copies' of the -draft permit
and ":other._supporting:'.
Jorinatiori-on- file=,used .to
'determine.=::conditions)
present in the `draft_ per
mrt. are "available upon-
:, request payment .of.
the costa"_of reproduction.
Mail Comments :0; and/or
requests `-for information
(0 ;the NC Division:of War.;
'ter' Quality `rat.. he "above.
.address or call the Point
Source __-:Branch 3 at '•(919) ;
733-5083 '.-extension 520;
or" 363.='Please .include;
'the NPDES: permit' num-
bar. `(attached).. In 'any.
I.o'
Interested 'persons 4may-
also%'visit the ;Division".of.
Water -Quality at 512 N.:.
Salisbury,'.. fleet; Ra--:
leigh, `'cNC`°.27604,1148';
between`: the c. hours'.:of -
8:00 •a.m::and: 5:00 p.m.'
to `,review,;information on:
NPDES ';Peniiit Number
NC0005258, •:. SGL ::Car-.
bon LLC,''Burke County;,
23245
NORTH CAROLINA
CATAWBA COUNTY
being first d ly worn, ays:, That he or
she is /of the
Hickory Daily Record, a newsiaper pub-
lished at Hickory, North Carolina; that in
the issues of the said newspaper for the
following days, to wit: ry-\\°,,„ a poc,5-
there appeared ..... /..3..F 'spaced
lines of advertising as per attached named
advertiser.
The Hickory Daily Record is a qualified news-
paper within the meaning of •n 1-597 of the
Genera tatutes of N. C.
Affiant
Sworn to and subscribed before me,
this
/G
My Commission Expires
`�✓cue—A; //
day of
, 20..4S..
, 20 ay'
ueraimanec:unwnwis,i
is present in the : draft: per-;
• mit - are ;'available ..upon
• „'request and':; payment of
the costs of .reproduction...:.
Mall'Continents :rand/or
.requests -;for'i.Information .
to;the NC:Division .of Wa-
:'ter'. Quality at ithe :above
;.addres§ or:calt:the. Point
•Source..Branch at 1919)
733-50837-extension 520
363.- !'Please•dnclude
the NPDES .'permit ° nurrl;
ber.:(attabhed) in '-'any
ctim;muni-c'at'on..'..
:Interested persons s may
also" visit the Division'of
Water Quality at 512 N.
Salisbury Street,
lefgh, : NC':' 27604-1148
between ;;the :r.hours -'of
8:00 a.mu •and'5:00 p.m..
to;.revlew Information on
file.
NPDES -.Permit .Number
• NC0005258„; SGL .Car-.
bon : LLC Burke County;-
has applied;.tar renewal
of -its pemirt Dior a .facility
discharging .•: contact and
noncontact cooling water
to.the Silver Creek in. the
,Catawba =River, Basin.
Currently,- chronic -toxicity
is the '-.•water-• quality
limited ••parameter. This
discharge -may affect fu-
ture -allocations in ..this
portion of the receiving
Huffman Finishing (P.O.
Box 170, : Granitq. • Fal(s,
'NC '28630) hasapplied
for. 'renewalrof : NPDES
permit.; NC0025135 for
.the Huffman : Finishing
WWTP • in• Cardwell
County."'- This permitted
facility :'discharges • 0.25
MGD of :.treated -waste-
water of'- the • 'Catawba
+River ern- the ' Catawba
River Basin. • Currently
fecal% coliform, phenols,
and `total residual 'chlo-
rine ' are water •.quality
limited: This , discharge
may; affect future alloca-
tions in: this portion of the
Catawba River Basin..:,
NPDES . Permit. , Number
NC0020401,. City. of
Hickory -Northeast
Wastewater . Treatment
Plant has applied for re
newel ..of .its permit for -.a
;'facility ;'djscharging :treat-
: pd; wastewater, to:ithe:
Catawba (liver --(Lake
Hickory) m the ';Catawba
River, . Basih. "; ;Currently
fecal: coliform; total resid-
f'ual chlorine, -‘phenol and:
other metals,: are . water'
qualitji - limited.' ' This dis-
charge -.may affect future
allocations : In `this portion
of the receiving stream. .
PUBLISH: Septernber2, :r': • '
2005.

Draft Permit review (2)
Subject: Draft Permit review (2)
From: John Giorgino <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:35:30 -0400
To: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Jackie, I have reviewed NC0005258 (SGL Carbon) and CO,20401 (Hickory Northeast
mime I have; no comments on the dralls. Thanks for forwarding them.
John Giorgino
Environmental Biologist
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
Mailing Address:
1621 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Office: 919 733-2136
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Web Page: htto://www.esb.enr.state.nc.us
1 of 1 1/1 1/2006 11:43 AM

To: NPDES Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Jackie Nowell
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
Date: April 13, 2005
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
County: Catawba
NPDES Permit No.: NC0020401
MRO No.: 04-111
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and address: City of Hickory Northeast WWTP
Post Office Box 398
Hickory, N.C. 28603-0398
p)
APfi 1 5 2005
L
DEHR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
2. Date of investigation: March 18, 2005
3. Report prepared by: Michael L. Parker, Environmental Engineer II
4. Person contacted and telephone number: Keith Rhyne, ORC [phone].
5. Directions to site: The WWTP site is located on the right (west) side of SR 1400
(Cloninger Mill Rd., N.E.) �0.15 mile southeast of the jct. of SR 1400 and Hwy. 127 in
northern Catawba County.
6. Discharge point(s), list for all discharge points: -
Latitude: 3 5 ° 48' 00"
Longitude: 81 ° 18' 05"
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No.: D 13 SE
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application: Yes. There is a small amount of
area available for expansion/upgrade, if necessary.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Hilly, 5-12% slopes. The WWTP site
does not appear to be located in a flood plain area.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: There is one dwelling .100 feet from the WWTP site.
Several dwellings are located within 500 feet of the site.

Page Two
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Catawba River
a. Classification: WS-IV, B
b. River basin and subbasin no.: Catawba 030832
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Primary and
secondary recreation (with frequent bodily contact) and as a source of public
water supply. There are no other (known) dischargers between the current
discharge point and a hydroelectric dam (Oxford Dam) located 4.0 miles below
the point of discharge.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater: 6.0 MGD (Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity: 6.0 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of current facility (current design capacity): 6.0 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous ATCs issued in the
previous two years: There has been no ATCs issued to this facility in the past two
years.
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: The existing
WWT facilities consist of a parshall flume with an ultrasonic flow transmitter
followed by dual influent bar screens (one mechanical and one manual), an
aerated grit chamber, four (4) rectangular and one circular primary clarifiers, eight
(8) aeration basins, two circular secondary clarifiers, a sludge pumping station,
gaseous chlorine disinfection, dechlorination (sulfur dioxide), diffused post
aeration, and two gravity belt sludge thickeners. A stand-by power generator is
available, if necessary.
f. Description of proposed WWT facilities: The permittee is currently in the design
stage for a complete overhaul of the existing WWTP. This overhaul will result in
the upgrade of essentially every treatment process currently being used at this
facility. Plans are to have the final design completed by the end of 2005 with
construction beginning early in 2006. Completion of construction is tentatively
scheduled for November 2007. ,`cl s NON i'1 Zckl 7
'L. PtAT 56A ;;,+tom,-�,,fj c,' +, .
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: This facility has a consistent record over
the past four years of passing it's toxicity tests.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved.
2. Residual handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Residuals are transported to the
City's Regional Composting Facility for treatment and disposal (WQ0004563). The
permittee has available (if necessary) the County landfill as a back-up disposal location.

Page Three
3. Treatment Plant Classification: Class IV
4. SIC Code(s): 4952 Wastewater Code(s): Primary: 01, 55, 09
5. MTU Code(s): 04003
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved?: Public monies were used in the construction of the existing WWT facility and
any future expansion/upgrade.
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: The permittee has not
requested any changes to the current permit's effluent limitations, frequency, sample type,
or sampling location in this permit renewal.
3. Important SOC/JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: This facility is neither under an SOC
nor is one being considered at this time.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The City of Hickory requests renewal of the subject permit for the continued operation of
the subject facility. There have been no changes to the current permit and/or existing WWT
facility since the permit was last issued, however, significant changes to the WWTP are planned
during the term of the next permit (see Part II, No. 1(f) above).
Pending receipt and approval of the draft permit, it is recommended that the permit be
renewed as requested.
Signature of R - ort Pre ' arer
/) ,
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
h:lds?dsr05\hiclaze.dsr
1
Date

A IFTEClS MUM MAMIS
HAYES. SEAY. MATTERN & MATTERN. INC.
181 E. EVANS ST. BTC-105 SUITE 23
FLORENCE. SC 29508
[phone] www.hsmm.com
SCALE: None
COMM. NO.: 60402A
DATE: APRIL 2004
PROPOSED PROJECT AREA
HICKORY NORTHEAST WWTP
HICKORY. NORTH CAROUNA

RKE
r'
Proposed Surface later Supply latersbed
data compiled by NCDBW / NCCGIA
and automated by NCCGIA, August 1991.
HPvisions completed March 1992.
WELL
Lake Hickory - Catawba
co
SCALE 1:325,000
1'
ATAWBA
Cidan
��G/A Municipality Ewa Lake or Pond
77/ j Critical Area ® NPDLS-Domestic
l \ \ j Balance of latershed A NPDYS-Industrial
emont
1
Love Vola
IREDELI
Catawba
N.C. Center for Geograpbic
Information and Analysis
April. 1992

Water Supply watershed Fact Sheet
Watershed: Lake Hickory
Major River Easin: Cataw3a
User (s) : City of Lenoir
Current Classification: WS—III
Recommended Classification: WS—IV
Watershed Drainage Area
Watershed or Protected Area:
Critical Area:
Total Area:
41.043 acres
12,224 acres
53,267 acres
Jurisdictional Composition Of Watershed
Percent of Percent of
Counties Acres watershed Jurisdiction
ALEXANDER 4.293 8 3
BURKE 11,841 22 4
CALDWELL 27.354 51 10
CATAWBA 2,283 4 1511921
CATAWBA 2,283 4 3610
CATAWBA 2,283 4 1
Municipalities
Granite Falls
Hickory
Hildebran
Hudson
Longview
Rhodhiss
Sawmills
Percent of Percent of
Acres Watershed Jurisdiction
1.393 3 71
3,851 7 33
55e 1 79
42 0 2
620 1 46
454 1 93
579 1 1•A
Existing DOMESTIC type dischargers:
DUDLEY SHOALS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
THOMASVILLE FURNITURE IND / SAWMILLS PLANT
BRUCE E. HALL PROJECT
J. WILBUR ARMSTRONG RESIDENCE
DEWITT C. MORETZ RESIDENCE
TED HAYES RESIDENCE
DUKE POWER CO / RHODHISS HYDRO STATION
RHODHISS WWTP
BETTY S. LOWMAN RENTAL PROPEPTY
. 241.
• NC00411 57
NC006O861
NC0073008
NC0052167
NC0050962
NC0047678
NC0004529
NC0025917
NC0048721

Lake Assessment
Lake Hickory
Lake Hickory is a run -of -the -river impoundment
located between Lake Rhodhiss and Lookout
Shoals Lake on the Catawba River (Figure 26).
The lake is owned by Duke Energy and is used to
generate hydroelectric power; public recreation is
a secondary use. There are several municipal
wastewater dischargers located in the reservoir's
immediate watershed. These discharges, as well
as nonpoint source pollution, have contributed to
the eutrophic conditions observed over the years.
The reservoir was most recently monitored in
2002. Surface dissolved oxygen and pH values
were elevated in May and surface percent
dissolved oxygen saturations (— 115 percent) were
greater than the water quality standard (110
percent for dissolved gasses). These values
suggested the possibility of an algal bloom.
Chlorophyll a values ranged from moderate to
elevated, but were not greater than the water
quality standard (40 pg/L). Chlorophyll a
concentrations at Station CTB048A were
consistently greater than those at the other three
sites (Appendix 16). Surface metals were within
applicable water quality standards. Based on the
NCTSI scores, the reservoir was mesotrophic in
May and July and eutrophic in August.
The Town of Hickory experienced taste and odor
problems in their drinking water in 2002. Algal
samples in May indicated the presence of
filamentous blue-green algae, which may have
contributed to the problems. Since elevated
densities of blue-green algae were also present in
Lake Rhodhiss, the problem persisted until the
algae died back in both reservoirs.
Duke Energy staff sampled the reservoir for DWQ
in 1997. Surface dissolved oxygen was
consistently greater than 9.0 mg/L at Station
CTB056A. In July, surface percent dissolved
oxygen saturation ranged from 111 to 124 percent
throughout the reservoir and in August was
approximately 115 percent from Station CTB056A
to Station CTB058D. Secchi depth was
consistently lowest, and nutrient values were
generally greatest, at the most upstream site
(Station CTB048A). Trophic conditions in 1997
were similar to those observed in previous years.
LAKE
HICKORY
0 1
1 1
Figure 26. Sampling Sites at Lake Hickory, Alexander and Catawba counties.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Catawba River Basin - June 2003
64

Appendix 15. Lake assessment program.
Lakes Monitored
Ten lakes in the basin were monitored as part of
the Lakes Assessment program in 2002 (Table 1).
Surface physical and photic zone chemistry data
collected from 1997 through 2002 (from 1992 for
Newton City and Bessemer City Lakes) are
presented in Appendix 18.
Lake Sampling Methods
Lake monitoring stations are sited to provide
representati'e samples of lake.water quality based
on morpholdgy, size, and site -specific features
such as coves and tributaries. Physical field
measurements (dissolved oxygen, pH, water
temperature and conductivity) are made with a
calibrated HydrolabTM. Readings are taken at the
surface of the lake (0.15 meters) and at one -meter
increments to the bottom of the lake. Secchi
depths are measured at each sampling station
with a weighted Secchi disk attached to a rope
marked off in centimeters. Surface water samples
are collecte for chloride, hardness, fecal coliform
bacteria and metals.
A LablineTM sampler is used to composite water
samples within the photic zone (a depth equal to
twice the Secchi depth). Nutrients, chlorophyll a,
Table 1.
solids, turbidity and phytoplankton are collected at
this depth. Nutrients and chlorophyll a from the
photic zone are used to calculate the North
Carolina Trophic State Index score. The LablineTM
sampler is also used to collect a grab water
samples near the bottom of the lake for nutrients.
Water samples are collected and preserved in
accordance with specified protocols (NCDEHNR
1996 and subsequent updates).
Data Interpretation
The North Carolina water quality standards per
15A NCAC 2B .0200 are used in determining if a
lake is meeting its designated uses. Table 5 (in
the Introduction to Program Methods Section) lists
the standards applicable to the various use
classifications (designated uses) associated with
lakes and streams. In addition to data collected
through field sampling efforts, lake water quality
assessments are also based on information
obtained from other lake monitoring programs
such as those implemented by municipalities and
major hydroelectric companies. Observations and
comments from citizens, local government
personnel, water treatment facility staff, etc. are
also considered in the assessment process.
Lakes monitored in the Catawba River basin during the 2001 — 2002 sampling
effort.
Subbasinl
Lake
County
Classification
Surface Mean Volume Watershed Retention
Area (Ac) Depth (ft.) (X106m3) (mil) Time (days)
03-08-30
Lake Tahoma
Lake James
.03-08-31
Lake Rhodhiss
03-08-32 ... _ 1
Lake Hickory
Lookout Shoal
Lake
Lake Norman
03-08-33
Mountain Island
Lake
03-08-34
Lake Wylie
03-08-35
Newton City La e Catawba
03-08-36
Bessemer City Lake Gaston
McDowell
Burke
Burke -
Caldwell
Alexander -
Catawba
Catawba
Iredell
Mecklenburg
- Lincoln
WS-II, B Tr, HQW
WS-IV, V, B Tr
WS-IV, B, CA
WS-IV, V, B, CA
WS-IV, V, B, CA
WS-IV, B, CA
Mecklenburg
- Gaston WS-IV, B, CA
Mecklenburg
- York, SC WS-IV, V, B, CA
WS-III, CA
WS-II, HQW, CA
1,61 30 0.7 23
6,510 46 36.9 380
3,515 20 36.7 1,090
4,100 33 17.0 1,310
1,270 30 4.6 1,450
32,510 33 131.5 1,790
3,235 16 71.0 1,860
12,450 23 35.3 3,020
17 10 0.1 100
15 10 0.02 0.4
228
21
33
9
206
12
32
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Catawba River Basin - June 2003
157

In addition to determining use support, data
collected during ambient lakes monitoring are
used to evaluate the trophic state of lakes. An
index was developed specifically for North
Carolina lakes as part of the state's original Clean
Lakes Classification Survey (NCDNRCD 1982).
The North Carolina Trophic State Index (NCTSI) is
based on total phosphorus (TP in mg/L), total
organic nitrogen (TON in mg/L), Secchi depth (SD
in inches), aitid chlorophyll a (CHL in pg/L).
Lakewide means for these parameters are used to
produce a NCTSI score for each lake, using the
equations:
TONscore =
TPscore =
SDscore =
CHLscore =
NCTSI =
(Log (TON) + 0.45)/0.24)*0.90
((Log (TP) + 1.55)/0.35)*0.92
((Log (SD) —1.73)/0.35)*-0.82
(Log (CHL)— 1.00)/0.48)*0.83
TONscore + TPscore + SDscore + CHLscore
In general, NCTSI scores relate to trophic
classifications (Table 2). When scores border
between classes, best professional judgment is
used to assign an appropriate classification.
Scores may be skewed by highly colored water
typical of dystrophic lakes. Some variation in the
trophic state between years is not unusual
because of the variability of data collections, which
usually involve sampling a limited number of times
during the growing season.
Table 2. Lakes classification criteria.
NCTSI Score Trophic classification
< -2.0
-2.0 — 0.0
0.0 — 5.0
> 5.0
Oligotrophic
Mesotrophic
Eutrophic
Hypereutrophic
Oligotrophic lakes are characteristically found in
the mountains or in undisturbed watersheds.
Many mesotrophic and eutrophic lakes are found
in the central piedmont. There are a few
hypereutrophic lakes where point or nonpoint
sources of pollution contribute to high levels of
nutrients.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Catawba River Basin - June 2003
158

Location:
Classification:
Period:
Lake Hickory at NC 127 near Hickory Station: C2600000
WS-V8,B Subbasin: CTB32
9/3/1997 to 8/27/2002
Parameter
< or >
Num. Eval. Eval. Level Percentiles
N < R.L. Level N % Min. 10 25 50 75 90 Max.
Field
Dissolved Oxygen
(DO; mg/L)
Conductivity
Temperature (°C)
pH (s.u.)
Other (mg1L)
Total Residue
TSS
Chloride
Turbidity (NTU)
48 0 <4 0 0.0 4.4 6.5 7.9 8.5 9.6 10.6 13.3
<5 1 2.1
48 na 51 58 61 66 70 74 83
48 na 1 8 13 21 27 28 31
48 na <6 0 0.0 6.4 6.7 6.9 7.2 7.9 8.4 8.7
>9 0 0.0
35 0 >500 0 . 24 35 45 54 59 67 74
42 6 >10 1 2.4 1 1 1 2 3 5 11
>20 0 0.0
35 0 >250 0 0.0 4 4 4 5 6 7 9
52 0 >50 0 0.0 1 2 2 2 6 7 37
>25 1 1.9
>10 4 7.7
Nutrients (mg/L)
NH3 as N 43 10 . 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.11 0.34
TKN as N 42 0 . . 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.90
NO2+NO3 as N 43 11 >10 0 0.0 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.16 0.25 0.29 0.33
Total Phosphorus 43 7 >0.05 3 7.0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.10
1
Metals (pg1L)
Aluminum (Al) 43 3 . . . 50 56 84 120 200 336 1200
Arsenic (AS) 43 43 >50 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Cadmium (Cd) 43 43 >2 0 0.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Chromium (Cr) 43 43 >50 0 0.0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Copper (Ciu) 43 24 >7 3 7.0 2 2 2 2 3 4 14
Iron (Fe) ' 43 0 >1000 0 0.0 65 77 110 170 260 388 790
Lead (Pb) 43 43 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Manganese (Mn) 42 4 >200 0 0.0 10 10 14 19 26 32 37
Mercury (Hg) 43 43 >0.012 0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Nickel (Ni)43 43 >25 0 0.0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Zinc (Zn) 43 30 >50 1 2.3 10 10 10 10 14 29 100
Bacteria (#/100 ml)
Fecal coliform 55 N>200= 0 N>400= 0 %>400= 0.0 Geometric mean= 7.5
Abbreviation: N = number of samples; Num. < R.L. = number < Reporting Level; < or > refers to "less than or greater than";
TSS = Total Suspended Solids; conductivity measured as pmhos/cm; na = not applicable.
Evaluation Levels (Eval. Level) are presented to facilitate review. Some levels refer to water quality standards; others may be
used for ecological or Action Level review.
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Catawba River Basin -June 2003
177

Appendix 16 (continued).
Subbasin/ Dissolved Water Secchi Total Susp.
Waterbodyl Oxygen temperature pH Conductivity depth TP TKN NH3 NO, TN TON TIN CHL a Solids Solids Turbidity
Date Station (mglL) (°C) (s.u.) (pmhos/cm) (m) (mg/L) (mglL) (mglL) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (pglL) (mg/L) (mglL) (NTU)
08-03-32
Lake Hickory
08/28/2002 CTB048A 5.3 25.7 7.4 81 0.6 0.04 0.43 0.13 0.09 0.52 0.30 0.22 31 84 8.0 8.5
08/28/2002 CTB056A 4.8 27.3 7.4 73 1.2 0.02 0.35 0.08 0.03 0.38 0.27 0.11 24 60 4.0 4.6
08/28/2002 CTB058C 5.3 27.1 7.4 71 1.4 0.02 0.30 0.04 0.02 0.32 0.26 0.06 25 59 4.0 3.4
08/28/2002 CTB058D 5.4 27.0 7.5 68 1.8 0.02 0.29 0.03 <0.02 0.30 0.26 0.04 22 62 4.0 3.5
07/15/2002 CTB048A 7.6 27.1 7.1 70 0.8 0.03 0.63 0.08 0.16 0.79 0.55 0.24 26 68 12.0 7.2
07/15/2002 CTB056A 9.1 28.1 7.9 64 1.0 <0.02 0.31 <0.02 <0.02 0.32 0.30 0.02 16 59 3.0 3.4
07/15/2002 CTB058C 7.5 29.0 7.1 62 1.5 <0.02 0.29 <0.02 0.02 0.31 0.28 0.03 9 61 <3.3 3.2
07/15/2002 CTB058D 7.3 28.2 7.2 61.7 1.5 <0.02 0.29 <0.02 0.02 0.31 0.28 0.03 7 59 <2.5 3.1
DS
Rhodhiss
05/29/2002 Dam 6.5 24.0 8.2 69 1.1
At Hickory
WTP
05/29/2002 Intake 11.2 24.7 9.1 63 1.2
05/29/2002 CTB048A 11.1 24.6 9.0 61 1.2 0.04 0.33 <0.01 <0.01 0.34 0.33 0.01 29 94 4.0 5.0
05/29/2002 CTB056A 9.5 24.6 51.0 1.7 1.7 0.02 0.22 <0.01 <0.01 0.23 0.22 0.01 11 50 4.0 2.9
05/29/2002 CTB058C 9.5 24.5 8.4 49 1.7 <0.02 0.10 <0.01 <0.01 0.11 0.10 0.01 11 62 4.0 3.1
05/29/2002 CTB058D 9.4 24.7 9.0 51 1.8 0.02 0.20 <0.01 <0.01 0.21 0.20 0.01 56 4.0 2.7
08/12/1997 CTB048A 7.8 26.6 6.9 56 0.7 0.05 0.20 0.07 0.18 0.38 0.13 0.25 110 11.0 10.0
08/12/1997 CTB056A 8.9 27.5 7.8 49 1.5 0.02 0.10 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.06 0.07 70 3.0 2.5
08/12/1997 CTB058C 9.1 27.8 8.0 49 1.7 0.02 0.10 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.05 55 3.0 2.6
08/12/1997 CTB058D 8.9 28.0 7.9 46 1.7 0.02 0.20 0.03 0.04 0.24 0.17 0.07 71 2.0 2.2
07/08/1997 CTB048A 9.7 27.8 8.1 52 1.3 0.02 0.20 0.02 0.14 0.34 0.18 0.16 73 4.0 5.8
07/08/1997 CTB056A 9.1 28.3 7.6 47 1.6 <0.01 0.20 <0.01 0.05 0.25 0.20 0.06 55 2.0 3.2
07/08/1997 CTB058C 8.5 29.1 7.3 44 1.8 <0.01 0.10 0.01 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.09 63 3.0 3.1
07/08/1997 CTB058D 8.6 28.4 7.5 43 1.7 <0.01 0.40 <0.01 <0.01 0.41 0.40 0.01 57 3.0 2.7
06/10/1997 CTB048A 7.3 17.8 6.4 49 0.8 0.06 0.30 0.11 0.23 0.53 0.19 0.34 77 5.0 15.0
06/10/1997 CTB056A 9.2 19.5 6.7 46 1.2 0.03 0.10 <0.01 0.15 0.25 0.10 0.16 57 3.0 4.1
06/10/1997 CTB058C 8.6 19.4 6.5 46 1.8 0.02 0.20 0.01 0.15 0.35 0.19 0.16 56 3.0 5.1
06/10/1997 CTB058D 8.6 19.4 6.5 46 1.7 0.01 0.20 <0.01 0.14 0.34 0.20 0.15 50 2.0 3.7
Lookout Shoals Lake
08/07/2002 CTB0581 F 7.1 28 1 7.0 63 1.0 0.02 0.24 0.02 0.02 0.26 0.24 0.04 5 50 <2.5 3.4
08/07/2002 CTB058F 8.1 28.4 7.2 61 1.8 <0.02 0.25 <0.02 <0.02 0.26 0.31 0.02 7 50 <5 3.1
08/07/2002 CTB058G 8.3 28.7 7.9 60 2.2 <0.02 0.24 <0.02 <0.02 0.26 0.31 0.02 7 50 <2.5 3.0
07/24/2002 CTB0581 F 7.3 27.6 7.2 62 1.0 0.04 0.25 <0.02 0.03 0.28 0.24 0.04 5 55 <2.5 4.2
07/24/2002 CTB058F 7.9 28.7 7.3 60 1.2 0.03 0.32 <0.02 <0.02 0.33 0.31 0.02 8 47 2.0 3.6
07/24/2002 CTB058G 8.4 28.7 7.8 60 1.2 0.03 0.32 <0.02 <0.02 0.33 0.31 0.02 7 55 3.3 3.2
06/20/2002 CTB0581 F 4.6 22.3 6.6 59 2.4 <0.02 <0.2 0.04 0.15 0.25 0.06 0.19 4 95 <2.5 2.9
06/20/2002 CTB058F 8.7 26.1 7.6 53 1.5 <0.02 <0.2 <0.01 0.03 0.13 0.10 0.04 10 50 4.0 3.9
06/20/2002 CTB058G 8.3 26.1 8.0 53 1.6 <0.02 <0.2 <0.01 0.02 0.12 0.10 0.03 7 53 3.0 4.3
08/18/1997 CTB0581F 8.3 30.9 7.2 48 1.0 0.02 0.20 <0.01 0.23 0.43 0.20 0.24 62 5.0 5.5
08/18/1997 CTB058F 8.5 30.7 7.4 47 1.5 0.01 0.20 <0.01 0.24 0.44 0.20 0.25 37 3.0 4.8
08/18/1997 CTB058G 9.0 30.3 8.2 46 2.0 <0.01 0.20 <0.01 0.16 0.36 0.20 0.17 40 1.0 2.2
07/07/1997 CT60581 F 5.6 25.2 6.1 54 1.5 0.02 0.30 0.06 0.30 0.60 0.24 0.36 66 4.0 5.8
07/07/1997 CTB058F 8.9 27.8 7.1 50 1.5 0.02 0.20 0.03 0.27 0.47 0.17 0.30 62 4.0 5.0
07/07/1997 CTB058G 8.9 27.5 7.2 50 1.5 0.02 0.20 <0.01 0.24 0.44 0.20 0.25 46 4.0 4.0
06/10/1997 CTB0581 F 7.1 19.7 6.3 48 2.0 0.01 0.20 0.07 0.22 0.42 0.13 0.29 63 5.0 6.8
06/10/1997 CTB058F 7.9 20.3 6.4 47 2.0 0.02 0.30 0.05 0.22 0.52 0.25 0.27 56 3.0 5.1
06/10/1997 CTB058G 10.0 19.8 7.1 45 1.8 0.01 0.10 <0.01 0.17 0.27 0.10 0.18 56 3.0 3.8
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report - Catawba River Basin - June 2003
163

11111/
Kruger
/t/6
I g� i- id astil .N G,Jcq
itf,t iii(4,2,c /A/ Arati &•e4eLy27/-,.1 / 6044_ ,zely--
79 to = cs. 8
/40,, (/If ,.7 s /1l t '°
ilef3 Gf44t -7p0,806
Vag6 6, f`/f6e / eo 401,/
lot L*i�trlc,
017 / 8 7
4f/� u: 74,14)0
-
$jam Liir
6 d c/
,ry,,t Id
f
/o J ,ram 7 (Pd., 4
d a�J: '1'3 "f ✓ l-w-
G U
i,✓76 if-6 , , ..-/ udl m w, _
a fY s rii _- 7- 6uui /N (4
k -7,9X 6,0 ci
DIM °7'83z
Ur- 6fflc. c
N = 37,70 021Y/83'Ior
QA `1(2, y0
11.citut,e DPG G, yn/Gnaw
Gt&
ampaAt.,, Crsa_a Dist Air 64., (-666
(7 S
9 i74070 f>
642 3y, y 7pros .7,5 7°F
79oc.,= /1. o
4211 /7j6Yv S2//o74i Gyor4 4/0
0rr.g8
e 2 3� u
lyW _ 9 3 3�z = 17
lLy=99Z

Facility: city of hickory ne
NPDES#: nc0020401
Receiving Stream: gunpowder creek
Comment(s):
gage number not available
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q1 0 Low Flow Record Station:
w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
30Q2 Low Flow Record Station:
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Qave per Report Equation:
s7Q10 per Report Equation:
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
30Q2 per Report Equation:
02.1416.7000
HA10
15.00 miles squared
18.00 cfs
3.40 cfs
4.60 cfs
6.20 cfs
must be < 400 sq. miles
44.80 sq. miles
1.2
54 cfs
8.67 cfs
13.02 cfs
18.49 cfs
Continue
Drainage Area Ratio: 2.99 : 1
[ new DA / Da at gage Continue
Weighted Ratio: 0.34 : 1
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
i
W
Drainage Area New Site: 44.80 miles squared
MAR New Site: 1.2
Weighted Qave per Report Equation: 54 cfs
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation: 9.17 cfs
eighted w7Q10 per Report Equation: 13.26 cfs
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation: 18.50 cfs
II

Facility: hickory ne
NPDES#: nc0020401
Receiving Stream: upper little river
Comment(s):
gage number not available
Lc A, Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
30Q2 Low Flow Record Station:
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Qave per Report Equation:
s7Q1 0 per Report Equation:
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
30Q2 per Report Equation:
HA10
must be < 400 sq. miles
39.70 sq. miles
1.2
Drainage Area Ratio:
[new DA / Da at gage
Weighted Ratio:
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
48 cfs
7.68 cfs
11.55 cfs
16.39 cfs
Continue
#DIV/O!
#DIV/0!
#DIVIO!
F
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Weighted Qave per Report Equation:
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation:
II
39.70 miles squared
1.2
#DIV/01
no input from above
no input from above
no input from above

A„Lzri•
e).-phe
4,40- 06(6
6/140—
</
/
</
< /
/1716ib
< 2-o
2-0
< 2-0
<Zo
G. Z..
< < Z0
<

NPDES/Non-Discharge Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
NPDES OR NONDISCHARGE PERMITTING UNIT COMPLETES THIS PART:
Date of Request ; 2/24/2005
Facility Hickory -Northeast WWTP
Permit # NC0020401
Region
Requestor
Pretreatment Jon Risgaard (ext 580)
Contact
PRETREATMENT UNIT COMPLETES THIS PART:
Status of Pretreatment Program (circle all that apply)
11) the facility has no SIU's and does have a Division approved Pretreatment Program that isINACTIVE
2) the facility has no SIU's and does not have a Division approved Pretreatment Program
3 t - •- • - =' - - - retreatment Program
1 2a) is Full Program with LTMP • ' 2b) is Modified Program with STMP
4) the a • • - : reatment Program - Full Modified
5) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
Flow Permitted Actual
% Industrial 6.47 mgd 0.17 mgd
STMP time frame:
most recent
next cycle
% Domestic
L
T
M
P
Pollutant
Check List
POC due to
NPot:S/Non•
oIfiehargo Permit
Limit
Required by
EPA'
Required by
503 Sludge**
POC due to SIU•••
Slte specific POC (Provide Explanation)****
STMP
Frequency at
effluent
LTMP
Frequency at
effluent
I/
BOD
3 days/Q
-4
TSS
3 days/Q
I
NH3
3 days/Q
I
Arsenic
3 days/Q
4
Cadmium
-I
-I
3 days/Q
4
Chromium
4
3 days/Q
I/
Copper
'4
4
3 days/Q
4
Cyanide
3 days/Q
Lead
j
'4
'4
3 days/Q
4
Mercury
'4
3 days/Q
Molybdemium
1
'4
3 days/Q
4
Nickel
1
'4
4
3 days/Q
4
Silver
3 days/Q
Selinium
'Ni
3 days/Q
'4
Zinc
4
4
3 days/Q
Toluene
4
3 days/Q
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
'Always in the LTMP
"Onty in the LTMP if the POTW land applies sludge
••• Only in LTMP while the SlUjis connected to the POTW
'••• Only in LTMP when the potutant is a specific concern to the POTW (le -Chloride to a POTW who accepts Textile waste)
Q= Quarterly
M=Monthly
I called the Town and she verified that all of the influent and effluent LIMP data is included in the
Comments: DMRs. Let me know if you need any additional info - Jon
1
Hickory PIR
Revised: August 4, 2000

Flow Permitted Actual
% Industrial
'
STMP
time
% Domestic
frame
LTMP
Pollu
tant
Chec
k
List
POC
due to
NPDES/
Non-
Dischar
ge
Permit
Limit
Require
d by
EPA*
Require
d by
503
Sludge*
*
POC
due to
SIU***
Site
specific
POC
(Provid
e
Explana
tion)****
STMP
Freque
ncy at
effluent
LTMP
Freque
ncy at
effluent
BOP
4
Q M
TSS
4
Q M
NH3
4
Q M
Arsenic
4
Q M
4
Ca rnium
4
4
Q M
4
Chromium
4
4
Q M
J
Copper
Ai
4
QM
Cyanide
�
4
Q M
J
Lead
4
4
Q M
Mercury
4
Q M
Molybdemium
4
Q M
4
Niclkei
4
4
Q M
Silver
4
Q M
Selinium
4
Q M
4
Zinc
4
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M

4 Q M
4
Q M
4
Q M
*Always in the LTMP
**Only in the LTMP if the POTW land applies sludge
*** Only in LTF P while the SIU is connected to the POTW
**** Only in LTMP when the pollutant is a specific concern to the POTW (ie-Chloride tc
Q= Quarterly
M=Monthly
Co ments:

HSMM
ARCHITECTS ENGUJEERS PLANNERS
RYES, SEAY. MATTERN & MATTERN, INC.
181 E. EVANS ST. OTC-105 SURE 23
FLORENCE. SC 29508
[phone] www.hsmm.com
SCALE: NONE
COMM. NO.: 60467
DATE: 10/13/2004
PLANT LAYOUT
HICKORY NORTHEAST WWTP
HICKORY, NORTH CAOROLINA
ATTACHMENT B
DWG.
NO.
OF 1

INFLUENT
PSE — PRIMARY SETTLING EFFLUENT
ATE — AERATION TANK EFFLUENT
RAS — RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE
WAS — WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE
SSE — SECONDARY SETTLING EFFLUENT
FE — FINAL EFFLUENT
DS — DIGESTED SLUDGE
BAR
SCREEN
INFLUENT
PUMPING
STATION
DS
PARSHALL
FLUME
SCREENINGS/GRIT
TO LANDFILL
SLUDGE
DIGESTER
6 MGD
BAR
SCREEN/GRIT
COLLECTOR
PRIMARY
SETTLING
BASIN _
(2.5 MGD)
PSE
PRIMARY
SETTLING
BASIN
(3.5 MGD)
PSE
WAS RAS
SO2
CHLORINE
CONTACT
CHAMBER
W
In
SECONDARY
CLARIFIERS
(2-3 MGD)
ATE
POST
AERATION
SO
FE
6 MGD
Cl2
TO LAKE
HICKORY
RAS
AERATION
BASIN
(3.5 MGD)
AERATION
BASIN
(2.5 MGD)
ARCHFIEC S ENOINEO5 PIAMl 35
HAYES, SEAY, MATTERN & MATTERN, INC.
181 E. EVANS ST. 8TC-105 SUITE 23
FLORENCE, SC 29506
[phone] www.hamm.com
SCALE: NONE
COMM. NO.: 60467
DATE: 10/13/2004
FLOW DIAGRAM
HICKORY NORTHEAST WWTP
HICKORY, NORTH CAROLINA
ATTACHMENT C
DWG.
NO.
OF 1

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory — Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
SU I EMENTALAP�PL[
►TIOhNi=�INFORMATION
jP 1 - :;.INbUS. RIA�USERIDISJIARGESi
-t. CRAICERCLA.. t_TES. ' _
All treatment works receiving
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
discharges from significant industrial users
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program.
® Yes
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that
a. Number of non
b. Number of CIUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
Does the treatment works have, or is subject
■ No
industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
discharge to the treatment works.
-categorical Sills. 7
0
USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial
as necessary.
Name:
Mailing Address:
F.4. Industrial Processes.
User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
Century Furniture (Outfall 001)
P.O. Box 608
Hickory, NC 28603
Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.S. Principal Product(s)
discharge.
Principal product(s):
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater
day (gpd) and
and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
wood furniture
wood products, lumber. glue. cardboard, and hardware
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1
23,939 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1 gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits ® Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
following:
❑ No
0 No
F.8. Problems at the Treatment
upsets, interference)
Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
at the treatment works in the past three years?
If yes, describe each episode.
• Yes 0 No

A
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT
City of Hickory —
NUMBER:
Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
SUPPLEM NTAL`
APP, `ICATIONINFORMATION - z 0..E
:PRT F,INDUSTRIA
= USERDISCHA G S` ND'RCR 4-, ERC WASTES
All treatment works receiving
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
Pram. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ No
Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number
idischarge to the treatment works.
-categorical SIUs. 7
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment prog
® Yes
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that
c. Number of non
d. Number of CIUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
0
USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the Information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial
as necessary.
Name:
Mailing Address:
F.4. Industrial Processes.
User information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
Century Furniture (Outfall 002)
P.O. Box 608
Hickory. NC 28603
Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.5. Principal Product(s)
discharge.
Principal product(s):
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
c. Process wastewater
day (gpd) and
and Raw Materiai(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
I wood furniture
wood products, lumber. glue. cardboard. and hardware
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into
whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
7.100 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
d. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ID Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory'?
• No
►5 No
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works In the past three years?
0 Yes ® No I If yes, describe each episode.

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory — Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
-
4SUPPLEMENTALaAPPPLICAT
ONIINFORMATION , ,.. _ _ ..z
PART �F INDUS !AL
tUSER DCSCHA�GES AND RCRA/C RCLA' S ES r ; _
Ail treatment works rece
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program.
® Yes
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that'
e. Number of non
ving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
I ■ No
Industrial Users (SlUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
discharge to the treatment works.
-categorical Sills. 7
f. Number of ClUs. 0
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Frye Regional Medical Center (Outfall 001)
Mailing Address: 420 North Center Street
Hickory. NC 28601
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.S. Principal Product(s
discharge.
Principal product(s):
and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
health care
Raw material(s):
water used in boilers for steam used for heating, cooking, humidifying. and sterilizing instruments
F.6. Flow Rate.
e. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
32,900 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
f. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards.
a. Local limits
b. Categorical pretreatment
If subject to categorical
Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
0 Yes ❑ No
standards ❑ Yes ® No
pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes 181 No If yes, describe each episode.

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory j Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
=YSU.PEM NTAL
P
I
AP LICA I=ONINFO MA�TION
_
P� .. MIND U St USER D!SkCHARGES AND RCRA _CERC t , WASTES = , -'
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F. j
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CPUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
industrial users that 'discharge to the treatment works.
g. Number of non -categorical SIUs. 7
h. Number of CPUs. 0
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: Frye Regional Medical Center (Outfall 002)
Mailing Address:
420 North Center Street
Hickory. NC 28601
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.5. Principal Product(s)and Raw Material s . Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
p () P P
discharge.
Principal product(s): health care
Raw material(s):
water used in boilers for steam used for heating. cooking. humidifying. and sterilizing instruments
F.6. Flow Rate.
g. Process wastewater
day (gpd) and
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
17.600 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
h. Non -process Wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.T. Pretreatment Standards.
a. Local limits
b. Categorical pretreatment
If subject to categoricali
Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
® Yes ❑ No
standards ❑ Yes CO No
pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes ® No 1 If yes, describe each episode.

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory - Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
_.
UPPLEMENTAL:APPLICATION
... ..- .. ... w l }g r �. . `� sus.
INFORMATION 1L
PA T,F:1N�DyUSTRI FUSER DISCHARGE AND RGRAICERCLA•WASTESf ' '
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program.
El Yes
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that
i. Number of non
Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ No
Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
discharge to the treatment works.
-categorical SIUs. 7
j. Number of CIUs.
0
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information
provide the information riquested
for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial
as necessary.
Name:
User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
Hickory Dyeing & Winding Co., Inc.
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1975
Hickory. NC 28603
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): dyed yard in various forms
Raw material(s): nylon and polyester yam and dve
F.6. Flow Rate.
i. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
54,300 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
j. Non -process wastewater
in gallons per day
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
(gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ❑ Yes ® No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes 0 No If yes, describe each episode.

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory — Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
SUPPLEMENTALAP-.LPLI•
CATION; INFORMATION _
PARTr!FINDUS,TRI
USEyDISCHARGESAND RCRAICERC}LAWAST ESf _
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
or which receive RCRA,CERCLA,
ot, an approved pretreatment program?
Users (ClUs). Provide the number
or other remedial wastes must
of each of the following types of
questions F.3 through F.8 and
F.1. Pretreatment program.
® Yes
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that
k. Number of noln-categorical
I. Number of CIUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL
Does the treatment works have, or is subject
❑ No
Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial
discharge to the treatment works.
SlUs. 7
0
USER INFORMATION:
to the treatment works, copy
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial
as necessary.
Name:
Mailing Address:
F.4. Industrial Processes.
User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
HK Research Corp.
P.O. Box 1809
Hickory, NC 28603
Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.S. Principal Product(s)
discharge.
Principal product(s):
Raw material(s):
F.6. Flow Rate.
k. Process wastewater
day (gpd) and
and Raw Materlal(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
polvester ael coating
blend of polyester (resin) styrene and additives
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge Into
whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
500 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
I. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards.
a. Local limits
b. Categorical pretreatment
If subject to categorical
Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
IDYes
MINo
® No
standards • Yes
pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
F.8. Problems at the Treatment
upsets, interference)
Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
at the treatment works in the past three years?
If yes, describe each episode.
• Yes ID No

r FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
City of Hickory — Northeast WWTP, NC0020401
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba
- SUPPLEMENTAL
PI?LIC,A►TIONF`INFOR IfIATION x x �
P.A1 T;F,IND,UUS`TRIAL4J
ER.DISCHA GES ANDrRC C,ERCLA STES . _ -
IAIA
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program.
® Yes 1
F.2. Number of Significant
industrial users that
m. Number of non
Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
❑ No
Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of
discharge to the treatment works.
-categorical SIUs. 7
n. Number of CIUs. 0
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industriaal
as necessary.
Name:
User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
Shurtape Technologies. Inc.
Mailing Address: P.Q. Box 1530
Hickory, NC 28603-1530
F.4. Industrial Processesi . Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
F.5. Principal Product(s)
discharge.
Principal product(s):
and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
pressure sensitive tape
Raw material(s):
paper coated with latex and solvent solution of adhesive
F.6. Flow Rate.
m. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
36.500 gpd ( X continuous or intermittent)
n. Non -process wastewater
in gallons per day
flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system
(gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
gpd ( continuous or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes • No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards • Yes ® No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
0 Yes ® No If yes, describe each episode.