NC0020664_Permit Issuance_19981207

NPDES DOCYWENT SCANNING: COVER SHEET
NC0020664
Spindale WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
201 Facilities Plan
Instream Assessment
(67B)
Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
December 7, 1998
Thin document is printed cm. reuse paper - ignore nay
content on the reYerse side

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 7, 1998
Donald R. Price
Superintendent
Town of Spindale
P.O. Box 186
Spindale, North Carolina 28160
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Final NPDES Permit
Permit No. NC0020664
Town of Spindale WWTP
Rutherford County
Dear Mr. Price:
In accordance with the application for a discharge permit received on April 23, 1998, the Division is
forwarding herewith the subject NPDES 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 Agency dated December 6, 1983, and as subsequently amended.
The following items from the draft permit have been changed:
• The downstream sampling point for Catheys Creek is specified at SR 1549, instead of SR 1548.
• Conductivity sampling was corrected to specify a grab sample.
• On the Supplement to Cover page, number 2.) specifies that this facility may operate at 4.5 MGD
until the average flow for any twelve (12) month period exceeds 80 % of permitted flow (3.6 MGD).
At that time, the facility must begin monitoring in accordance with requirements for 6.0 MGD. This
condition clarifies "expansion above 4.5 MGD" on the effluent pages.
• Mercury monitoring has been reduced to 2/Month. This frequency is consistent with the monitoring
requirements assigned to toxicants without limits.
Please note the following changes from the previous permit (as indicated in the draft) have been finalized:
General
• Effluent pages for flow at 4.5 MGD have been added with appropriate limits and are effective upon
issuance until expansion above 4.5 MGD (i.e., after average flow exceeds 80% of 4.5 MGD over a
twelve (12) month period).
• Instream monitoring for BODS and ammonia are not required as long as facility discharges to
Hollands Creek, since past data indicate levels are low. Instream monitoring at Catheys Creek has
been included, however, since no data yet exists for that location.
• Effluent monitoring for conductivity is specified as daily (reflects requirements per 2B .0500s).
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]/FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

v.33
Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing and Toxicants Monitoring
• Total residul chlorine (TRC) and ammonia limits have been added for flow at 6.0 MGD at both
Hollands and Catheys Creeks. These are consistent with requirements for new or expanded flow and
depend upon dilution calculations for protecting against toxicity. All new or expanded flows receive
a TRC limit between 17 and 28 mil. This policy also applies to facilities choosing to drop flow
limits but retain a higher limit in the permit for future needs.
• Monitoring frequencies for copper, chromium, and zinc have been reduced to 2/Month. This
frequency is consistent with the monitoring requirements assigned to toxicants without limits.
• Chromium and mercury limits have been removed. Based on a statistical analysis of past data for the
reasonable potential to exceed water quality standards, limits for these metals are not necessary
during this prmit cycle.
• In light of information available regarding cyanide measurement techniques, the Division feels it is
reasonable tai specify the cyanide quantitation limit as 10 41(10 ppb).
• In response to comments from the regional office and the possibility that sulfate may be contributing
to the facility's toxicity problems, sulfate monitoring has been added.
• A cadmium limit has been added with weekly monitoring for flow at 6.0 MGD (Catheys Creek).
This limit is based on a statistical analysis of past data for the reasonable potential to exceed the water
quality standard for cadmium.
• Chronic Toxicity test limits have been adjusted for flow at 4.5 MGD, based on dilution calculations.
• Sampling foci toxicants must be performed in conjunction with toxicity sampling. This approach
allows comparison of toxicant data to WET test results and may help in identifying a specific cause
of any test failures.
Flow
Please note that the facility must notify the Division when the average flow for any twelve (12)
month period exceeds 80% of 4.5 MGD (3.6 MGD) to assure compliance with appropriate effluent
limits. Limits for chronic toxicity have been reduced at lower flows; however, recent tests indicate a
small margin of safety is present even at reduced limits. The facility is strongly encouraged to continue
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) efforts to rectify toxicity problems and avoid future enforcement
action.
24-hour Staffing Requirement
In addition, the Town of Spindale is granted a variance of the requirement to have 24-hour staffing
coverage by certified operators at this facility. This variance is contingent upon the following conditions
and will be revie ed at the next renewal, unless there is cause to consider rescission sooner:
• In case of power failure or an alarm situation, an appropriate certified operator must be dispatched
immediately to the treatment plant.
• Failure of the monitoring system to detect malfunction, the failure of the monitoring system to report
a malfunction, or the failure of an appropriate certified operator to respond to a problem must be
documented and reported to the Asheville Regional Office (ARO) by phone within 24 hours and in
writing within five (5) working days. Failure of a monitoring device or failure to respond to a
problem will not be a mitigating factor in any enforcement action.
• A designated certified operator shall be on call during the periods when the WWTP is not staffed.
The Town should have already provided in writing to the ARO the notification procedure and
notification schedule of how contacts will be made when problems are reported (condition of initial
variance). The Town must notify the ARO at least ten (10) working days prior to the implementation
of any change in this schedule.
• This variance may be rescinded at the discretion of the Director in the event that the compliance
status or the conditions at the facility change or the system in place does not prove to provide
adequate reliability or notification.

If any parts, measurement frequencies, or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicative 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, Post Office Drawer 27447, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447. Unless such demand is made,
this decision shall be final and binding.
Please take note that this permit is not transferable. Part II, E. 4. addresses the requirements to be
followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge. This permit does not affect the legal
requirements to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of Land Resources or any
other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If you have any questions or comments concerning this permit, please contact Bethany A. Bolt at (919)
733-5083, extension 551.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Enclosure
cc: Asheville Regional Office/Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit
Central Files
Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Technical Assistance & Certification Unit
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit

Permit No. NC0020664
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
Iri 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,
Town of Spindale
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Town of Spindale Wastewater Treatment Plant
Ecology Drive
Spindale
Rutherford County
to receiving waters designated as Hollands Creek and Catheys Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, III, and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective January 1, 1999.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2003.
Signed this day December 7,1998.
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Spindale
is hereby authorized to:
Permit No. NC0020664
1. Continue to operate an existing 6.0 MGD extended aeration wastewater treatment
plant: consisting of screening, grit removal, extended aeration, clarification,
chlorination, and dechlorination, with discharge to Hollands Creek, which is
classified as C waters in the Broad River Basin, located at Town of Spindale
Wastewater Treatment Plant, Ecology Drive, Spindale, Rutherford County (See Part
III, A. of this Permit), and
2. Operate at 4.5 MGD until the average flow for any twelve (12) month period exceeds
80% of permitted flow (3.6 MGD), after which time the facility must monitor in
accordance with effluent limitations and monitoring requirements specified for 6.0
MGD, and
3. After completing construction of an outfall to Catheys Creek and relocating discharge
in accordance with the Authorization to Construct issued February 16, 1998 from the
Division of Water Quality, discharge from said treatment works at the location
specified on the attached map into Catheys Creek, which is classified as C waters in
the Broad River Basin.

ROAD CLASSIFICATION
PRIMARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE
SECONDARY HIGHWAY
HARD SURFACE 1
LIGHT -DUTY ROAD. HARD OR
IMPROVED SURFACE
UNIMPROVED ROAD = = =
Latitude 35°22'52' Longitude 81°53'18'
Map # F11NW Sub -basin 03-08-02
Stream Class c
Discharge Class 01 55 57 58
Receiving Stream Catheys Creek
Design Q 6-0 MGD
SCALE 1:24 000
0
1 MILE
7000 FEET
1
0
1 KILOMETER
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 FEET
Spindale WWTP
NC0020664
Rutherford County

A (1). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS tarok ,
Permit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expansion of flow above 4.5 MGD and/or relocation to Catheys Creek, the Permittee is authorized
to discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001 into Hollands Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location*
Flow
4.5 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 — October 31)1
27.0 mg/1
40.5 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 — March 31)1
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N (April 1 — October 31)
8.0 mg/I
Daily
Composite
E
NH3 as N (November 1 — March 31)
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
pH4
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Residual Chlorine
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
E
Conductivity
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Cadmium
3.0 µg/1
Weekly7
Composite
E
Chlorides
2/Month7
Composite
E
Chromium
2/Month7
Composite
E
Cyanide6
7.5 µg/1
Weekly7
Grab
E
Sulfate
2/Month7
Composite
E
Lead
37.5 µg/1
Weekly?
Composite
E
Mercury
2/Month7
Composite
E
Nickel
132.2 µg/1
Weekly7Composite
E
Copper
2/Month7
Composite
E
Zinc
2/Month7
Composite
E
Silver
NntPc•
2/Month7
Composite
E
* v V Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1548. Instream monitoring shall be grab samples taken 3/week during
June -September and 1/week during October -May.
1 The monthly average effluent BOD5 concentration shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2 The monthly average effluent Total Suspended Solids concentration shall not exceed 35% of the respective influent value (65% removal).
3 The daily average of dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/1.
4 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
5 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaplmia) P/F at 67%-March, June, September, and December. See Supplement to Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements, Special Condition
A (5).
6 The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 µg/1. Levels reported as "<10 µg/1" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
7 METALS, CYANIDE, CHLORIDES, AND SULFATE SAMPLING SHALL COINCIDE WITH TOXICITY SAMPLING.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A (2). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS t ! ,k,
Permit No. NC0020664 -
During the period beginning after relocation of discharge to Catheys Creek and lasting until expansion of flow above 4.5 MGD or expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001 into Catheys Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location"
low
4.5 MGD
Continuous •
Recording
I or E
13OD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 - October 31)1
25.5 mg/1
38.2 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, I, U, D
'80D, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 - March 31)1
25.5 mg/1
38.2 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, I, U, D
"Total Suspended Solidsl
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
-NH3 as N (April 1 - October 31)
10.0 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, U, D
.NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31)
10.0 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, U, D
Dissolved Oxygen2
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
--pH3
Daily
Grab
E
.Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
-Total Residual Chlorine
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
-Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
E
-Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
E
-Chronic Toxicity4
Quarterly
Composite
E
-Conductivity
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
.Cadmium
7.7 µg/1
Week1y6
Composite
E
.Chlorides
2/Month6
Composite
E
Chromium
2/Month6
Composite
E
`Uyanide5
19.3 µg/1
Weekly6
Grab
E
-Sulfate •2/Month6
Composite
E
_Lead
2/Month6
Composite
E
-Mercury
2/Month6
Composite
E
-Nickel
340.3 µg/1
Week1y6
Composite
E
i.Copper
2/Month6
Composite
E
-Zinc
2/Month6
Composite
E
~Silver
2/Month6
Composite
E
* Vaample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1549. Instream monitoring shall be grab samples taken 3/week during
June -September and 1/week during October -May.
1 The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2 The daily average of dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/l.
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 26%-March, June, September, and December. See Supplement to Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements, Special Condition
A (6).
5 The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 µg/1. Levels reported as "<10 µg/1" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
6 METALS, CYANIDE, CHLORIDES, AND SULFATE SAMPLING SHALL COINCIDE WITH TOXICITY SAMPLING.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A (3). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS F• e 1 . `.
Permit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning after expansion of flow above 4.5 MGD and lasting until relocation to Catheys Creek, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial
number 001 into Hollands Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ' -
_Monthly ..•
Average
Weekly._, -;
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location*
Flow
6.0 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 - October 31)1
27.0 mg/1
40.5 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 - March 31)1
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
Total Suspended Solids2
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N (April 1 - October 31)
1.3 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E
NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31) '
2.6 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E
Dissolved Oxygen3
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
pH4
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Residual Chlorine
23 lig/l
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity5
Quarterly
Composite
E
Conductivity
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Cadmium
2.8 µg/1
Weekly7
Composite
E
Chlorides
2/Month7
Composite
E
Chromium
2/Month7
Composite
E
Cyanide6
6.9 µg/1
Weekly7
Grab
E
Sulfate
2/Month7
Composite
E
Lead
34.4 µg/1
Weekly7
Composite
E
Mercury
2/Month7
Composite
E
Nickel
121.1 µg/1
Weekly?
Composite
E
Copper
2/Month7
Composite
E
Zinc
2/Month7
Composite
E
Silver
2/Month7
Composite
E
* V Vaample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1548. Instream monitoring shall be grab samples taken 3/week during
June -September and 1/week during October -May.
1 The monthly average effluent BOD5 concentration shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2 The monthly average effluent Total Suspended Solids concentration shall not exceed 35% of the respective influent value (65% removal).
3 The daily average of dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/1.
4 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
5 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 73%-March, June, September, and December. See Supplement to Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements, Special Condition
A (7).
6 The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 µg/1. Levels reported as "<10 µg/1" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
7 METALS, CYANIDE, CHLORIDES, AND SULFATE SAMPLING SHALL COINCIDE WITH TOXICITY SAMPLING.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A (4). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS V'I,I1I,EA,
Permit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning after expansion of flow above 4.5 MGD and relocation of discharge to Catheys Creek and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001 into Catheys Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
<' MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type
Sample Location*
Flow
6.0 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (April 1 - October 31)1
25.5 mg/1
40.5 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, I, U, D
BOD, 5 day, 20°C (November 1 - March 31)1
25.5 mg/1
40.5 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, I, U, D
Total Suspended Solids].
30.0 mg/1
45.0 mg/1
Daily
Composite
E, I
NH3 as N (April 1 - October 31)
2.7 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, U, D
NH3 as N (November 1 - March 31)
6.2 mg/1
Daily*
Composite
E, U, D
Dissolved Oxygen2
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
pH3
Daily
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Residual Chlorine
28 µg/1
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature °C
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity4
Quarterly
Composite
E
Conductivity
Daily*
Grab
E, U, D
Cadmium
6.3 µg/1
Week1y6
Composite
E
Chlorides
2/Month6
Composite
E
Chromium
2/Month6
Composite
E.
Cyanide5
15.8 µg/1
Weekly6
Grab
E
Sulfate
2/Month•6
Composite
E
Lead
2/Month6
Composite
E
Mercury
2/Month6
Composite
E
Nickel
277.2 µg/1
Weekly6
Composite
E
Copper
2/Month6
Composite
E
Zinc
2/Month6
Composite
E
Silver
2/Month6
Composite
E
otes:
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1549. Instream monitoring shall be grab samples taken 3/week during
June -September and 1/week during October -May.
1 The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
2 The daily average of dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/1.
3 The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
4 Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 32%-March, June, September, and December. See Supplement to Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements, Special Condition
A (8).
5 The quantitation limit for cyanide shall be 10 µg/1. Levels reported as "<10 µg/1" shall be considered zero for compliance purposes.
6 METALS, CYANIDE, CHLORIDES, AND SULFATE SAMPLING SHALL COINCIDE WITH TOXICITY SAMPLING.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CO�TIONS
A (5). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised November 1995, or subsequent
versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 67% (defined as treatment two in the procedure document). The permit holder shall perform
uarterl monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The tests will
e pe ormed during the months of March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling for this
testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should 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 Branch at the address cited above.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly
test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this 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.

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
• T
• SPEC CONDITIONS
A (6). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised November 1995, or subsequent
versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 26% (defined as treatment two in the procedure document). The permit holder shall perform
uarterl monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The tests will
be pe ormed du ing the months of March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling for this
testing shall be p rformed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should 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 Branch at the address cited above.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will evert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly
test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test dta 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 andmodified
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.

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
• SPECI ONDITIONS
A (7). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised November 1995, or subsequent
versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 73% (defined as treatment two in the procedure document). The permit holder shall perform
uarterl monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The tests will
e pe ormed during the months of March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling for this
testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required'as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should 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 Branch at the address cited above.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should the permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly
test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this 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.

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (8). CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in the "North
Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised November 1995, or'subsequent
versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 32% (defined as treatment two in the procedure document). The permit holder shall perform
uarterl monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The tests will
be pe ormed duing the months of March, June, September, and December. Effluent sampling P g for this
testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DWQ Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should 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 Branch at the address cited above.
Should any singlquarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should the permi l ee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required, then monthly
monitoring will b gin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly
test requirement 111 revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this 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.

1
Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS NN
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A (9). LIMITATION REOPENER CONDITION
Upon initiation of water withdrawal from the Second Broad River resulting from the expansion of the Forest
City Water Treatment Plant (WTP), Spindale's limits for oxygen consuming wastes may be changed. If
instream water quality standard violations are documented as a result of the decrease in the 7Q10 flow in the
Second Broad River caused by the WTP withdrawal, or upon expansion of the Spindale plant, this permit
shall be modified to incorporate more stringent effluent limitations for the oxygen consuming constituents,
BOD5 and NH3 as N, to protect the downstream dissolved oxygen standard.

Ply.a se_ Gl' P
-tc)
((,t}eci -tag-T
11/24/96 • 01 e r Eel ,nia. 1-e1 ARO ee--i')
ovv5 kac beer! Sic;, ► , c8 M4 k/ 4 4 s I osin9 S- Bond. "
Or)ce 00 ° -4,5 (Nay 1A.--tos)
l �
}'l, b0 i DI? n CI iv) c c v r-c i c)nc e W ri- k (0-0 /I D
211' ,\�� f C- (�C{s. (sornF \A/ko�4 cortsisf ent u�r1l.1
kv
I J
(V919° '0/90 1u)e) lYeed we_ skovid includ-e Fevryl
g0(\ pYc61e m i 3a ppea red as cols tc ' `j c-45
cattne_, so Yloi sure ' , was
care. OC, blit �" 6 � I , We- a V.I; 4i()
�I \1 t2 0411 -kj Coli- 1 ' ev- -
> o vnr r-e cl v o,-) e I Pe cl VA-0/1 I IS (\A/Er)
> c pY .' s G lA e (Y./ o v e,
-i-on v\1 e►) Fla r)
TantAa{y-
> Ln 0 \N wiflv Li t\% P s c \-k e8 A. � e,
N .s i Cr-e c yt e,f ( l�r i n inn (fie✓r►fl c ev-
y r
e- rF D- -i e� i n c1; c� ect a C� -C ewe
-Cac;1;- 1es Set dif. SckeCkies , so 1(10.--
1/(_s�al-
> Yerl Ikbu k 1fow roles` < 5. o tNA C1D \4;
, -c) c, c i ` \l 1' r e e,).! re. s t_X t ►yt. p �(on
0 Z1-1- k °RG Y ectiAi rewterrt
c -Dp� Gr 4-y 15 >- 5. 0 NA. (7 D.
> Ove��S� / Dvv s C0,5e.+i basecoere
.1()-1 was r v (Iv) -The (? bn r
Sa 1 Di 3 3.5 (-) S .5 G v,/
eve Ya,n 6.l at 1 2-2.5 Mc,D (')8) 1b1A
ITY\-axfj (In urn i 0 ws, y, '9 7 W e,re_ o f -i-e.n 3- 3.
(LN ,,, 1 - 2 MG, D).

}4125/9e
V2w-' ,�a1.4.5 0i01^
�I .
-kk`c2sP ka& \2\1)i
vv\a4 fr kV"A. .1?5
‘sko'k J,° itiLJ-10-kci‘
f,‘N.
01,
62r- 06,0„ 4.-
1 gP

PUBLIC NOTICE
State of North Carolina
Environmental
Management Commission
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
NOTIFICATION OF
INTENT TO ISSUE A
STATE NPDES PERMIT
On the basis of thorough
staff review and applica-
tion of Article 21 of Chap-
ter 143, General Statutes
of North Carolina, Public
Law 92-500 and other law-
ful standards and regula-
tions, the North Carolina
Environmental Manage-
ment Commission propos-
es to issue a permit to dis-
charge to the persons list-
ed below effective 11-7-98
and subject to special con-
ditions..
Persons wishing to com-
ment upon or object to the
proposed determinations
are invited to submit same
in writing to the above ad-
dress no later than
10/23/98. All comments re-
ceived prior to that date
will be considered in the
formulation of final deter-
minations regarding the
proposed permit. A public
meeting may be held
where the Director of the
Division of Environmental
Management finds a sig-
nificant degree of public in-
terest in a proposed per-
mit.
A copy of the draft permit
is available by writing or
calling the Division of Envi-
ronmental Management,
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27626-
0535, [phone].
The application and other
information may be in-
spected at these locations
during normal office hours.
Copies of the information
on file are available upon
request and payment of
the costs of reproduction.
All such comments or re-
quests regarding a pro-
posed permit should make
reference to the NPDES
permit number listed be-
low.
Date: 9/16/98
David A. Goodrich
for A. Preston Howard Jr.,
P.E., Director
I Division of Environmental
' Management
Public notice of intent to
issue a State NPDES
permit to the following:
1. NPDES No.
NC0020664. 44,Town sr -of
'Spindalia, PO Box 1.86,
Spindale,' NC 28160 has
appliedfor a permit renew-
al and modification for a
facility located at the Town
of Spindale WWTP on
Ecology Drive, Spindale,
Rutherford County. The fa-
cility discharges 6.0 MGD
of treated domestic and in-
dustrial wastewater from
one outfall into Hollands
Creek, a Class C stream in
the Broad River Basin with
a 7Q10 of 3.5 cfs. The per-
mit modification will reduce
the flow to 4.5 MGD until a
flow expansion is request-
ed. Upon relocation of the
present outfall, the facility
will discharge 4.5 MGD to
Catheys; Creek, a Class C
stream in the Broad River
Basin which has a 7Q10
flow of 20.0 cfs. Some pa-
rameters are water quality
limited. For some parame-
ters, the available load ca-
pacity of the immediate re-
ceiving water will be con-
sumed. This may affect fu-
ture water quality based
effluent limitations for addi-
tional dischargers within
this portion of the water-
shed.
2. NPDES No.
NC0030139. White Oak
Manor - Rutherfordton,
Route 2, Box 39A, Ruther-
fordton, NC 28139 has ap-
plied for a permit renewal
for a facility located at
White Oak Manor- Ruther-
fordton, West of the inter-
section of US 64 and SR
1523 in Rutherford Coun-
ty. The facility is permitted
to discharge 0.015 MGD of
treated domestic wastewa-
ter from one outfall into an
Unnamed Tributary to
Catheys Creek, a Class
WS-V stream in the Broad
River Basin. No parame-
ters are water quality limit-
ed, but this discharge may
affect future allocations.
3. NPDES cr.(' j No.
NC008 93. Spartan Mills,
PO B 1658, Spartan-
burg, C 29304 has ap-
plied for a permit renewal
for a facility located at
John H. Montgomery Mill,
707 Montgomery Drive,
Chesnee, SC with dis-
charge location in North
Carolina, off NCSR 1113
in Rutherford County. The
facility discharges 0.175
MGD of treated domestic
and industrial wastewater
from one outfall into the
Broad River a Class C
stream in the Broad River
Basin. No parameters are
water quality limited, but
this discharge may affect
future allocations.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
C
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and
State, duly commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to
administer oaths, personally appeared
;.P Betty Brooks
who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that they are
Classified Advertising Manager
(Owner, partner, publisher, or other officer or employee authorized
to make this affidavit) of THE DAILY COURIER, a newspaper
published, issued and entered as second class mail In the town
of FOREST CITY, in said County and State; that they are
authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement; that the
notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy of which is
attached hereto, was published in THE DAILY COURIER on the
following dates:
6(,AK L September 22, 1998
and that said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document,
or legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and
every such publication, a newspaper meeting all of the requirements
and qualifications of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North
Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section
1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina.
This 22nd day of September, 1998.
(
ty Brooks, Classified Advertising Manager)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this
22nd day of September, 1998.
las A. Flowe, Notary Public)
My commission expires: February 12, 2001

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit (NC0020664) Fact Sheet
FACILITY INFORMATION
Facility: Town of Spindale WWTP
NPDES No.: NC0020664
Design Flow (MGD): 6.0
Facility Class: IV
County:
Regional Office:
USGS Topo Quad:
Rutherford
Asheville
F11NW
STREAM
CHARACTERISTICS
Stream Name: Hollands, Catheys
Stream Class: Both C
Sub -basin: 030802
Drainage Area (mi2): 7.1, 41.6
S7Q 10 (cfs): 3.5, 20
W7Q10 (cfs): 4.5, 26
30Q2 (cfs): 6.0, 35
IWC (%): 73, 32
Location
Proposed Changes
Basis for change(s)
Supplement Page
Updated.
Reflects ATC issued 2/16/98 for
construction of outfall to
Catheys Cr.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1). and A(2). I
Added effluent pages for 4.5
MGD, effective upon issuance at
both locations.
Town is losing Springford next
year (0.8 MGD) and is already
running 3.2-3.5 MGD. Region
confirmed with ORC that facility
wants reduced flow limit.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1). and A(2).
BOD5/NH3 limits at 4.5 MGD
of 27.0/30.0 and 8/No limit,
resp., for S/W at Hollands; 25.5
and 10.0, resp., for both S/W at
Catheys.
Current Division policy for
existing dischargers is to leave
BOD5 and NH3 limits
unchanged upon renewal. See
below for further discussion.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1). and A(3).
Removed instream monitoring
for BOD5/NH3 parameters.
Request of facility honored at
Hollands Cr since up- and
downstream levels have been
low over past year.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(2). and A(4).
1
Instream monitoring for
BOD5/NH3 parameters retained.
No data yet exists in Catheys Cr
since outfall construction
incomplete. Basinwide plan
specifies that effluent limits may
be adjusted if instream water
quality standards violations
documented.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1)-A(4).
Effluent monitoring for
Conductivity specified as Daily.
Reflects monitoring
requirements in 2B .0500s; was
not specified in previous permit.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Page
A(3).
TRC limit of 23 µg/1 and NH3
limits of 1.3/2.6 mg/1 S/W have
been added for Hollands at 6.0
MGD.
Based on TRC and ammonia
dilution calcs. Reflects NPDES
Unit Supervisor decision/policy
for dischargers reducing flow
and expanding above it again.

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit (NC0020664) Fact Sheet
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Page
A(4).
TRC limit of 28 µg/1 and NH3
limits of 2.7/6.2 mg/1 S/W have
been added for Catheys at 6.0
MGD.
Based on ammonia toxicity calcs
and TRC for new flow. Reflects
NPDES Unit Supervisor
decision/policy for dischargers
reducing flow and expanding
above it again.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(1)-A(4).
and
Pages
Monitoring frequency for Cu
and Zn changed from Weekly to
2/Month.
Reflects Division policy for
toxicant monitoring without a
limit.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1)-A(4).
Quantitation limit for CN
specified as 10 mil.
Reflects CN detection limit now
being incorporated into permits
upon request for mod. or
renewal.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(1)-A(4).
and
Pages
Limits for Chromium and
Mercury removed; monitoring
frequency changed from Weekly
to 2/Month.
Reasonable potential analysis
justifies removal; reflects
Division policy for monitoring
toxicants without a limit.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(1).
and
Page
Limits for Cd (3.0 41), CN (7.5
µg/1), Lead (37.5 µg/1), and Ni
(132.2 µg/1) with Weekly
monitoring; monitoring
frequency for other toxicants
2/Month.
Reasonable potential analysis
justifies limit; reflects Division
policy for monitoring toxicants
without a limit.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(2).
and
Page
Limits for Cd (7.7 41), CN
(19.3 µg/1), and Ni (340.3 41)
with Weekly monitoring;
monitoring frequency for other
toxicants 2/Month.
Reasonable potential analysis
justifies limit; reflects Division
policy for monitoring toxicants
without a limit.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(4).
and
Page
Limit for Cd (6.3 µg/1) added.
CN and Ni limits changed to
15.8 and 277.2 µg/l, resp. with
Weekly monitoring. Lead limit
removed and monitoring
frequency changed from Weekly
to 2/Month.
Reasonable potential analysis
justifies presence or removal of
limit; reflects Division policy for
monitoring toxicants without a
limit.
Effluent Limitations and
Monitoring Requirements Pages
A(1)-A(4). I 1
Footnote added that specifies
sampling for toxicants in
conjunction with Chronic
Toxicity sampling.
To align toxicant data with WET
test results in an effort to
identify cause of toxicity
problems.
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
A(1)-A(2).
and
Pages
Chronic toxicity test specified at
67% and 26% (Hollands and
Catheys, resp.); refer to
Supplement to Effluent
Limitations, Special Conditions
A(5) and A(6).
Reflects new instream waste
concentration (IWC) with 4.5
MGD flow limit.
Compliance Schedule: N/A.
Special Condition(s): WET testing requirements A(5)-A(8); re -opener condition A(9).
History
A public hearing was held in January, 1994, and during the hearing officer's review, an error in 7Q10
flow of the Second Broad River was identified; Forest City's WTP uptake, 8.0 MGD, had not been
considered. A revised Waste Load Allocation (WLA) was prepared to account for a lower 7Q10 flow in
the Second Broad River. For both Spindale WWTP and Forest City WWTP BODS and ammonia limits

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit (NC0020664) Fact Sheet
were adjusted (lowered) to 25.5 mg/1 and 10 mg/1, respectively, which predicted a minimum Dissolved
Oxygen (DO) level downstream of 5.08 mg/1.
Spindale WWTP had notable mercury and toxicity problems in the past, the latter of which persists.
Facility is presenty under an SOC for construction of outfall to Catheys Creek and Toxicity testing. The
most recently amended SOC specifies beginning construction by 10/15/98, completion of construction by
6/15/99, and achieving compliance by 9/30/99. SOC dates have been modified several times to
accommodate a delayed construction schedule. (Effluent pages have been included for both flows at both
locations, in the event additional SOC amendments are necessary.)
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) work for the WWTP, which targeted surfactants and inorganic
salts, failed to determine a definite source of toxicity in the effluent as of August, 1997. The
Environmental Sc'ences Branch (ESB) has stated that it supports all efforts by the facility to reduce
effluent toxicants rior to relocation of the outfall, and ESB believes a long-term chemical management
plan would benefit the town, regardless of relocation.
Compliance Sumtnary
• Several NOVs for TSS (all in 1996), toxicity, Cd, Ni, and CN during past couple of years.
• Mercuryproblem has decreased significantly overpast two years; dailymonitoringhas revealed no
lm Y
detects since 51/97.
• Toxicity test r4sults reported for 1996-98 were: 29.6%, 29.6%, 53.7%, 66.18%, 66.18%, >73%,
66.2%, >73%,,53.7%, 66.2%, and 29.6%.
• Effluent BODS levels usually < 15 mg/1; ammonia levels normally < 0.5 mg/I.
• Effluent TSS concentrations normally fall in teens/20s mg/1.
• Reasonable po ential calculations show Chlorides, Copper, Zinc, and Silver maximum predicted
concentrationsl are above action levels in all cases.
• Instream data (Hollands Cr) show low ammonia (<0.10 mg/1) and BOD5 (<1-2 mg/1) levels.
Temperature measurements are fine, and no discernible trends found in fecal or DO data; however,
Conductivity data indicate a large contribution from the effluent (<100 upstream and upper 100s or
1000s downstream).
• Long Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) data showed upstream detects of Lead, Chromium, and Nickel.
• Facility is currently exempt from the 24-h staffing requirement. No need to address this exemption in
permit itself; however, the letter (date?) sent to facility does say variance expires 11/30/98 and will be
reviewed at this renewal. Application includes formal request to continue, as well as information
regarding dialiig/alarm systems which are promptly answered by an ORC on duty. No problem with
continued exemption at this time, but should be reviewed again at next renewal (to be addressed in
cover letter. ___L.
Additional Comments
• Catheys Cr is isted on the 303(d) list as impaired. Catheys Cr is Partially Supporting its uses,
and sedimentation is a problem parameter. Major sources are believed to be municipal
pretreatment (indirect dischargers) and agriculture.
• It is appropriate to subject a higher flow 6.0 MGD to policies for "new" flow, if the facility has
chosen to drop and retain a page for higher flow. A reduction of flow cannot be prevented; however,
allowing it should not mean that a facility "locks" the increased flow at current limits and thus leaves
the Division less flexibility to address water quality issues with more recent policies.
• Ammonia toxicity calculations (attached) show need for lower limits at 4.5 MGD, but facility is
performing well (NH3 values usually < 0.5 mg/1), and current Division policy is not to require more
stringent ammonia limits for existing dischargers, so the limits remain unchanged. Identical
concentration limits to previously established ammonia limits at 6.0 MGD were used for 4.5 MGD
and not "scaled up" with a smaller flow, since more recent long-term BOD data (10/3/96 memo to
Ruth Swanek) show a higher multiplier than the one used for original WLA modeling is more
accurate. The multiplier (CBODu/BOD5) calculated from that data was 4.2, and 2 was assumed in
the modeling procedure. In addition, it is Division policy not to give minor facilities (<1.0 MGD)
ammonia limits below 2/4 mg/1 for S/W (reflective of Best Available Technology, or BAT); however,
for majors, the threshold has been deemed 1/2 mg/1 S/W.

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit (NC0020664) Fact Sheet
• TRC calculations (attached) show an allowable concentration in Hollands Cr of 23 µg/I. Facility does
use sulfur dioxide as dechlor agent, and currently takes TRC down to about mid -hundreds (µg/I) on
average.
• A QUAL2E field calibrated model is in the works for the Second Broad River. Unless instream
water quality standard violations are observed or Forest City WTP expands during the course of this
permit (and the re -opener condition is invoked), new limits may be assigned to the Town of
Spindale's permit upon renewal to better manage interacting discharges in this watershed.
• At 4.5 MGD, Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) compliance should improve significantly once move to
Catheys is made. If facility goes back to 6.0 MGD, facility stands a better chance of passing at an
IWC of 32%; however, some tests from 1996-98 did not even pass at 32%. Facility should continue
investigating source of toxicity (TRE), regardless of flow; a very narrow margin of safety exists even
at 4.5 MGD.
• Instream Assessment memo (8/97) noted prominent color being discharged; this was also an issue
that arose at the 1994 Public Hearing. Has facility considered reduction actions?
• 65% TSS removal requirement at Hollands Cr left as is, since standard 85% removal requirement will
go into effect upon relocation of outfall (scheduled complete by end of the year). DMR data from
1998 shows even 65% removal requirement was not met in Jan. or Feb. Has facility investigated
possible I&I problems?
• No documentation found in files as to why 65% removal percent was first introduced into permit;
The majority of facility's influent is industrial, not domestic...? 40 CFR 133 (g) (facilities qualifying
for treatment "equivalent to secondary treatment") may have been the basis, since facility could meet
effluent concentration limits. Any history from the region?
• Facility losing Springford next year (0.800 MGD), with pretreatment permit limits for Cu, CN, and
Chloride.
• Overlapping toxicant parameters in LTMP have not been removed since monitoring frequencies in
LTMP are less frequent (3 consecutive days semi-annually in LTMP).
• Preliminary discussions with the Pretreatment Unit suggest that sulfate monitoring may need to be
added; town feels that sulfates and chlorides may be the source of toxicity. More to come as draft
permit is reviewed.
• Facility must notify the Division before expansion above 4.5 MGD occurs.
State Contact
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Bethany Bolt at [phone], extension 551.
Copies of the following are attached to provide further information on the permit development:
• Reasonable Potential Analysis (majors only)
• TRC and Ammonia Calculations
• Existing permit effluent sheets with changes noted (existing facilities only)
• Draft Permit
NPDES Recommendation by:
9/3o799 - Vet 2.0ex EdW?rcls, Do►NRS1-re?
Ca-Ny Cr skot4Cd bt A- 52 1 S-49 r
j / e rte t � S eat a 4- NJ 1,\ o; r, � V.l1.l TP Ira s
1 2'� f 9�'' � p � '' � Eon +tilesr�i s � f�2C�
`'�XQario(ec abo`r- 4S 1►�- G b . (Z t e r `` I
r3 re.ers; be s�- a y i s bc.- so►v`�-w I1a t c� nSi t; terl.7
g n . o �,1� �.3 . Cand 4 -i o.- - o e. d 4-0
l,,i i �'h $ 0�9 6 r� 1 e
Su . Co 'ter r3. spe c�-Fy►►� -}�,a� -�a�; l� 1441 h1-
YY1t711��
r iV', dcLor�a►'t cQ. vv �d •MG-1I7
�v �1 vv fi7Nr av,y 12 - mo. Feri o c 4 XcEe S SD°4-.5 MenD
170,vt
4 (54a.

Staff Review and Evaluation
NPDES Wastewater Permit (NC0020664) Fact Sheet
Regional Office Comments
�-7�" ...1�
�(,�'rt�iYc tJ. !G � D ivw f�, .cU�-C�- �-' -0- '(. ¢-cs-�c'u°
.4414
,v
ll
l
e 2.A s �vr b{ . s D -� o k) : a c; l was ,901 rt �s.e..
I98 — a5 ►' M _ -fie J��-`i (c. s -}D Q � +-e r r d T ,
I $pr„�.o Forol (o.a �� blow
eY\d was alreac / ,rvtArt vt. a4- -flows weI
���2•s M� on ew l . ?Galt- 'l in ' 91) S . Fo+rci
`i•S �l 1 Yt
►�
15 SC kte' k l e � +D Y� 104-e- � "' .1 a ►-� • �9, w Vt c,
20-is Co rv- P
l-e-4-ed) so Sp -,dales- coL,.lok eas�y
pe rko r rvt >1 -- 4.5 NVi D Ge9 t S V\o ccl /l also ,redc
-�-5 C , 0 tA_ VN 'C-a c- < }-/ 5 k c-1 of csa v�+i vi
TIZG-
mor6.1-vri n wit( he, re duczd --ft. *At,
oiktr - r i ea rt {-s w/° tA+ (4-0 4s . A l fkc' (A. k pv-e-v ot,e,4
no b e
F I sk;I� y5� er dal -a ,eld1 a e. wtll c9•iar
►�.
a y +-'s waY a NO' de)-e4'5 way-Y'aw1 a .
Signature:
Regional Recommendation by:
Reviewed By:
2 5
ture:
te:
Regional Supervisor:
,
( 0
Si n u e:
Da
NPDES Unit:
-
////9�

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Bill Penson
Town of Spindale
P.O. Box 186, 103 Revely Street
Spindale, North Carolina 28160
Dear Mr. Penson:
EDEHNF=1
March 13, 1995
Subject: NPDES Permit No. NC0020664
Spindale WWTP
Rutherford County
A review of the subject permit by the Division revealed an error in the effluent limit
pages and the supplement page. Enclosed please find the corrected pages. The classification of
Hollands Creek and Catheys Creek was incorrect. The correct classification of both streams is
Class This classification will effect the facility's nickel limit and chloride monitoring
rement. The enclosed pages should be inserted into your existing permit and the old pages
discarded. 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 Agency dated December 6, 1983.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this
modification of the 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, Post Office Drawer
27447, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7447. Unless such demand is made, this decision shall
be final and binding.
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. Part II, E.4. addresses the
requirements to be followed in case of change in ownership or control of this discharge.
This permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other permits which may be
required by the Division of Environmental Management or permits required by the Division of
Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act or any other Federal or Local governrnental
permit that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Susan Wilson at telephone
number 919/733-5083.
cc: Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Asheville Regional Office
Compliance
Central Files
Permit File
S'ncerelly,
VA. Preston Howa
d, Jr., P.E.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Spindale
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate the existing 6.0 MGD extended aeration wastewater treatment plant with
discharge into Hollands Creek, which is classified Class C waters in the Broad River Basin
located at the Town of Spindale Wastewater Treatment Plant, Ecology Drive, Spindale,
Rutherford County (See Part III of this permit), and
CE,145
2. After zecctving an Authorization
l K 0.( r'I ✓\ 1/�i Q.
to Construct from the Diy_isinn- ntal
eeate-t-discharge point to Catheys Creek, and
`. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into Catheys
1� Creek which is classified Class C waters in the Broad River Basin.

A. (). ENI-4LUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAT. rSi April 1 October 31)— Permit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until relocation to Catheys Creek, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001 into Hollands Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics
Discharge Limitations
Monthly Avg.
Flow
BOQ, 5-Day, 20°C ** /rrW.,./i 1: 04 3r 4c-5-e' gDl
Total Suspended ResidQ�' �aV3� (J.b mg/I
NH3 as N Po;( if `0 3-f .) 8.0 mg/I
Dissolved 'Oxygen '� f t
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200. /100 ml
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
Chronic Toxicity
Conductivity
Cadmium
Chlorides
Chromi m
Cyanide`
vf_ead
'Mercury
Nickel
Copper
L-Zinc
S i,l,v e r
Weekly Avg. Daily Max.
40.5 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
400,1c /100 ml
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
Frequency
Continuous
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Quarterly
Quarterly
Quarterly
2:78° Da L ()
µg/I Weekly
2/Month
.F lag / I 9 z/P`1O
1S _6 r µ g / I Weekly
31534'3 µg/I Weekly
1>47 µg/I 214o
(32µ9/I Weekly
.W....Dekt9 irnt b
2 / Month
Sample
Type
Recording
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
*Sample
Location
1 or E
E, 1,VAC-
E, I
E, Kole'
E, U, D
E, U, D
E
E, U, D
E
E
E
E, U, D
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1548.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July, August and
September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
"'The monthly average effluent BOD5 concentration shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
"""The monthly average effluent Total Suspended Residue concentration shall not exceed 35% of the influent value (65% removal).
****The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentrations shall not be less than 6.0 mg/I.
****C onic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 73%; March, June, September, December: SEE Part III, Condition F.
The shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. I'
Qu liwt �� 7 D
*TO Kit -1 ntoni
Sam?
/ to Conjunc-ficry% u/-taKdc

A. (). EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FINAL ermit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until relocation to Catheys Creek, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall(s) serial number 001 into Hollands Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified
below:
Effluent Characteristics
Fl B�?, r3tay, 20°C ** Ok
i 'b I2 t
Total Suspended Residue ***
NH3 as N (P ,r (-* O(. 3i)`(.Jo✓-Mar)
Dissolved Oxygen ****
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
Chronic Toxicity*****
Conductivity
Cadmium
Chlorides
Chromium
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Copper
Zinc
SiJNer
Discharge Limitations
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg.
2: (3 MGD
30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/I
30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/I
t. 3 / z. &
200` /100 ml 400 /100 ml
Monitoring Requirements
Measurement
Daily Max. Frequency
Continuous
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Quarterly
Quarterly
2.8 µg/I Weekly
2/Month
Bd µ e9/1 —1kt7AtseZMC.)
6.9 µg/I Weekly
34.14 µg/I Weekly
Z/L A
12141 µg/I Weekly 2. frto
W
ujvt�
2 / Month
Sample
Type
Recording
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Grab
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
Composite
*Sample
Location
I or E
E, I,
E, I
E,
E, U, D
E, U, D
E
E, U, D
E
E
E
E, U, D
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1548.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July, August and
September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
**The monthly average effluent BOD5 concentration shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
***The monthly average effluent Total Suspended Residue concentration shall not exceed 35% of the influent value (65% removal).
****The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentrations shall not be less than 5.0 mg/I.
"**C ronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 73%; March, June, September, December: SEE Part III, Condition F.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
Ther shall /be°� no discharge of flouting solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A. O. Erl~LUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS, FINAL Permit No. NC0020664
During the period beginning after relocation to Catheys Creek and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outf411(4 serial number 001 into Cathey Creek. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
LtM; ch Viztrtn- sts are C1.0 Nt §D -
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Monthly Avg.
Flow *o0" MGD
BOD, 5-Day, 20°C `lvCZ •51 25.5 mg/I
Total Suspended Residue **
NH3 as N SfW (21fi1 2.) 301 0..00 mg/I
Dissolved Oxygen ***
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
Total Residual Chlorine
Temperature
1 otal Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Total Phosphorus
Chronic Toxicity****
Conductivity
Chlorides
Chromium
Cyanide r4
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Cadmium
Copper
Zinc
Silver
911
200. /100 ml
400./100 ml
Measurement
Weekly Avg. Daily Max. Frequency
Continuous
38.2 mg/I Daily
45.0 mg/I Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Quarterly
Quarterly
Quartery
(ze,H,t)
µg/I
(tf:$) 19.3 ss->f µg/I
µg/I
11.0k, µg/I
(Ur.1) 340.3 a ' µg/I
(G 3) •�
* y `E)
2/Month
f
Weekly
PI
war 27.D
Weekly
2_,Z— AurftT' 144
vY
we'Tly Ma
2 / Mont
Sample *Sample
Type Location
Recording I or E
Composite E, I, U, D
Composite E, I
Composite E, U, D
Grab E, U, D
Grab E, U, D
Grab E
Grab E, U, D
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E, U, D
Composite E
Composite E
Grab E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
Composite E
* Sample locations: E - Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream at SR 1547, D - Downstream at SR 1548.
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be collected three times per week during June, July, August and
September and once per week during the remaining months of the year.
**The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Residue concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent value (85% removal).
***The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentrations shall not be less than 6.0 mg/I.
�•• onic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 32%; March, June, September, December: SEE Part III, Condition G.
The IFE shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored daily at the effluent by grab sample.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

NCoo2o 64
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Hollands Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-(6)
Residual
hlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
1WC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/l)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 0.5
1
r 3,' ' ,
-r*
Ammonia as NH3 t'�t .,r
(summer)
3.5 7Q10 (CFS)
4.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6.975 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
66.59 IWC (%)
25.53 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/l)
3.5
4.5
6.975
1.0
0.22
66.59 I
1.39
minimum
4.5
4.5
6.975
1.8
0.22
60.78
2.819 4_,
minimum
2

NC0020664
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Catheys Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-7 (1)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 2.9 :1
tA-ov4A1/1
.� �� • ,fir
G"r,
Ammonia as NH3 j
(summer) 1 C��f �1r9
20 7Q10 (CFS)
4.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6.975 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
25.86 IWC (%)
65.75 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
20
4.5
6.975
1.0
0.22
25.86
3.24
minimum =
26
4.5
6.975
1.8
0.22
21.15
7.690
minimum =of
2

NC00206 4
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Hollands Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-1346)
,I
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/l)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 0.4 :
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
3.5 7Q10 (CFS)
6.0 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
9.3 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
72.66 IWC (%)
23.40 Allowable Concentration (mgll)
2001100m1
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mgll)
3.5
6.0
9.3
1.0
0.22
72.66
1.29
minimum d'
4.5
6.0
9.3
1.8
0.22
67.39
2.565
minimum =g
2-

•
NC0020664
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Catheys Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-7 (1)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 2.2 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
20 7Q10 (CFS)
6.0 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
9.3 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
31.74 IWC (%)
53.56 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I).
20
6.0
9.3
1.0
0.22
31.74
2.68
minimum =0--
26
6.0
9.3
1.8
0.22
26.35
6.217
minimum =7
2-

Permit No. NC0020664
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRO ENTAL MANAGEMENT
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,
Town of Spindale
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Town of Spindale WWTP
Ecology Drive
Spindale
Rutherford County
to receiving waters designated as Catheys Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective Ju y-1;
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on
Signed this day w 31, 1-994 `—
Original Signed By
Coleen H. Sullins
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit No. NC0020664
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Town of Spindale
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate the existing 6.0 MGD extended aeration wastewater treatment plant with
discharge into Hollands Creek, which is classified class aters in the Broad River Basin
located at Town of Spindale WWTP, Ecology Drive, indale, Rutherford County (See Part III
of this Permit), and
/'
recei ing an tiiiorization to Construct jom the vision of Environinen Management,
struct a�n outf to relocate th- dischar_- point to Ca keys Creek, and -I
.-,- /
comp/al colitslroc4ioyi .. .
�! Discharge from said treatment works a the location specified on the attached map into Catheys
Creek which is classified Class waters in the Broad River Basin.
(�i

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Bethany Bolt
DATE: June 8, 1998
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
PERMIT NUMBER NC0020664
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address:
Mailing:
Town of Spindale WWTP
Ecology Street
P.O. Box 186
Spindale, NC 28160
2. Date of Investigation: March 24, 1998
3. Report Prepared By: Roger C. Edwards
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
Donald R. Price, Superintendent
828-286-3407
5. Directions to Site: From Town of Spindale take Business 74 to
Ledbetter Road (turn left) travel approximately 2.5 miles to Ecology
Drive (turn right) WWTP located at end of road.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 35° 22' 33"
Latitude: 35° 22' 52"
Longitude: 81° 54' 12" Hollands Ck.(Old)
Longitude: 81° 53' 18" Cathey's Ck.(New)
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. U.S.G.S. Quad Name Rutherford North, NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain:
Page 1

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Gentle slope
above 100 year flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: >1000 feet
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Hollands and Catheys
Creeks are as stated below.
a. Classification: "C"
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: 030802
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
uses: Wildlife habitat, agriculture, recreation.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted 4.5 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? 6.0 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity 6.0 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two years:
N/A
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: Screening, grit
removal, extended aeration, clarification, chlorination, de -
chlorination.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: see "e" above
g Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Facility under SOC
for toxicity at present.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
approved
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ Permit
Number WQ0001953
Residuals Contractor Environmental Waste Recycling, Inc.
Telephone Number 336-998-8184
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP X PFRP OTHER
Page 2

C. Landfill:
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet):
4. SIC Codes (s) : 4952
Primary 55 Secondary 01, 58
Main Treatment Unit Code: 05003
PART III -
1. Is this
are any
OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or
public monies involved. (municipals only)? yes
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests:
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please indicate)
The Town of Spindale is under a SOC for toxicity. Plans have been
submitted to extend the discharge line to Cathey's Creek.
Date
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
_June 15, 1997_
November 18,1998
_June 15, 1999
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of
the nonfdischarge options available. Please provide regional
perspective for each option evaluated. N/A
Spray Irrigation:
Connec4on to Regional Sewer System:
Subsurf ce :
Other disposal options:
5. Other Special Items:
Page 3

PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS','
> 1 '''
1. The NPDES Permit should be evaluated for a discharge limit flow of
4.5 MGD and 6.0 MGD. Establish limits pages for both flows. This
will all w the Town the flexibility to accept new industry, if
/j recruitmint is successful, for industry that has be lost to other
,areas. The permitted flow of 4.5 MGD will possibility reduce limits
imposed on the Town until flow increase to the point,the limits for
6.0 MGD take effect . ____ ___, �. c f ce ,-� c- n--�(1
c� �y - L-cv -- 6-(4 "r. : -)
\� and stream
In reviewing data for the past 12 months on the upstream Y�-
cc. -- i/,� � � 1 M6D (
trixt`f l( jU n �?.
downstream BOD an NH3 consideration should be given to removin NO
these requirements for stream sampling. Effluent BOD's were in
single digits and NH3 values were <1.0 mg/1. Xx„ „
p 0 6- tic Ar -( Le c:- 4,teZJ vt
Reduction of daily sampling regiiremefit to three (3) time per week
is not recommended, unless this is a done for all Grade IV
facilities in the State with good compliance records. 7tO..
4.J Mercury has not been detected in the effluent for approximately a
year. The present limit in the NPDES Permit is 0.017 ug/1 daily
maximum. The mercury limit is expected to increase when discharge
line is completed to Cathey's Creek. However, a daily maximum limit
does not allow for any resampling or additional analysis. It is
recommended that amonly average be established for mercury in
this permit based on past sample results. cc, /rctc.lf Gt/-c-C.rG--1— C.
C ,.k..
^7,t)e.i'et,:-..., .4,-L.0., ota_cio,,,-,,,,_____,,/a.,;!)
5. The Town of Spindale has ��//been allowed` the exemption from 24 hour ' (.*
staffing during the life of the present NPDES Permit. There has not
been any problems with compliance related to 24 hour staffing of the
facility. It is recommended that the exemption be allowed for the
new permit term or until a problem arises that indicates 24 hour
staffing is necessary. ,, / (�j i �c,G c t c
U� �f v i '! tom- -'c iL`..i Jtide. f _(-<
6. The total suspended solids requirement for 654 removal should ,� r'Kic�
evaluated. The majority of influent is industrial wastewater whiche tc',�,JI
is typically low in TSS. The present permit contains a monthly and tp€-eA(
weekly average for TSS. The weekly average and monthly average .r, ;f-,-
limits should protect the ceiving stream. re,;�,'
n r -
© ry , ` is ; f- c �. - ,.`,, � ,;? .� f t (` i �- �r � : �'� c `� �' c ;;� ,.�.� 1.' � .E 6= r' �L�.-�. �-- . l
l
Sign';ture of Report Preparer
ater Quality Regional Supervisor
Date
Page 4

RATING SCALE FORFOCLASSIFICATION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL SYSTEMS
Name of Facility: 1Dwn.! o 4 el/ide
Owner or Contact Person: 7vtG1 ''�T 15Aklit,7Gu,tr MAeu c-r2
Mailing Address: P.O, Bcx ! J " Cp./1. NC'_ z ir.o
County: R c5ig o_d Telephone: 'V.t -2 ' - 3 y07
Present Classification:
NPDES Per. No. NC00 20(064/ Nondisc.
Rated by: i2
New Facility Existing Facility ✓
Per. No.WQ Health Dept.Per No.
oaf /, rcii�r Telephone: s2.5-Z5/-6zc ' Date:
Reviewed by:
•
ORC:(trc-
Check Classification(s): Subsurface
Wastewater Classification: (Circle One) I
Health Dept. Telephone:.,?s/ -
Regional Office Telephone:
Central Office Telephone:
Grade: _ Telephone: /2. -,2_/ - 3Y07
Spray Irrigati Land Application
II III IV Total Points: 01C- 6. C iwkG-1
11& ce-- 115 Aa<G-.)
IN -PLANT PROCESSES AND RELATED CONTROL EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION SHALL NOT BE
CONSIDERED WASTE TREATMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLASSIFICATION. ALSO SEPTIC TANK SYSTEMS CONSISTING ONLY OF SEPTIC TAM(
AND GRAVITY NITRIFICATION LINES ARE EXEMPT FROM CLASSIFICATION,
SUBSURFACE CLASSIFICATION
(check all units that apply)
1_ septic tanks
2. pump tanks
3. siphon or pump -dosing systems
4. sand filters
5. grease trap/interceptor
6. oil/water separators
7. gravity subsurface treatment and disposal:
8. pressure subsurface treatment and disposal:
SPRAY IRRIGATION C1ASSIF1CATiON
(check all units that apply)
1. preliminary treatment (definition no. 32 )
2. lagoons
3. septic tanks
4. pump tanks
5. pumps
6. sand filters
7. grease trapinterceptor
8. oil/water separators
9. disinfection
10. chemical addition for nutrient/algae control
11. spray irrigation of wastewater
In addition to the above classifications, pretreatment of wastewater in excess of these components shell
be rated using the point rating system and will require an operator with an appropriate dual certification.
LAND APPLICATION/RESIDUALS CLASSIFICATION (Applies only to permit holder)
1. Land application of biosolids, residuals or contaminated soils on a designated site.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY CLASSIFICATION
The following systems shall be assigned a Class I classification unless the flow is of a significant quantity or the technology is unusually
complex, to require consideration by the Commission on a case -by -case basis: (Check if Appropriate)
1. OiUwater Separator Systems consisting only of physical separation, pumps and disposal;
2. Septic Tank/Sand Fitter Systems consisting only of septic tanks, dosing apparatus, pumps,sand filters, disinfection
and direct discharge;
3. Lagoon Systems consisting only of preliminary treatment, lagoons, pumps, disinfection, necessary chemical treatment for
algae or nutrient control, and direct discharge;
4. Closed -loop Recycle Systems;
5. Groundwater Remediation Systems consisting only of oiVwater separators, pumps, air -stripping, carbon adsorption, disinfection
and disposal;
6. Aquaculture operations with discharge to surface waters;
7. Water Plant sludge handling and back -wash water treatment;
8. Seafood processing consisting of screening and disposal.
9. Single-family discharging systems, with the exception of Aerobic Treatment Units, will be classified if permitted after July 1,
1993 or if upon inspection by the Division, it is found that the system is not being adequately operated or maintained. Such
systems will be notified of the classification or reclassification by the Commission, in writing.

The following scale is used for rating wastewater treatment facilities: (circle appropriate points)
ITEM
(1) Industrial Pretreatment Units or Industrial Pretreatment Program (see definition No. 33)
(2) DESIGN FLOW OF PLANT IN gpd [not applicable to non -contaminated cooling waters. sludge handling facilities for
water purification plants. totally closed cycle systems(see definition No. 11), and facilities consisting only of item
(4)(d) or Items (4)(d) and (11)(d)]
0 - 20.000 1
20.001 - 50.000 2
50.001 - 100.000 3
100,001 - 250,000 4
250.001 - 500.000 .5
500.001 - 1.000.000 .8
1,000.001 - 2.000,000 1
2.000.001 (and up) rate 1point additional for each 200.000 gpd capacity up to a maximum of
Design Flow (gpd) '
PRELIMINARY UNITS/PROCESSES (see definition No.32) —
' , — •
(a) Bar Screens
or
(b) Mechanical Screens. Static Screens or Comminuting Devices 2
(c) Grit Removal 1
or
(d) Mechanical or Aerated Grit Removal(4)
(e) Flow Measuring Device
or
(f) instrumented Flow Measurement
(g) Preaeratlon CP
(h) Influent Flow Equalization 2
(I) Grease or 011 Separators - Gravity 2
Mechanical 3
Dissolved Air Flotation .8
( 1) Prechtorination S
(4) PRiMARYTREATMENtr UNTTSfPROCESSES
(a) Septic Tank (see definition No. 43) 2
(b) Imhof Tank. ,5
(c) Primary Clarifiers. .5
(d) Settling Ponds or Settling Tanks for inorganic Non -toxic Materials (sludge handling facilities for water
purification platys, sand. gravel. stone. and other mining operations except recreational activities such as gem
or gold mining) 2
(5) SECONDARY TREATMENT UW'TS/PROCESSES
(a) Carbonaceous Stage
(I) Aeration -High Purity Oxygen System 20
Diffused Air System14)
Mechanical Air System (fixed. floating or rotor)
Separate Sludge Reaeration
(II) Tridding Filter
High Rate 7
Standard Rate .5
Packed Tower ,5
Biological Aerated Fitter or Aerated Biological Filter 10
Aerated Lagoons 10
Rotating Biological Contactors 10
Sand Filters -intermittent biological 2
Recirculating biological 3
Stabilization Lagoons
Clarifier to
Single stage system for combined carbonaceous removal of BOD and nitrogenous removal by
nitrification (see definition No. 12)(Points for this item have to be in addition to items
(5)(a)(i) through (5)(a)(viii).
utilizing the extended aeration process (see definition No.3a) 2
utilizing other than the extended aeration process. 8
(x) Nutrient additions to enhance BOO removal 5
(xi) Biological Culture ('Super Bugs")addltion 5
(b) Nitrogenous Stage
(i) Aeration High Purity Oxygen System.. ..................... .................... .......... ........ .............. 20
Diffused Air System 10
Mechanical Air System (fixed. floating or rotor) ,............. ..................................6
Separate Sludge Reperation .3
(II) Trickling Filter -High Rate 7
Standard Rate 5
Packed Tower 5
(111) Biological Aerated Filter or Aerated Biological Fitter 10
(Iv) Rotating Biological Contactors 10
(v) Sand Fitter - Intermittent biological 2
Recirculating biological 3
(vi) Clarifier .5
TERTIARY OR ADVANCED TREATMENT UNITS/PROCESSES
(a) Activated Carbon Beds -
without carbon regeneration .5
with carbon regeneration 15
(b) Powdered or Granular Activated Carbon Feed -
without carbon regeneration .5
with carbon regeneration 15
(3)
(6)
POINTS
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(0)
(h)
(1)
(k)
Air stripping
Denitrification Process
Eiectrodlalysis
Foam Separation
Ion Exchange
Land Application of Treated Effluent (see definition No. 22b) (not applicable for sand. gravel. atone
and other similar mining operations) by high rate Infiltratlon.»...».........»...»...»...»...»........»....»...».............A
5
20
2
5
0
Microscreens
Phosphorous Removal by Biological Processes (See definition No. 26)
Polishing Ponds - without aeration
with aeration
5
10
5
5
.5

(1) Post Aeration - cascade O,
t diffused or mechanical 2
(m) Reverse Osmosis 5
(n) Sand or Mixed -Media Filters - low rate 2
' high rate 5
(0) Treatment processes for removal of metal or cyanide 15
(p) treatment processes for removal of toxic materials other than metal or cyanide 15
(7) iSUJDGETREATMENT
(a) Sludge Digestion Tank - Heated (anaerobic) 1 Q
Aerobic
Unheated (anaerobic) 3
(b) Sludge Stabilization (chemical or thermal) .5
(c) Sludge Drying Beds - Gravity 2
Vacuum Assisted .5
(d) Sludge Etutriatlon .5
(e) Sludge Conditioner (chemical or thermal) .5
{ f) Sludge Thickener (gravity) .5
{ g) Dissolved Air Flotation Unit [not applicable to a unit rated as (3)(i)) 8
(h) Sludge Gas Utilization (including gas storage) 2
(1) Sludge Holding Tank - Aerated .5
Non -aerated 2
(j) Sludge Incinerator (not including activated carbon regeneration) 10
(k) Vacuum Fitter, Centrifuge, or Filter Press or other similar dewatering devices 10
(8) RESIDUALS UTILLIZAION/DtSPOSAL (including incinerated ash)
(a)
Lagoons2
(b) Land Application (surface and subsurface) (see definition 22a)
by contracting to a land application operator or landfill operator who holds the land application permit
or landfill permit
'CP
( ) (c)Dedicated Landfill(burial) by the permittee of the wastewater treatment facility
(9)
Chlorination
(b) Dechlorinatton
IP
(c) Ozone
(d) Radiation .5
(10) CHEMICAL ADDITION SYSTEM(S) ( see definition No. 9) (not applicable to chemical additions rated as item (3)Q),
(5)(a)(x1), (6)(a), (6)(b). (7)(b), (7)(e). (9a), (9)(b) or (9)(c) 5 points each:
list .5
.5
.5
.5
(11) MISCELLANEOUS UNITS/PROCESSES
(a) Holding Ponds, Holding Tanks or Settling Ponds for Organic or Toxic Materials Including wastes from mining
operations containing nitrogen or phosphorus compounds In amounts significantly greater than is common
for domestic wastewater -4
(b) Effluent Flow Equalization (not applicable to storage basins which are inherent In land application systems) 2
(c) Stage Discharge (not applicable to storage basins inherent in land application systems).— ............. .. ...... -...-5
(d) Pumps
9
(a) Stand -By Power Supply
(f) Thermal Pollution Control Device 3
TOTAL POINTS
CLASS!FlCATICN
Class! 5-25 Points
Class 11 26-50 Points
C1asslq 51-65 Points
Cias, N 66-Up Points
Facittttes having a rating
of one through four points, inclusive, do not require a certified operator.
Facilities having an activated sludge process will be assigned a minimum classification of Class II.
Facilities having treatment processes for the removal of metal or cyanide will be assigned a minimum classification of Class II.
Facilities having treatment processes for the biological removal of phosphorus will be assigned a minimum classification of Class ill.
.0004 DEFlNfTIONS
The following deflntions shall apply throughout this Subchapter.
(1) Activated Carbon Beds. A physlcaVchemical method for reducing soluble organic material from wastewater effluent; The column -type beds used In this
method will have a flow a varying from two to eight gallons per minute per square foot and may be either upflow or downftow carbon beds. Carbon may or
may not be regenerated on the wastewater treatment plant site;
(2) Aerated Lagoons. A asin in which all solids are maintained in suspension and by which biological oxidation or organic matter Is reduced through artificially
accelerated transfer of o ygen on a flow -through basis;
(3) Aeration. A process of bringing about intimate contact between air or high purity oxygen In a liquid by spraying. agitation or diffuston;(3a) Extended
Aeration. An activated sludge process utilizing a minimum hydraulic detention time of 18 hours.
(4) Agr€cutturalty managed site. Any she on which a crop is produced, managed, and harvested (Crop includes grasses. grains, trees, etc.);
(5) Air Stripping. A process by which the ammonium ion is first converted to dissolved ammonia (pH adjustment) with the ammonia then released to the
atmosphere by physical means; or other similar processes which remove petroleum products such as benzene, toluene, and xytene;
(6) Carbon Regeneration; The regeneration of exhausted carbon by the use of a furnace to provide extremely high temperatures which volatilize and oxidize the
absorbed impurities;
(7) Carbonaceous Stage A stage of wastewater treatment designed to achieve 'secondary' effluent limits;
(8) Centrifuge. A mechanical device in which centrifugal force Is used to separate solids from llqutds or to separate liquids of different densi ies;
(9) Chemical Addition Systems- The addition of chemicals) to wastewater at an application point for purposes of improving solids removal, pH adjustment,
alkalinity control, etc.; the capability to experiment with different chemicals and different application points to achieve a specific result will be considered one
system; the capability to add chemical(s) to dual units will be rated as one system; capability to add a chemical at a different application points for different
purposes will result to the systems being rated as separate systems;
(10) Chemical Sludge Conditioning. The addition of a chemical compound such as lime, ferric chlorfde, or a polymer to wet sludge to coalesce the mass prior to
its application to a dewatering device;
(11) Closed Cycle Systems. Use of holding ponds or holding tanks for containment of wastewater containing inorganic, nontoxic materials from sand, gravel,
crushed stone or other similar operations. Such systems shall carry a maximum of two points regardless of pumping facilities or any other appurtenances;
(12) Combined Removal of Carbonaceous BOD and Nitrogenous Removal by Nltrificatbn- A single stage system required to achieve permit effluent limits on BOD
and ammonia nitrogen within the same biological reactor
(13) Dechtortnation. Thelparttal or complete reduction of residual chlorine in a liquid by any chemical or physical process;
(14) Denitrfftcatton Process. The conversion of nitrate-nitrogen to nitrogen gas;

(15) Etectrodialysis. Process for removing ionized salts from water through the use of ion -selective ion -exchange membranes;
(16) Filter Press. A process operated mechanically for partially dewatering sludge;
(17) Foam Separation. The planned frothing of wastewater or wastewater effluent as a means of removing excessive amounts of detergent materials through
the introduction of air In the form of fine bubbles; also called foam fractionation;
(18) Grit Removal. The process of removing grit and other heavy mineral matter from wastewater;
(19) Imhoff Tank. A deep two story wastewater tank consisting of an upper sedimentation chamber and a lower sludge digestion chamber.
(20) instrumented Flow Measurement. A device which indicates and records rate of flow;
(21) ion Exchange. A chemical process in which ions from two different molecules are exchanged;
(22) Land application:
(a) Sludge Disposal. A final sludge disposal method by which wet sludge may be applied to land either by spraying on the surface or by subsurface injection
(i.e.. chisel plow); [not applicable for types of sludge described In (11) of this Rule];
(b) Treated Effluent. The process of spraying treated wastewater onto a land area or other methods of application of wastewater onto a land area as a
means of final disposal or treatment;
(23) Microscreen. A low speed, continuously back -washed, rotating drum filter operating under gravity conditions as a polishing method for removing
suspended solids from efftuerd;
(24) Nitrification Process. The biochemical conversion o1 unoxidized nitrogen (ammonia and organic nitrogen) to oxidized nitrogen (usually nitrate);
(25) Nitrogenous Stage. A separate stage of wastewater treatment designed for the specific purpose of converting ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen;
(26) Phosphate Removal, Biological. The removal of phosphorus from wastewater by an oxic/anoxic process designed to enhance luxury uptake of phosphorus
by the microorganisms;
(27) Polishing Pond. A holding pond following secondary treatment with sufficient detention time to allow settling of finely suspended solids;
(2B) Post Aeration. Aeration following conventional secondary treatment units to Increase effluent D.O. or for any other purpose;
(29) Post Aeration. (Cascade) A polishing method by which dissolved oxygen is added to the effluent by a nonmechanical. gravity means of flowing down a
series of steps or weirs; The flow occurring across the steps or weirs moves in a fairly thin layer and the operation of the cascade requires no operator
adjustment; thus, zero points are assigned even though this Is an essential step to meeting the limits of the discharge permit;
(30) Powdered to Granular Activated Carbon Feed. A biophysical carbon moose that utilizes blo!oglcal activity and organic absorption by using powdered or
granular activated carbon; Virgin or regenerated carbon is feed controlled into the system;
(31) Preaeration. A tank constructed to provide aeration prior to primary treatment;
(32) Preliminary Units. Unit operations in the treatment process. such as screening and comminution. that prepare the liquor for subsequent major operations;
(33) Industrial Pretreatment.
(a) Pre-treatment Unit, Industrial. The conditioning of a waste at its source before discharge, to remove or to neutralize substances injurious to sewers and
treatment processes or to effect a partial reduction in load on the treatment process which is operated by the same governing body as the wastewater
treatment plant being rated;
b) Pre-treatment Program, Industrial - must be a State or EPA required program to receive points on the rating sheet;
(34) Primary Clarifiers. The first settling tanks through which wastewater is passed in a treatment works for the purpose of removing settleable and suspended
solids and BOD which Is associated with the solids;
(35) Pumps. All influent. effluent and in -plant pumps;
(36) Radiation. Disinfection or sterilization process utilizing devices emitting uttraviotet or gamma rays;
(37) Reverse Osmosis. A treatment process in which a heavy contaminated liquid is pressurized through a membrane forming nearly pure liquid free from
suspended solids;
(38) Rotating Biological Contractors. A fixed biological growth process in which wastewater flows through tanks in which a series of partially submerged circular
surfaces are rotated;
(39) Sand Filters:
(a) Intermittent Biological. Filtration of effluent following septic tanks, lagoons. or some other treatment process In which further blodecomposltion is
expected to produce desired effluents; Hydraulic loading rates on these fitters are computed in gpolac and have a resulting tow gpnt/sf (less than one);
b) Recirculating biological - the same type of sand filter as defined in Subparagraph (39) (a) of this Rule with the added capability to recycle effluent back
through the sand filter;
(40) Sand or Mixed -Media Filters. A polishing process by which effluent Limits are achieved through a further reduction of suspended solids;
(a) tow rate — gravity, hydraulically loaded filter with loading rates in the one to three gpm/sf range;
(b) high rate — a pressure. hydraulically loaded fitter with loading rates in the five gpm/sf range; At any rate. the loading rate will exceed three gprNsf;
(41) Secondary Clarifiers. A tank which follows the biological unit of treatment plant and which has the purpose of removing sludges associated with the
biological treatment units;
(42) Separate Sludge Reaeratton. A part of the contact stabilization process where the activated sludge Is transferred to a tank and aerated before returning it
to the contact basin;
(43) Septic Tank. A single -story settling tank In which settled sludge is to contact with the wastewater flowing through the tank; shall not be applicable for
septic tank systems serving single family residences having capacity of 2,000 gallons or less which discharge to a nitrification field;
(44) Sludge Digestion. The process by which organic or volatile matter and sludge is gasified, liquefied, mineralized or converted into more stable organic matter
through the activity of living organisms. which includes aerated holding tanks;
(45) Sludge Drying Beds. An area comprising natural or artificial layer; of porous materials upon which digested sewage sludge is dried by drainage and
evaporation;
(46) Sludge Etutriation. A process of sludge conditioning in which certain constituents are removed by successive washings with fresh water or plard effluent;
(47) Sludge Gas Utilization. The process of using sewage gas for the purpose of heating buildings. driving engirfes, etc.;
(48) Sludge Holding Tank (Aerated and Nonaerated). A tank utilized for small wastewater treatment plants not containing a digester in which sludge may be
kept fresh. and supernatant withdrawn prior to a drying method (i.e. sludge drying beds); This may be done by adding a small amount of air simply to keep the
sludge fresh. but not necessarily an amount that would be required to achieve stabilization of organic matter. A nonaerated tank would simply be used to
decant sludge prior to dewatering and would not allow long periods (several days of detention) without resulting odor problems;
(49) Sludge Incinerators. A furnace designed to bum sludge and to remove all moisture and combustible materials and reduce the sludge to a sterile ash;
(50) Sludge Stabilization (Chemical or Thermal). A process to make treated sludge less odorous and putrescrbte, and to reduce the pathogenic organism
content; This may be done by pH adjustment. chlorin dosing. or by heat treatment;
(51) Sludge Thickener. A type of sedimentation tank in which the sludge is permitted to settle and thicken through agitation and gravity;
(52) Stabilization Lagoon. A type of oxidation lagoon in which biological oxidation of organic matter is effected by natural transfer of oxygen to the water from
air (not a polishing pond);
(53) Stand -By Power Supply. On site or portable electrical generating equipment;
(54) Static Screens. A stationary screen designed to remove solids. including non -biodegradable particulate (Heatable solids, suspended solids and BOD
reduction) from municipal and industrial wastewater treatment systems;
(55) Tertiary Treatment. A stage of treatment following secondary which is primarily for the purpose of effluent polishing; A settling lagoon or sand or coal filter
might be employed for this purpose;
(56) Thermal Pollution Control Device. A device providing for the transfer of heat from a fluid flowing in tubes to another fluid outside the tubes, or vice versa;
or other means of regulating liquid temperatures;
(57) Thermal Sludge Conditioner. A conditioning process by which heat is added for a protracted period of time to Improve the dewaterabiilty of sludge by the
sotubitizing and hydraulizing of the smaller and more highly hydrated sludge particles;
(58) Toxic Materials. Those wastes or combinations of wastes. Including disease -causing agents which after discharge and upon exposure. Ingestion, inhalation
or assimilation into any organism, either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through food chains. will cause death. disease, behavioral
abnormalities. cancer. genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions (including malfunction In reproduction) or physical deformations. in such organisms or their
offspring; Toxic materials include. by way of Illustration and not limitation: Lead. cadmium. chromium. mercury. vanadium. arsenic. zinc. ortho-nitro-chlorobenzene
(ONCB). polychlorinated btphenyts (PCBs) and dichlorodiphenyl trtchioroethane (DDT); and any other materials that have or may hereafter be determined to have
toxic properties;
(59) Trickling Filter. A biological treatment unit consisting of a material such as broken stone or rock over which wastewater is distributed; A high rate trickling
titter is one which operated at between 10 and 30 mgd per acre. A low rate trickling fitter Is one which is designed to operate at one to four mgd per acre;
(60) Trickling Fitter (Packed Tower). A plug flow type of operation In which wastewater flows down through successive Layers of media or filtrate material; Organic
material Is removed continually by the active biological fixed growth to each successive layer. This method may produce 'secondary' quality effluent, or may be
adapted to produce a nitrified effluent;
(61) Vacuum Fitter. Centrifuges. or Fitter Presses. Devices which are designed to remove excess water from either digested or undigested sludge prior to disposal
or further treatment.

9.4.1.41 d we eo,; i
NOTES FOR SPINDALE WWTP
PERMIT RENEWAL (NC0020664)
Wastewater discharge from Spindale WWTP (Spindale, Rutherford County) to
Hollands/Catheys (upon relocation) Creeks in the Broad River Basin.
15A NCAC 2B .0300 Index # 9-41-13-(6) (Hollands) and # 9-41-13-7 (1) (Catheys):
Classified as C 9/1/74 and 8/3/92.
WWTP description: 6.0 MGD extended aeration with chlor/dechlor.
ATC Information:
• 3/2/88-ATC to upgrade 4.0 MGD plant
• 10/31/88-ATC to replace the belt press dewatering system with sludge holding
tank.
• 7/29/91-ATC for sulfur dioxide dechlor facilities, new baffles for chlorine contact
chamber.
• 2/ 16/98-ATC for relocation of discharge to Catheys Creek.
Permit Information:
• Effective 7/1/94, and modified 3/13/95. Both Hollands and Catheys Creeks are
Class C, and nickel and chloride limit/monitoring requirements were adjusted.
Limits and Standards/Criteria Information:
• Those that apply for Class C
Basinwide Plan Information:
• See attachment
WLA Information:
5/9/90-Catheys Cr
• Sub -Basin: 03-08-02
• USGS Quad: F11NW
• Average Flow = 62 cfs
• 7Q 10 (S) = 20 cfs
• 7Q 10 (W) = 26 cfs
• 30Q2 = 35 cfs
• 23% Domestic, 77% Industrial
• Class II, but 6/8/98 Staff Report records Class IV
• , DA = 41.6 sq. mi.
2/9/90-Hollands Cr
• Average Flow = 10.2 cfs
• 7Q 10 (S) = 3.5 cfs
• 7Q 10 (W) = 4.5 cfs
• 30Q2 = 6.0 cfs
• DA = 7.1 sq. mi.
WLA redone in 1994 to account for lower 7Q10 in the Second Broad River because
of Forest City WTP uptake (8 MGD). Limits were adjusted (interacting discharge
issue). See 4/20/94 memo re: Public Hearing held in 1994 and Forest City notes
from Jackie Nowell in WLA file.

NC0020664
BAB
Correspondence:
• 1996 NOVs: 4 for TSS; 1 for fecal; 3 for toxicity.
• Ni, Cd, and CN from 8/96-7/97.
• 2/6/96-SOC for just chronic tox (quarterly monitoring, no limit). Modified 8/13/96.
• 4/ 18/96-Memo from ARO: Phase I testing concluded surfactants a major
contributor; all IU's contribute to surfactant loading; and inorganic salts (chlorides)
have increased. Notes data indicates violations of action levels for chlorides, CN,
and Zn. Also notes tox problem began 12/93.
• 6/7/96-Memo from ARO: reviewed THE Progress Report. Facility cannot meet 73%
limit; noted highest conductivity trend in past few years; testing of effluent revealed
MBAS and CTAS surfactants at potentially toxic levels (Phase I and II testing).
• 8/ 13/96-SOC for chronic toxicity and mercury limits (no chronic tox limit, just
quarterly monitoring/full range testing; monthly ave limit of 0.017 µg/1 for
mercury.) Expired 3/31/98.
• 9/27/96-Tox test failure.
• 10/3/96-Long term BOD analysis results-BODu approximately 40.5 mg/1 (curve fit
with Jason Doll 6/24/98.)
• 2 / 3 / 97-Notice of deficiency. Fecal sample during inspection exceeded limit.
• 1997 NOVs: 3 for Cd and Ni, 10/97 compliance inspection recorded 11 violations for
Cd, Ni, and CN from 8/96-7/97.
• 1/ 13/97-SOC will need to be amended for possible relocation to Catheys Cr.
• 2/ 18/ 97-SIUs Springford, New Cherokee, Torrington, and Watts Regulator
pretreatment permits reviewed.
• 2/24/97-Notice that town did not complete construction plans per SOC.
• 3/7/97-SOC violation cause: one industry removed discharge, and another tied in.
SOC construction plans requirement/schedule modified.
• 7/21/97-Amended SOC, expires 12/30/98. Required to begin construction of
outfall to Catheys on/before 1/15/98; complete by 8/15/98; achieve compliance by
9/30/98.
• 8 / 8/ 97-Instream Assessment memo (attached) noted relocation to Catheys will
improve Hollands Cr, but color will now be more prominent in Catheys. Facility
should consider abatement actions.
• 1998 NOVs: 1 for CN (8.0) in 11/97.
• 8/18/98 memo from Michelle Suverkrubbe attached re: facility's 201 Plan.
• 1/27/98-SOC (amended) specifies undertaking full -range tox test from Springford
upon expansion of company. Revised time schedule- begin construction by
10/ 15/ 98, complete by 6/ 15/ 99, and achieve compliance by 9 / 30/ 99.
DMR Review:
• See reasonable potential analysis for toxicants. All mercury measurements over
past year have been non -detect; can justify removing limit.
• Effluent BOD5 levels have b en well under 20 mg/; oyez- past year.()sually <15
--� mg/1) .,l' ;__ Ftt ; L,ytO _ ..2,- '' " i x C1tj ^c m
TRC concentrations between 100 and 800 gg/ 1; facility has dlechlor?
• Effluent ammonia levels have also been low; normally < 0.5 mg/1.
• 65% removal of TSS? See comments. Effluent levels usually in teens/20s mg/1.
• 1997-98 Instream data: Ammonia levels low in upstream and downstream (usually
less than 0.10 mg/1); BOD5 levels normally less than 1 mg/1 upstream; sometimes
slightly higher downstream (between 1-2 mg/1). DO usually between 7 and 10 (lower
in summer months). Conductivity data indicates large contribution from effluent;
upstream measurements normally <100, downstream typically in the upper 1 OOs or
1000s. No discernible trends in fecal coliform data. Temperature data seems okay.
• 1 / 96-Mercury detected; noted Hg under study.
• 2/96-Fecals exceeded; noted chlorinator stopped up/regulator frozen/vacuum pump
frozen. Heat tape (?) installed.
2

NC0020664
BAB
• 3/96-failed chronic tox test. TSS also exceeded. Attached letter says polymer feed
system installed to "buy tune" until compliance achieved.
• 4/96-Hg and tox out of compliance, as well as TSS.
• 5/916-Hg detected and noted as still under study. TSS also exceeded.
• 6/96 and 7/96-Hg detected and noted as still under study.
• 8/96-Hg and CN exceeded limits.
• 6/97-Ni violated twice.
• 7/97-Cd violated twice; Ni once.
• 8/97-Cd limit violated. Noted that scheduled pretreatment semi-annual sample
monitoring tests revealed high Cd levels in some industries' effluents. Samples were
sp14 with different labs and NCDENR.
• 9 / 97-2 Cd violations and one Ni violation. Samples split on 9 / 23 show variability
between lab results, but during Headworks sampling, facility found extremely high
levels of Ni (2970 ppb) and Cd (22 ppb). A second sample had lower levels of 726
and 13 ppb.
• 10/ 7-Cd violations; facility felt it was a lab error.
• 11 / 5 / 97-CN violated (8 µg/ 1); facility felt it was a lab preservation error.
• 12/ 7-CN exceeded (10 and 31 nil). Facility felt it was caused by interference from
chlorine and began a more uniform sampling program beginning in 1/98.
LTMP Review:
• All toxicants monitored at influent and effluent.
• Monitoring frequency appears to be semi-annually for three consecutive days.
• Not always a consistent influent/effluent pattern with detects.
• Upstream monitoring showed some lead, Cr, and Ni detects.
• Data spans 96-t Lez44, wywiacni;t_rey
w, peA44,t4,i A-{,ivLcL L TM P 40
Load Allocation Table:
• Facility is apparently losing Springford, which has a flow of 0.800 MGD, as well as
Cu, CN, and Chloride pretreatment limits.
General omments:
Expiration date to be assigned to this permit is July 31, 2003.
Why Las 65% removal of TSS (mo. ave.) required instead of 85%, as with BOD5
(no for POTWs). According to DMR data from 1998, this would be a problem —in
Janu and February, facility has not even met 65% removal requirement. '97-'98
rang (from selected DMRs) seems to be about 60-77%.
ATC has been issued for new outfall at Catheys Creek, but Spindale has not yet
begu discharging there, according to region.
CN quanitation limit should be specified as 10 µg/1, to be consistent with
modifications for other permits (Staff meeting, 6/22/98).
1996 Long-term BOD data, after curve -fitting, shows a multiplier of 4.2 is most
approiriate for this facility (CBODu/BOD5). The multiplier documented in the 1990
WLA file for Catheys Cr was "2," but Jackie Nowell recommended holding off re-
evaluation/re-modeling since a QUAL2E field calibratAl model is scheduled to be
performed for the Second Broad River and will take into account more update info.
such performed
the multiplier.
Staff report suggests establishing limits for 4.5 MGD and 6.0 MGD, since losing an
industry (I assume it is Springford). Although this flow reduction was not
specifically requested by the facility, Roger Edwards said that he and the ORC
agreed it would be appropriate.
3

NC0020664 BAB
Large toxicity problem. Since SOC in 1996, would have passed at 73% only twice
(quarterly monitoring). Sometimes haven't even met 32%. (record attached).
Roger also said that mercury problem "went away as quickly as it had showed up."
Town never determined source.
Facility requesting continued exemption from 24-h staffing requirement; I don't
think this needs to be specifically addressed in permit. Facility received separate
letter outlining exemptions from this requirement (Roger faxed 7/ 1 /98).
Meeting with Dave, 6/29:
• We do not need a specific written request from Spindale to incorporate reduced
flow into permit effluent pages, since it is documented in the staff report.
• Exemption from 24-h staffing requirement probably a letter from compliance; no
reason to address in permit. We can simply acknowledge exemption in cover
letter.
• Can leave TSS 65% removal requirement as is; removal requirements are really
to keep I&I problems in check, and since move to Catheys Cr in present permit
requires the standard 85%, don't worry about changing page for Hollands.
• For flow reduction, probably reasonable to distribute same load. Given more
recent (10/96) long-term BOD data, however, can also justify using new
multiplier ("4.2," versus "2" that was assumed in earlier models) in BOD5/NH3
calcs for 4.5 MGD***. Also, make Roger Edwards aware that by doing this,
facility accepts that 6.0 MGD will be considered "new flow," and more stringent
limits at can be more readily incorporated during renewal/necessary
adjustments on that effluent page (such as TRC limits).
Check with Ruth Swanek on status of QUAL2E model for Second Broad.
BOD and Ammonia Calculations:
NH3 calcs show that lower ammonia limits should be imposed to protect for
ammonia toxicity. Should these be implemented at 6.0 MGD ?
To maintain current load, but using a new multiplier (4.2), various possible
combinations of BOD5/NH3 limits were determined. If ammonia tox is not
considered at 4.5 MGD, I recommend the following monthly average limits:
Hollands: BOD5 of 20.0/30.0 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 8.0/16.4 mg/1 (S/W)
Catheys: BOD5 of 25.5 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 4.6 mg/1 (S/W)
If ammonia tox is considered at 4.5 MGD:
Hollands: BOD5 of 26.4/30.0 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 1.4/2.8 mg/1 (S/W)
Catheys: BOD5 of 27.0/22.2 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 3.2/7.7 mg/1 (S/W)
If ammonia tox is not considered at 6.0 MGD, current limits for both Hollands and
Catheys Creeks should remain unchanged until QUAL2E model determines
appropriate limits.
If ammonia tox is considered at 6.0 MGD:
Hollands: BOD5 of 27.0/30.0 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 1.3/2.6 mg/1 (S/W)
Catheys: BOD5 of 25.5 mg/1 (S/W) and NH3-N of 2.7/6.2 mg/1 (S/W)
TRC Calculations:
Current Division policy is not to impose TRC limits in existing permits that do not
contain them; however, at 6.0 MGD, calcs show that a limit of 23 µg/1 should be in
place at Hollands. Allowable concentration for Catheys is above 28 µg/1, but all
"new flow" receives at least a limit of 28, and facility does have dechlor2.

WHOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY TESTING 01SELP-MONITORJNO SUMMARY) Mon, Jun 15, 1998
Rr;QUIREM1;NT YEAR /AN
ETD
MAE
AI'R
MAY
111N
JUL,
AV)
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
'F141vr/
Southport WWTP Perm 241u p/f au lim: 90% 94 Pewit
NC0021334/001 Begin:71I/96 Frequency: Q A Feb Mny Aug Nov NonCortta':S into 95 Pass!
County:Brunswick Region: WIRO Subbasin:CP1:I7 90 Pass
PF: 0.80 Special 97 -
7Q10:111)AI. IWC(%):NA Order 90 •-
F&II
FOIll
Fell
Fel
Pass
Pasel
Fell'
Pass
Fall
-
Fall(
Pass!
--
Pass
.-•
Faill
Pass!
Fall
Pass
Fnlll
--
Pass
-
Fnlll
-
---
---
Folll
Fall
Fall
Pass
Fnlll
Fel
Fel
-
Felll
Fall
Fell
-
Fent
Fall '
Pass
Pass
Fe11I
Fel
-
-
Sparta WWTP Perm chr lint: 2.1 %; If cap 0.60MG1) chr lint 9% 04 -
NC0026913/00l Begin: l/I/96 Frequency: Q PR' A Mar Jun Sep Dec NonComp:Single 135 -
County:Alleghany Region: WSRO Subbasin: NEW03 98 -
PF:0.6 Special 97 Pass
7 10: ( ) 9.0 Order.
Q 9.9 IWC %: B0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
--
-
-
-•
•••
--
--
••-
---
--
Paas
Pass
Peas
Pass
-
-
--•
-
-.
-
-
-
NR/Pass
Pees
Pace
Pa99
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Lete.Pe99
Pass
Fai
Pass
Spencer WWTP PERM CIIR LIM: 17% 94 Pass
NC0025593/001 Begin:5/1/94 Frequency: Q P/F A Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:SINGLE 95 Pass
County:Rowan Region: MRO Suhbssin: YADo4 90 Pass
PP: 0.75 Special 97 Pees
7Q10: 5.8 IWC(%): 17 Order. 98 Pass
-.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Poee
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
••-
•-
-
•-
•-
---
•-•
-
Peas
Pass
Pass
NR/Pass
-
-
-
-
-.
-
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Spindale WWTP I'ERM CIIR LIM: 73%; WHEN RI3I.00. 10 CA'IIHITS CRK Y 94 F011
NC0020664/001 Begin:7/1/94 Frequency: Q pip A Mar tun Sep Dec NonComp:SINGLB 95 Pass
County:Rutherford Region: ARO Subbasin: BRll02 BB -
7F:6.0 Special SOC: 8/17/96-9/30/99 Q P-2 chr monil (24, 36.5, 48, 60, 73) B7 -
7Q10: 3.5 IWC(%):73.0 Order 88 -
-
Fell
-
-
-
Fall
Fel
29.0
88.2
29.0
...
fail
28.8
-
-
fall
nil
141
•-
Pass
Fall
53.7
>73
Pass
Pass
68.18
-
Pass
-
-
-
Fall
Pass
68.18
S3.7
Fell
•-
-
-
Fell
-.
-
-
Fal
Pes9
>73
68.2
Spring Lake WWTP Perm chi lint: 5.5% 94 •--
NC0030970/001 Begin:9/1/96 Frequency: Q P/F A Feb May Aug Nov NonComp:Singlc 95 -
County:Cumberland Region: FRO Subbasin:CPF14 98 -
PF: 1.5 Special 97 -
7Q10: 40.0 IWC(%):5.5 Order 98 -
Pees
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
---
-
-
-
-
--
--
-•
-
Pass
Pees
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
NR/Pet9
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
Springs Industries PERM: 241IR PA' AC LIM 90% F1111) 94 Pass!
NC0005754/00I Begin:1/1/95 Frequency: Q P/F A Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:SINGLE 95 Pass!
Counly:Scotland Region:FRO Subbasin:LUM55 88 NR/Pass
PF: 0.03 Special 97 Pass
7Q10:34.0 IWC(%):0.14 Order: 98 Pass
-
-
-
-
•-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass!
Pass!
NR/Pass
P099
Pass
-
-
-••
-
-
-
•--
-
Pes91
NR/Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass(
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Spruce Pine WWTP Perm chr lint: 2.1 %; if pf 2.OMGD chr lint 6.6% Y 94 -
NC0021423/001 Begin:7/1/97 Frequency: Q P/F A Feb May Aug Nov A NonComp:Single 95 -
County:Mitchell Region: ARO Subbasin:FRB06 96 -
PF:0.60 Special 97 -
7Q10: 44.0 IWC(%):2.1 Order. 90 -
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pa99
-
-
-
-
•-
-
-
-
-
--
P893
Pass
Pe99
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
Pass
NR/Pass
Paso
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
Pegs
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
Square D-Phase 1 Perm chr lint: 14%; upon exp to 0.0432 MGD chr lint 25% 94 -
NC0081540/001 Begin:8/I/97 Frequency: Q pip A Feb May Aug Nov A NonComp:Single 95 -
County: Wake Region: RHO Subbasin: NEU02 90 --
PF: 0.021 Special 97 -
7Q10: 0.20 IWC(%):14 Order: 98 -
Pass
Pass
NR/Pase
Pass
Pass
---
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-•
-•-
Pass
Pass
01
Pass
-
-
Bt
-
-
-
Pass
-
Pass
Pass
Pass
Past)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pass
NR/Pass
Pass
Late
-
-
-
Pass
Stanley WWTP Perm cite lim: 74%; if PF 1.0 chr lim 79% y 94 Pass
N1.w20036/001 Begin:8/1/95 Frequency: Q P/F A Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:Single 95 Pass
County:Gaston Region: MRO Subhaain: C)'B35 00 Fa8
PI':0.5 Special 07 Pass
7Q10:0.27 IWC(%):74 Order 90 Pass
-
-
Fail
-
--
-
-
Fab
-
•-•
Fag
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
Late
-
-
-
Pes9,Pase
Pass
Fell
Pass
Pass
-
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
Late
Pass
Pess
Pass
Pass
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Slar Enterprise PERM: 241IR LC50 AC MONIT EPIS F1 HD (GRAD) 94 -
NC0022217/001 Begin:5/1/94 Frequency:5OWD/A NonComp: 95 -
County:Wake Region:RRO Subbasin:NE1J03 90 -
PF: WA Special 97 -
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%): 100.0 Order. 90 -
-
-
•-
-
-
-
>1001
-
-
>100
-
-
-
-
--
>10010.1001
--
>100
NMI
>1001,>
-
-
-
1001 >1001
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Star Enierprlse-Paw Creek Pcmt 241u LC50 ac monit epis (lid (grab) 94 BP'
NC0022187/001 Begin:9/1/96 Frequency: SOWD/A NonComp: 95 -
County:Mecklenburg Region:MRO Subhasin:CI1334 90 >100
PF: NA Special 07 -
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%):100 Order 90 -
-
>100'
-
-
-
>100'
-
-
-
--
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
>100
>100
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
>100,>1001
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Y Pre 1994 Data Available
1 J1GPl4D:
PERM = Permit Requirement LET = Administrative Letter - Target Frequency = Monitoring fmiucncy: Q• Quarterly; M• Monthly; DM- Bimonthly: SA- Semiannually; A• Annually; OWD- Only when discharging: D. Discontinued rnonitnring requirement; IS- Conducting independent study%
Begin = First month required 7010 = Receiving stream low flow criterion (ch) A = quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months that testing must occur - ex. Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct NonComp = Current Complionce Requirement
1'F = Permitted Dow (MGU) IWC%= (nstrearst wane concentration P/F = I'assA'ad rest AC = Acute CIIR = Chronic
Data Notation: t - fathead Minnow; • - Ceriodaphnin sp.: my - Mysid shrimp; CIiV - Chronic value; P - Mortality of stated percentage at highest concentration; a1 - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tox Group; bt - Bad test
Reposing Notation: ..-= Data not required; NR - Not reported; ( ) • Beginning of Quarter Facility Activity Status: 1 • Inactive. N - Newly Issued(ro construct); 11 - Active but not discharging; 1-More data availahle for month in question J= ORC signature needed
42:,

NC0020664 BAB
Although at 4.5 MGD the allowable concentration in Hollands is < 28 µg/I (26), no
limit will be incorporated into the permit in the spirit of this policy.
Talked with Roger Edwards re: new BOD multiplier info., changes, etc., 7/ 1/98:
• Springford will not be leaving the area until next May or June, but facility is
currently running 3.2-3.5 MGD, and effluent pages for 4.5 MGD could go into
effect upon permit issuance.
• I explained that in light of more recent long-term BOD data, to distribute current
load with new multiplier may not mean less stringent concentration limits at
lower flow; also limits at 6.0 MGD will be more susceptible to change and
ultimately more stringent if considered "new flow."
• Roger will get in touch with ORC with this new info.
• Roger is also not worried about facility meeting more stringent ammonia limits is
placed in permit, but he is confused about why 6.0 MGD would be considered
"new flow;" Roger and I agreed that it did not seem to qualify in the 2H .0100s
rules's definition.
• 21 asked why TRC levels were not lower with dechlor in place; Roger explained
that facility uses sulfur dioxide to dechlorinate, but does not take levels down
further since SO2 can exert an oxygen demand on the stream. Possibility of
23/28 µg/1 limit up in air until "new flow" issue resolved.
Meeting w/Dave, 7/ 17:
• ***Don't use new multiplier for 4.5 MGD calculations (GREAT. A
misunderstanding that this actually had to be modeled.) To be somewhat
consistent with current policy, we will keep ammonia and BODS limits the same
concentrations as they are now at 6.0 MGD. This will, in effect, be better than
just maintaining the same loading with the old multiplier, since it really should
have been higher.
• As far as 6.0 MGD and "new flow" issues —this is really a policy decision, and it
is appropriate to subject a higher flow to our policies for new flow, if the facility
has chosen to drop. We cannot prevent a reduction of flow; however, allowing it
should not mean that a facility can "lock" a higher flow at limits with which it is
comfortable and thus leave the Division less flexibility to address water quality
issues in the future. TRC—at least 28 pg/1; ammonia based on dilution calcs.
• Should consult Kevin Bowden regarding toxicity limit at 4.5 MGD and Susan
Wilson about 24-h staff exemption in cover letter. Ask Kevin how we should
ensure facility will not discontinue investigating toxicity problems upon having a
larger margin for passing tests.
7/2-29
•
r a Wit- V-- (0
n r r
—`CCU 1 t 1 p / r ' r' / i. 1 C 77 c?cl f C' ‘.(•_ ! Z --t,_,.• �A.c / t� m
1
�. Uj 1
C.
•
712-1 /40 — 5f /1_ t_4 !' j (1-' r� ,- -` € J+ J l I`0 Gr -I ` ` _ fit,? - ";; r
y .mo d _ riJst[(TY / ,' �' c(.t r l- - ^ .'`, (,`i'., j_./.111,1) al
_SOC
etel

Abo-te4
Si, ►Nr7ALrE WWTP fJcoo2o664
7�27�98
- 24.1 zc,e4--ytter;-, euszLii A-at,o-e (/2)f
(9-14"- (oni,civo-e-4 f;t__
✓rd a o wc-[ P
R/LA JL4e N�
TSS AtivYc ✓i
so/ 0 (itO-L t-CFpe'L'1m f
.mac
ate we cAtnay Ai.e.,_
aL . eidoveizo A-4:10-6, (
. t „ce)
-(° -(glia -111+6'(a. 77-
-k-(4,, ,e044) ia_ce A ami_e Ae
&AA, _ ' purw cepeA La.cw-e Cu A/k.a.i or(
;:dta4Ceof GOOtt44)a-e't (74) it112,11 4,14'1 Qe0-7'ned
�.�c. oC&ut i¢ 67i9 A V (7771/11Afrfrwecz (,,,,,e ,e)cco,.3,e-
� � TSB ✓�f Cov��n.Zv�.,s— tilU✓a
r 90 1
(it
k( Avrvo-va.,e w-;-a 65-e/0
Olmia Ado-e- INA' S ./er(j .11/frt-i Of te„,,,,,,,) ,
..,,,L, (‚5-
GM'te4
' ef 4 o cFR t33.1o2a
;6 (o6o/ e"C
)‘40C,FR ro4
abkya4/01 `sue
s s 03s) 4,1441 ov-aP� cep r
- w (Ave peAiL op u 4ece ? ge.plou4
e_ u,itti rthLa (&c4&
(36.40 Jigivvo-voif)

NC0020664
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Hollands Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-(6)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 0.5 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
,, l ..
r
n L 1 �.'�j
,LL
f a'p
rritl
3.5 7Q10 (CFS)
4.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6.975 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
66.59 IWC (%)
25.53 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
200/100m1
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
3.5
4.5
6.975
1.0
0.22
66.59 t
1.39
minimum
4.5
4.5
6.975
1.8
0.22
60.78
2.819
minimum
i
2

NC0020664
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Catheys Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-7 (1)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 2.9 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
�t•yd
iN 6`' ��(
Cr • r
20 7Q10 (CFS)
4.5 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
6.975 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
25.86 IWC (%)
65.75 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100mI DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
20
4.5
6.975
1.0
0.22
25.86
3.24
minimum =
26
4.5
6.975
1.8
0.22
21.15 2
7.690
minimum =,4fi'

NC0020664
Facility: Spindale VWVTP
Discharge to: Hollands Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-(6)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 0.4 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
3.5 7Q10 (CFS)
6.0 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
9.3 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
72.66 IWC (%)
23.40 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
200/100mI
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
I
minimum
3.5
6.0
9.3
1.0
0.22
72.66
1.29
4.5
6.0
9.3
1.8
0.22
67.39 n
2.565
minimum g

NC0020664
Facility: Spindale WWTP
Discharge to: Catheys Cr
Stream class and index #: C, 9-41-13-7 (1)
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/I)
Fecal Limit
Ratio of 2.2 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
20 7Q10 (CFS)
6.0 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
9.3 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
31.74 IWC (%)
53.56 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7010 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
20
6.0
9.3
1.0
0.22
31.74
2.68
minimum =
26
6.0
9.3
1.8
0.22
26.35
6.217
minimum ='
1
'2—

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
lealth and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
August 18, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Michelle Suverkrubbe
THROUGH: AlanClark
AC--
RE: DEHNR # 864; DWQ # 11714
Town of Spindale WWTP 201 Facilities Plan
NPDES No °NC0020664
Spindale, Rutherfordton County
AvI7VA
�EHNF=1.
The project proposes to move the existing 6 mgd discharge for the Spindale Waste
Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) from Hollands Creek to Cathey's Creek (through a 6,700
linear foot outfall) and adding a dissolved air flotation sludge thickener and new weirs and
baffles in two secondary clarifiers. This project has been proposed to avoid the current
chronic toxicity problems identified by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) under a
Special Order of Consent for the facility.
The Division has reviewed the 201 Plan and Environmental Assessment and
generally supports the movement of the discharge location. We have the following
comments:
1) The Environmental Sciences Branch (ESB) of DWQ has evaluated Spindale's
Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) work for the WWTP. This TRE work
identified a significant percentage of the Town's influent flow is industrial
wastewater. THE work targeted surfactants, (CTAS and MBAS) as potential
toxicants as well as inorganic salts. The Town carried out Phase I Toxicity
Characterization Procedures on a June 1995 effluent sample. None of the
manipulations reportedly decreased toxicity. Results of sublation testing of clarifier
effluent was inconclusive. ESB's review of the facility's May through September
1995 TRE progress report noted increasing conductivity concentrations as reported
on the AT-1 forms. ESB also noted yearly average metals concentrations in excess
of the action level/water quality standard for copper, zinc, and cyanide. The ESB
office made several suggestions to the Town regarding TRE content and scope.
Since June 1996, the facility has conducted five full range toxicity tests and has
achieved compliance with its existing 73% limit only once during December 1996.
The four other reported chronic percentage values were 53.7, 66.18, 66.18, and
66.2. It would appear that the Town has additional TRE work to accomplish if it is
L :going to remain at the current discharge location.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1 O% post -consumer paper

#864
-y= ndale 201 Plan / EA
18/97; Page 2
The Environmental Sciences Branch still supports all efforts by Spindale to reduce
effluent toxicants prior to outfall relocation, whatever those actions may be. The
facility should feel comfortable that any proposed WWTP enhancements will •
reduce toxicity. This can be supported through bench scale testing and other
testing. A competent toxicity consultant who has success and experience with
conducting TREs is also a major factor in a facility's ability to solve its toxicity
problem. Cooperation from Spindale's industrial contributors are important. Any
source reduction activities undertaken by the industries are going to help the Town.
DWQ has stressed the importance of source reduction activities and we continue to
believe that a long-term chemical management plan will benefit the Town,
regardless of final discharge location. For clarification of these comments, please
contact Kevin Bowden, Environmental Sciences Branch, [phone].
2) Please see attached memorandum from Jacquelyn Nowell with the Instream
Assessment Unit for additional comments on the proposal.
Please have the applicant give me a call at 919-733-5083, ext. 567 if they should
have any questions.
mis:1864 Spindale 201 Plan
cc. Kevin Bowden, DWQ - ESB
Ceniral FikCir
L5 r'•
"1 �'r

MEMOR1NDUM
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
August 8, 1997
Michelle Suverkrubbe
Ruth Swanek 1
Carla Sanderson
- v `
Jacquelyn M. Nowell fljt
Comments on Town of Spindale WWTP 201 Facilities Plan
The Instream Assessment Unit has reviewed the subject document and have no
significant comments. The report indicates that the Town has elected to eliminate toxicity
problems by relocating the outfall to the larger Cathey's Creek rather than the more
expensive dption of reverse osmosis. Color problems that the Spindale effluent also
causes will be eliminated from the existing receiving stream, Hollands Creek, however it
will now become more prominent in Cathey's Creek and eventually the Second Broad
River. While there is no state numerical standard for color, the Town should investigate
available methods of color reduction so that the aesthetic quality of the waters below the
discharge aie not adversely affected.
It s1iould be noted that in Section 7.4 Environmental Assessment, in the
comparison of the reverse osmosis alternative and the outfall to Cathey's Creek alternative,
an apparent typo is included. On page 7-4, k. Shellfish or Fish and Their Habitat, the
document indicates that the "Cathey's Creek oufall will remove all dye and dissolved solids
from Cathey's Creek but will not change the current condition for Cathey's Creek and the
Second Broad River." The sentence should probably read " will remove all dye and
dissolved solids from Holland's Creek" instead of Cathey's Creek.
cc: Roy Davis
WI.7.
,Central Files;
File
L6 i

North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section / Intensive Survey Group
October 3, 1996
MEMORANQUM
To: Muth Swanek
Through: J y Sauber 601
From: Howard Bryant ,8
Subject:
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
180
Ling -term BOD Analysis for Spindale WWTP, Town of
7.45
13.14
17.76
20.83
23.35
25.23
26.78
28.10
30.42
32.52
34.68
36.19
37.40
38.62
39.63
40.45
44.14
Date Collected: April 3, 1996
01758-0825
NH3-N
0.20
0.41
cc: Central Files
Regional Water Quality Supervisor
-4Z_ 0.03Z
GO PLA.. - °- 5
0.03
0.09
County: Rutherford
NPDES
Receiving Stream: ollands Creek
Sub -basin: 030802
TKN-N JVOX-N TN-N
3.0 2.20
3.0 2.70
1.6
1.4
5.2
5.7
3.70 5.3
4.40
5.8
RECEIVED
0.10 1.5 4.50 6.0 OCT I 4 1996
WATER l ! - 4UTY r.., `^
0.07
0.9
Collected by: Edwards
pH: 8.2
5.10
6.0
3. 6 _2 1
Test evaluation: excellent
Seeded: seeded
4b.54
31 11
31,11i745111,
S/9MO'LA - r, f o - Z
500,
f .
rc�c.�

Chapter 4 - Water Quality and Use Support Ratings for the Broad Basin
Lake Lure supports a sport fishery consisting of sunfish, crappie, largemouth bass and trout
(Fish, 1968). In 1986, a survey was conducted to investigate the rainbow trout fishery in Lake
Lure. This study was conducted to address angler concerns of the declining rainbow trout
fishery in the lake. The three year study discovered that suitable habitat for trout (i.e., water
temperature and dissolved oxygen) had declined since the 1950's (Goudreau and Brown, 1988).
The Town of Lake Lure finances the stocking of the lake with trout and bass.
4.4.2 Subbasin 02 - Middle portion of the Broad River, including Walnut Creek,
Mountain Creek, the lower Green River and the Second Broad River
Description
This subbasin includes the middle portion of the Broad River watershed (approximately 35 river
miles from below the dam at Lake Lure to the confluence of the Second Broad River near the
Cleveland/Rutherford County line,) the entire Second Broad River drainage, and the lower
drainage of the Green River. These streams are found within the piedmont ecoregion and
contain the urban areas of Rutherfordton, Spindale, and Forest City. Other significant tributary
catchments of the Broad River include Mountain, Cleghorn, and Floyd Creeks. Large tributary
systems of the Second Broad River include Catheys Creek and Robinson Creek. The Broad
River, from the confluence of Cove Creek to the town of Rutherfordton, is currently classified as
WS-IV and the Second Broad River from its headwaters to 0.5 miles above the Cone Mills water
supply intake is currently classified as WS-IV or WS-V. Sedimentation is a major habitat quality
problem in the subbasin and is responsible for habitat degradation in many catchments. Many of
the streams have a shifting sand bottom. Eight permitted discharges have design flows of > 0.5
MGD, of which 5 discharge within the Second Broad River catchment (Spindale WWTP,
Burlington Industries, Forest City WTP and WWTP, and Cone Mills Corporation). Figure 4.9
provides a map showing the major hydrological features and the location of DWQ's sampling
sites in this subbasin.
Overview of Water Quality
Water quality, based on benthic macroinvertebrate information, generally ranges from Good to
Good/Fair in this subbasin (Table 4.10). During the 1995 basin assessment, the Broad River
water quality was Good at two sites, but Good -Fair at a site in between. Good water quality was
also found at Mountain Creek, the Green River, White Oak Creek and an upstream site on the
Second Broad River. Cleghorn Creek, Robinson Creek, and a downstream site on the Second
Broad River had Good -Fair bioclassifications. Fair water quality was found for Walnut Creek
and Catheys Creek below the Spindale WWTP. Poor bioclassifications have been recorded only
rior to 1987. Water quality deterioration is associated with large point source dischargers in the
Rutherfordton-Spindale area and nonpoint source runoff in other areas of the subbasin.
A fish community sample from the Green River in 1995 also noted Good water quality.
Fisheries samples were collected in 1994 during a special study of the Second Broad River.
- Fair -Good NCIBI ratings were found at Catheys Creek and a middle site on the Second Broad
River. Upstream and downstream sites on the Second Broad had Good NCIBI ratings.
Combining fisheries and benthos data, the 1994 study concluded that the overall water quality of
the Second Broad River was Good -Fair, and that the major problem was sedimentation.
Benthos sampling above and below the Columbus WWTP discharge in the White Oak Creek
watershed has shown improvement in water quality between 1986 and 1995. Water quality
below the discharge improved from Poor to Good -Fair. This change is attributed to improved
wastewater treatment and a reduction in the percent of industrial contributors.
4-19

Chapter 6 - Water Quality Concerns and Recommended Management Strategies
,Recommendations:
Measures to addrss sedimentation in this subbasin are needed. One of the goals identified by the
NPS Team (Table 6.1) is the promotion of the adoption of local erosion control ordinances.
Workshop participants identified the need for local education about erosion control and
sedimentation. Local citizens and governments should consider pursuing such efforts.
In addition, because water quality in this subbasin is generally high, it is important to take actions
to maintain these high levels. Some areas may qualify for a more protective surface water
classification sue!' as High Quality Waters. This is discussed in more detail in section 6.5.
6.4.2 Subbasin 030802 - MiddIe portion of the Broad River, including Walnut
Creek, Mountain Creek, the lower Green River and the Second Broad River
This subbasin inludes an approximately 35-mile portion of the Broad . River watershed (from
about 5 miles below the dam at Lake Lure to the confluence of the Second Broad River near the
Cleveland/Rutherford County line), the entire Second Broad River drainage, and the lower
drainage of the green River. Other significant 'tributary catchments of the Broad River include
Mountain, Cleghorn, and Floyd Creeks. Large tributary systems of the Second Broad River
include Catheys Creek and Robinson Creek. Water quality, based on benthic macroinvertebrate
information, generally ranges from Good to Good/Fair in this subbasin, although some streams are
considered impaired. Problem areas are specifically addressed below.
Jssues and Recommended Management Strategies
Walnut Creek
Walnut Creek, a tributary to the Green River, was sampled in 1995 as part of the Broad basinwide
assessment. This site received a low bioclassification (Fair) and a low habitat score. Based on
these results, this tream has received a use support rating of Partially Supporting. The field team
noted unstable banks with breaks in the riparian zoneand a heavily embedded substrate. The
landuse in the immediate vicinity of the monitoring location is primarily fallow agricultural fields.
Recommendation:
There is a need in this watershed to more clearly identify the source (or sources) of impairment in
order to determine iwhat measures can be taken to improve water quality. DWQ should work with
the local agricultural agencies to help farmers in this watershed ensure that appropriate measures
are taken to minimize runoff into surface waters from agricultural activities (resources permitting).
In addition, it is recommended that the NPS Team consider this area as a possible target of their
efforts, resources permitting.
Catheys Creek and Hollands Creek
Catheys Creek has been given a use support rating of Partially Supporting based on three benthic
macroinvertebrate surveys conducted_between 1988 and 1995. The hioclassification has been
borderline between% Good/Fair or Fair using mountain classification criteria during all three
surveys. The creek is impacted by the Spindale wastewater treatment plant. Based on nonpoint
source workshops held in 1988, it was also indicated that the stream was receiving nonpoint
source runoff from agricultural areas. Hollands Creek (which flows into Catheys Creek) is rated
as Not Supporting based on data that is greater than five years old, but it is the receiving stream for
the Spindale wastewater treatment plant.
The Spindale WWTP currently discharges 6.0 MGD of domestic and industrial wastewater into
Hollands Creek. Historic macroinvertebrate data collected by DWQ determined this creek was not
supporting its designated uses due to point source inputs. The Spindale WWTP with an instream
waste concentration of 73% has had problems passing its whole effluent toxicity test. In order to
maintain compliance with its NPDES permit limitations and to relieve stress on the receiving
stream, Spindale has elected to relocate its outfall to Catheys Creek, a larger receiving stream
6-9

Ii•
•
Chapter 6 - Water Quality Concerns and Recommended Management Strategies
ximatel 1 mile from its existing discharge point. In Catheys Creek, Spindale's effluent will
appro Y
be
32% of the streamflow and should be able to pass its toxicity test. Hollands Creek should begiri
recovery once the Spindale outfall is relocated.
In addition to reloca2.tion
lion of the outfall, plant improvements will be made including. thel addition
of These
dissolved flotation unit and replacement aton of the plant and reduces in the the cost of sludge disposal. DWQ
improvements will enhance thep
recommends that Spindale continue toxicity reduction tin evaluation
]fiance with toxicity limits intion from
Catliey s,
I industrial contributors in order to obtain and m P
Creek.
Recommendation:
i.
It is recommended that Spindale continue to pursue its efforts improve it rea to conditions treat
on
and to relocate its treatment plant outfall to Catheys Creek.
This Hollands Creek and DWQ will monitor impacts on Catheys Creek. In addition, DWQ should
work with local experts to assess NPS contributions to impairment and t iscrecommended
e oz . art deresource's
'
that the''
NPS Team consider the Catheys Creek watershed as a possetarget
permitting. • -:-It
Second Broad River
water
ty
The rel
ocation of the Spindale discharge into Catheys Creek cocould
cause
se some and industrial
problems in the Second Broad River because of interaction withexisting
dischargers located downstream. Major downstream dischargers include
n lud75 MGD).
WWTP (4.95
MGD), Burlington — J.C. Cowan Plant (2.5 MGD), ; A
app
The
t City WTP has a water withdrawal of 8 MGD on the Second Broad River inI the water
ximatelf
0.1 mileileabove the confluence of Catheys Creek. Historically, the stre
amflowquality models developed on the Second Broad River did not a � account
rw theflwater inputs withdrawal
the model'
MGD by the Forest City Water Treatment Plant (WTP). TheQ
for this segment of the river were equal to 32 cfs. Updated
dove Catheys Creek shouldn from the Dision of be
Resources indicated that the 7Q10 on the Second Broad River
ruction in the flow �.�
revised to 13 cfs based on the withdrawalac ty in then is a %Sec:o d Broad Riverinput;,
just helow?
New modeling results predicted that the assimilative ca P
the Burlington - J.C. Cowan plant was nearly depleted under 7Q10 conditions. Increased waterl
withdrawal from the Forest City WTP due to future expansion
effluent further havey the
7aQssigned to
Second Broad River below the WTP. Previously developed
major dischargers to the river based on a much higher streamflow. 4
Recommendationeen e pants results
Modeling results indicate wasteflow mterDacOtjoviolati�ons. ThePDidvisionnha Forest
determined that for nd
p predicted instream S m dissolved oxygen(DO)
limits should be assigned to the Forest City protection of the Second Broad River, equivalent City andSpindale that
Spindale WWTPs. New effluent limots have f 8 MGD an nd a proposed expansion ed for Forest 12 M e of
have accounted for the water plant withdrawalsis the
In addition, based on these modeling model resultslts, the indicatr ed that in affected der to protect lfor predicted
Burlington-J.C. Cowan. Preliminary
DO con
travention; the J.C. Cowan plant will have to he held at its existing BOD5 loading for an'
future expansions. '`
Upon initiation of increased water withdrawal from the Second Broad River
r Sulu g •and ,
from
expansion of the Forest City Water Treatment Plant, the NPDESpermits
Forest City WWTP may be modified to incorporate more stringent effluent limitations for, a
tY
oxygen consuming constituents, BOD5 and NH3 as N, toprotect
oxygenthere
docu
mentation of instream water quality standard violations as a result of the decrease in the 7Q-'
6- 10

Chapter 6 - Water Qualiry Concerns and Recommended Management Strategies
flow in the Second Broad River; effluent limits for Spindale, Forest City and Burlington — J.C.
" owan will have to be modified. Any plant expansions of these three dischargers will also result
in the modification of permit limits.
In order to gain a better picture of the system, DWQ has developed a study plan for the Second
Broad River to collect data to calibrate a QUAL2E model. Data was scheduled to be collected in
1996, however flow conditions and extreme weather, especially Hurricane Fran, did not allow for
completion of the field studies. The study and a QUAL2E model will be completed by the next
Broad basin plan, if resources allow it. The model results will be helpful in developing adequate
wasteload allocations for the Second Broad River dischargers.
Another issue to be addressed in the Second Broad River is color. Citizen complaints about the
aesthetics of the receiving stream due to dischargers' colored effluent have always been a topic of
concern within DWQ. There has been some reduction of color inputs into the Second Broad
River. In 1995, Cone Mills voluntarily implemented color removal by polymers through a
flocculation and filtration system. Site visits by DWQ staff to the plant have shown marked
improvement in the quality of the effluent. The Division's management strategy will .include
informational seminars in 1998 to provide technical assistance to dischargers for the removal of
color. It is recommended that facilities voluntarily remove or reduce color so that numerical
standards and effluent limits will not have to be assigned.
6.4.3 Subbasin 030803 - Green River drainage above Lake Adger
Subbasin 030803 contains the headwater reaches of the Green River and streams within this
subbasin are in the mountain physiographic region. This section of the Green River has been
dammed at two locations to form Lake Summit and Lake Adger. The Hungry River is the only
large tributary catchment.
Issues
Water quality in this subbasin is generally high. All waters are fully supporting their uses although
the Hungry River, which is supporting its uses, is considered threatened due to sedimentation
problems.
The upper Green River watershed has been determined to qualify for classification as High Quality
Waters as well as Class B (primary recreation). DWQ intends to pursue the reclassification of the
upper portion of the river, but due to the lengthy nature of the rule -making process, it is not clear
when this will occur. This action, if successful, will help to preserve the high quality nature of
these waters. The HQW classification is described in more detail in section 6.5.
6.4.4 Subbasin 030804 - First Broad River and lower portion of Broad River in
NC
Subbasin 04 contains the First Broad River and its tributaries, as well as the lowest portion of the
mainstem of the Broad River before it enters South Carolina. This geographic area is a transitional
zone between ecoregions, with some streams exhibiting mountain characteristics, while other
streams are more piedmont in nature. Recent macroinvertehrate data indicated Good water quality
in the First Broad River in the area near Casar with a slight decrease to Good -Fair near Earl.
Excellent water quality was documented in the North Fork First Broad River, a headwater tributary
to the First Broad in 1995. Many tributary streams have Good or Good -Fair water quality. The
only recent data indicating Fair water quality was from Beaverdam Creek below some small
dischargers. Some streams are considered impaired. Problem areas are specifically addressed
below.
6- 11

LONG 'PERM MONITORING PLAN REQUEST FORM
FACILITY: Town of Spindale WWTP
NPDES #:
NC0020664
EXPIRATION DATE: 11/30/98
REGION: ARO
NPDES UNIT REQUESTER: Bethany Bolt
PRETREATMENT CONTACT: Greg Newman
DATE OF REQUEST: 5/18/98
INDICATE THE STATUS OF THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM:
1. The facility has no SIUs and should not have pretreatment language.
2. The facility has or is developing a pretreatment program.
3. Additional conditions regarding the pretreatment program are attached.
PERMITTD FLOW: 6.0 MGD
% INDUSTRIAL 23
% DOMESTIC 77
- -704.-->6-%
Lit‘-/\P cto�0,
sSvcCk
� S
A-CU
S?r, _, isk ec�,uce
S
yo
CAS,.
e_
Gl Ct"0CCi�'O�
7 c{VeSkto—�S

POTW NA0E-5pindale MC
N NPDES N a NC0020864
Sample Location m Influent
W
0
ca
s
TOWN OF SPINDALE
N
L)
Cr)
co
CO
CO
LO
05/22/2019
SAMPLE
DATE
Flow
1AGD
000
mgt
TSS
ma&
NM)
molt
Moe.
mg L
pH
{s u4
Temp;
C
Condu.
uhaarcm
Cd
mgft.
Cu
m L
Ili
met
Pb
seplL
a .010
Zn
mg&
Ag mplL
Hp
worL
Cr
egg&
On
, m g&
Chlur.
nig1L
03/114 98
3.7
179
72
10
8.8
30.4
3000
< A01
0.11
0.008
0.150
0.001
<.0002
<,005
<.005
03/1108
3.6
143
70
4.5
1.9
21.1
2000
4101
0.00
0.007
4 .010
0160
0.001
< .0002
c,006
<,006
,
0312098
3.3
182
52
2.7
8.1
27
160D
0.02
0.087
< .005
D.019
0.197
< .001
<"0002
0.005
<005
09123188
2.5
72
40
7
88
31
1300
<.001
0.067
<.005
4,010
0.257
<.001
4.0002
<.005
0.017
0912408
2.9
180
32
7
7.4
32.2
3400
c ,001
0.217
< ,005
0.008
COW
0.017
0.227
0.257
< .001
< .001
<0002
<.0002
<.005
<,005
s.005
<,006
0945198
29
244
40
4
17
34.3
2500
c .001
0.194
03131/07
1.8
87.5
84
10
7.4
27.7
1000
< .001
01379
0.008
0.011
< .010
c ,001
<0002
<.005
0.008
4401137
2.4
111
26
a
7.2
30.9
2000
< .031
0.135
< .005
< .010
0A37
< .001
<0002
<,005
4,005
04107197
25
fig
50
4
7
27.3
2800
0.001
0.134
<.006
4.010
0.19E
<,001
<0002
<.006
<006
08l10147
2.3
121
49
4.4
L3
34.0
1100
< ,002
0.023
0.422
4 .006
0.218
< .01
<0002
<.02
<,005
09i18517
2.5
162
54
42
8.6
33.1
2600
< .002
0.114
0.248
<.006
0.316
< .01
<,0002
<,02
<,008
l 09117197
2.8
278
26
2
9.2
33.7
3100
0.003
0.112
0.101
<.006
0.222
< .01
4.0002
< ,02
<.005
0309/98
3.8
73
24
1.8
7.2
19.7
440
.4 .001
0.05
<.005
4_005
0.09
<,05
<0002
<.00f
0.002
TOTAL
30.1
2082.5
586
854
0
104
302.9
29480
0.0213
1.37210.788
0.047
2282
0.002
0
0.005
0.027
0
6 Values
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
19
13
13
Average
2.89
1430.2
43.7
5.1
BDPJ 1
XXXX
26.5
2257.63
0.0004
0.1056
0.061
5.004
0178
0.0002
0
0.00038
0.002
904V/01
Masinusn
3.7
270
72
10
0
8.7
34.5
3500
0.02
0.217
0.422
0.011
0315
01001
0
0.005
0.017
0
Minimum
1.0
67.5
14
1.8
0
6.9
_ 10.7
400
4 .001
0.023
a ,005
< .005 ,
< .010
<.0001
0 .
< .0005
< .005
0
BOL data used for averages are estimated to be 0 .

w
o_
TOWN OF SPINDALE WWD
CM
u�
m
m
w
CO
CO
lil
N
05/22/2019
POTW #NAME■$pindalt NC
NPDES 4.1NCOO10664
Sample LocatIonmEfluent
SAMPLE
DATE
Flow
MOD
00D
moil
TN
mink
NHj3j
mp&L
Phos.
molt
pH
(CU.
Tamp.
C
Condit
chastens
Cd
mull.
Cu
mutt
NI
must
Pb
ngtl
Zn
ma
AO
+nOIL
Hp Cr
aupt. milt.
Cr
mslL
Chlot.
mall.
03i20d10
3.3
10.3
324
< .10
7.6
17.7
3800
< .001
00071
< 006
0021
0.111
<.001
<.0002 <..005
< A00
106
03i21616
3.1
7
27.5
<.10
7.0
20,3
2500
< 001
0.061
<001
0.032
0.114
<401
<.0002 <.005
< .005
191
03t22196
2./
6
26
<.10
7.6
22.3
3100
<.001
0A56
<.05
0.02
0.12
<.001
<.0002 0..006
<..005
PS
• ' j' -
4.3
210
< .10
7.5
25.1
21100
<.001
0.068
<.006
<010
0.06
<.001
<.0002 < .005
<.006
9911
09/261/6
a
21.9
< .10
7.4
25.3
2000
<.001
0.067
<.001
<.010
<.010
<.,001
< .0002 < 005
< .005
680
091271911
2.7
6
11.6
0.3
7.
250
3000
<.001
0.000
<.005
<.010
<.010
<.001
<.0002 <.005
< .005
615
041020/7
2.6
p
21.6
<.10
74
19.9
2900
0.002
0.0E4
<.006
0.014
0,165
<.001
<0002 <,005
< 005
550
0413 97
2.4
7.6
114
< .10
-
74
200
2700
0.002
0493
<.006
< ;010
0,136
< Am<.0002
< .005
< J s
590
041041O7
1.3
SA
17
< M074
20.7
21011
0.003
0071
<.006 0.013
0.172
< .001
< .0002 < .005
< .006
1115
09117197
24
11.5
0.14
7.3
26.6
2500
< .002
0077
0499
<.001
0.41S
< .001
< .0002 < .02
< .006
511.4
001113t07
24
14.3
0.12
7.6
270
2000
< .002
0074
< .02
<.005
0242
<.01
< .0002 < .02
< .005
563.5
09t19197
1.6
110
14.5
0.2
-
7.6
NI
2b00
0.004
0064
0102
0009
04183
<.01
< 0002 < ,02
< ma
616
03111/96
3
6.1
20.25
< AO
7.72200
<.001
0.11
<,06
<.005
0.12
<.05
<.0002 0.001
0.002
407.3
.111111111111
■
MEI
TOTAL
35.8
103.3
lial
0.75
0
96
296.6
34100
0.011
1.036
1401
0.109
2.119
0
0 0.007
0.002
*577.6
0 Values
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13 13
13
13
Averaps
24
110
20.7
0.051
11131V 1
XXXX
22.731
2623.1
0.0006
0.0727
0.111
0.006
0.163
MINI
MIVIOI 0 0000
00001
459.0
• •.., i,
3.1
15.3
32.5
0.3
0
7.6
270
3100
0.004
0.11
0.102
0.132
0.463
0
0 0.006
0.002
975
11linknme
1.6
4.3
14.3
< .10
0
7.4
14.7
2000
< .001
0.059
< .006
< .005
< 210
0
0 <.0005
< 005
407.5
8QL dab used for averages are estimated 10 be 1.

o_
3
TOWN OF SPINDALE
N
to
m
Cr)
LD
CO
CJ
05/22/2019
PQIW NAME•SpIndele NC
'WOES DES #NC0020064
Semple Lora1onuSlodgs to Land Application
SAMPLE
DATE
Flow
MD .
11
D00
mglL
TS8
mg(L
NI113)
rrgfL
Ras.
mglL
poi
(s.n.)
Temp.
C
Conde.
uhostam
i Cd
l mg&L
Cu
well
Ni
mg&
Pb
mglL
I DiA6
i rs0&
rnga
llg I -Cr
n gl'L1 rrg1L
CA
mglL
Chior.
n L
1
02129190
19700
100.47
187.10
7.1
_ 0 '
24.82
0.57 _Q.73
. 17.61
Oil ! 17.41
< .6_
<.02 1_0.63-
,
-326 25
'
-04109 96
-�
1
18100-
-119.46-
-1M71-
-7:2-
0
23.71
0.83
0.02 0.84
413.8a
08/0508
: 30200
40.4
332.2
4.4
- -
OM
0.02
: 31.11
20.7
0.82
0.52
_ 1.12 i 29.41
j
0.03 1A3
56.57
09124196
20100
140.7
207.03
7.1
1.07 1 20.7
. < .02 0A0
4110.39
01127197
05/68J97
(
`
19800
34100
69.1
180.73
194.04
283.03
7.2
` 1.8
---
0.00
21.08 ;
0.55
1 0.99 ` 23.76
< .5
1 0.04 0.53
3511.97
.
0
36.49
1 0.99
' 1.24 , 22.91
0.04 0.92
607.07
111'11197
17200
70.52
129
4.9
0.03
19.78
055
0.63
10.34
0.04 0.7
1
UM
12A1197
13700
74�63
184.39
7.1
0.01
14.93
0.58
0.69
0 74
: 0.02
y
, 0.58 ;
110.14
01
13200
59.4
99
7.2
0.03
14.39
0.44
0.54
7.6
0.05
308.64
.
TOTAL
0
. 0
158100
9
891.43
9
1740.45
9
63.2
9
0
0
1 0
' 9
0.24
4
202.93
062
7.50
165.E .
0
' 0.24
53
0
2762.8
/ Valois
9
9
9
09
9
a
9
9
9
9
Average
Allaximeim
9011VA1 :
=WM
20900
99.0474
194.272
7.022
aCIVl01'
S01'1 I
0.0267
23,325
0.624
0.73
17.62
MINIS
0.03
0.713
MN
306.98
0
0
34100
180.73
332.2
7.2
0
0
0.09
38.49
0.99
1.20
21.41
a
0.05
1.03 .
0
507.07
Minimum
: 0
0
13200
59.4
99
5.6
0
0
0
' 14.39 1
0.44
0.54
7.5
0 ; OM
0.58 1_
,
1 0
8L87
SDL data used for averages are estimated to be ' 0.

NC
lorrtUpillream
Flow
Mao
BOO
mg/t.
US
mast
NH4.1)
mgli.
Plum.
m.
pH
(cu.)
Temp.
C
Condo.
uiiosscm
Cd
malt
Cu
ng&L
IN
malt
Pb
ap&
7n
amyll.
A0
me&
Hip
mall
Cr
mat
Ca
mall.
Chia'.
m01.
02
4A
<.10
7.3
50
< .001
<.005
< .005
0.025
0415
< A01
< .0002
0.005
< .005
0.1
331
<.10
7.4
50
< .001
<.005
< .006
<.010
0.105
< .001
< .0002
< .005
< A06
02
3A
< .10
7.4
< 100
< .001
< .065
< .500
0.011
< .010
< .001
< .0002
< .005
OA
2.5
< .10
7.4
< 100
< .002
< Al
0.061
< A05
0.200
0423
< .0002
< .02
< .006
0.7
7
< .10
72
< 50
< .001
<.01
< .05
<.005
0.03
< .05
< .0002
0.001
<.002
1
i
1
1
r
! 0
Ili
21.4
0
0
30.7
0
100
0
0
0A01
0.037
0.350
0.023
0
0A00
0
0
5
5
1
5
5
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
0.32
4.20
M)(V 0t
#OIVJ )f
7.34
lIXV001
50
)IV101
IIOIVI O!
0.012
0A07
0.071
0A05
>
0.001
MOO
IO A!
0
rs
0.7
7
0
0
7.4
0
50
a
0
0.011
Gigs
0.200
0.023
0
0A05
0
0
0
0.1
2.11
0
0
7.2
0
50
0
0
< A05
< A0$
< A10
<.001
0
<.005
0
0
SOL data used for averages are estimated to be' 0.
1-
w
N
CO
Cn
w
U1
N
GMM 31VGNIdS AO NM01
G)
m
m

POTW NAME"Spindale NC
NPDES 0= NC0020664
Sample Location . UnCantroable Source
SAMPLE
DATE
Flow
MGD
DOD
mQIL
TS8
mall
NH(3m
mgti.
P1 os.
ma1L
pH
(s.u.E
Temp.
C
Condo.
ulroalcm
Cd
mgA.
Cu
ngl1.
Hi
, ngfl
Pb '
mg&L
Zn I
° mgiL
Aa
mglL
Ng
ma1L
Cr
mOIL
Ca
mad.
Cblor.
mall.
03/22i96
120
111E
7.6
360
< .001
0.032
< .005
0.01
0.202
< .001
< A002
< .00$
< .005
09126N
277
145
7.3
560
< .001
0214
0.006
0.035
0.300
0.003
< .0002
<,605
< .005
0413197
2*4
134
0.002
025
<.605:0.047
0.317
<.001
0.006
<.005
0911517
70
1104
10
8.e
700
0.022
0232
2.47
0.06
1.03
< .01
0.00057
0.034
< A05
10/102117
0.013
1A5
0.726
0.112
01711
0.055
<.0002
0.021
10100117
0.007
1.1
< A5
0.131
012
< .0E
< .0002
0M011
10121197
< A01
<.05
03111196
411
114
2.4
7.5
<.001
0.01
<.05
0A06
0.21
0A5
<.0002
0A03
<.002
TOTAL
0
1172
1516
12A
0
314
0
1610
0.344
2125
3.702
0.405
4.714
0.136
0.00057
0.00
0
0
0 Values
5
5
5
2
4
3
b
7
$
7
7
7
6
7
5
awn*.
ROrVII
234.4
319..E
6.2
ODIVIOI
xxxx
IDIViOI
336.7
0.0065
OA1L)
0A62
0.056
0.673
0.02
0.0001
0013
MOON
BOIVVOI
Mmdmom
0
411
1104
10
0
LS
0
700
0.022
1.1
297
0.131
113
015
0.00057
0A34
0
0
Minimum
0
70
06
2A
0
7.3
0
360
< .001
0.032
<.05
0.006
021
< .05
<.0002
< A05
0
0
BDL data used for averages are estimated to be • O.

.ti
IUP
2oun
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Spindale
20664
<= POTW Allocation Table
<= NPDES number
NOTES:
HWA Updated => Sep 15, 1994
Allocation Table Updated => Oct. 22, 1997
Permits reissued/modified => Jul 16, 1997
INDUSTRY
NAMES
(Listed alphabeticly)
Industry
Permit/Pipe
number
Type
of
Industry
Original
Effective
Date
Date
Permit
Expires
FLOW
Permit Limits
BOD
Permit Limits
TSS
Permit Limits
ALUMINU1
Permit Limits
AMMONIA
Permit Limits
MGD
gal/day
Conc.
mg/1
Load
lbs/day
Conc.
mg/1
Load
lbs/day
Conc.
mg/1
Load
lbs/day
Conc.
mg/1
Load
lbs/day
Elmore —
0002
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.250
250,000
300
626
250
521
MC Group
0006
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.800
800,000
300
2,002
250
1,668
MC Group
0007
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.200
200,000
300
500
250
417
Dan River
0003
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.400
400,000
300
1,001
250
834
Springford
0005
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.800
800,000
300
2,002
250
1,668
Stonecutter
0001
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
1.000
1,000,000
300
2,502
250
2,085
Torrington
0004
433.17
1/1/97
12/31/99
0.060
60,000
300
150
250
125
Ultimate Textiles
0008
Textile
1/1/95
12/31/99
0.1000
100,000
300
250
250
209
Watts
9
433.17
11/1/96
12/31/99
0.0300
30,000
300
75
250
63
Column Totals =>
3.6400
3,640,000
9,107
7,589
Basis for MAHL =>
MAHL from HWA (lbs/day) =>
Domestic Loading (lbs/day) => Avg Plant flow - Avg Ind Flow
1 Allowable for Industry (lbs/day) =>
tal Permitted to Industry (lbs/day) =>
11 Allowable loading left (lbs/day) =>
1 Total loading still available (%) =>
iustrial loading still available (%) _>
File name: Spin_BK3 Page: 1
Date printed:. 5/26/98, Time 9:21 AM
6,000,000
2,270,000
3,730,000
3,640,000
90,000
1.5 %
2.4
NPDES
30,
1trr92
11,728
744
10,984
9,107
1,877
16.0 %
17.1 %
NPDES
30, ltrr9l
10,425
600
9,825
7,589
2,235
21.4
22.8 %
Aq.
Tox
.039
drr 50
3.9
0.0
3.9
Abreviations used in Basis for MARL:
des = design
def = default
as = activated sludge
Aq tox = Aquatic toxicity
Inhib = inhibition
ltrr = LTMP data removal rates
drr = default removal rates
NPDE
S 13
Itrr90
4,066
55
4,010

IUP
�oun
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Spindalc
20664
INDUSTRY Industry
NAMES Permit/Pipe
(Listed alphabeticly) number
ARSENIC
Permit Limits
CADMIUM
Permit Limits
CHROMIUM
Permit Limits
COD
Permit Limits
COPPER
Permit Limits
CYANIDE
Permit Limits
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
, mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Elmore -
0002
MC Group
0006
0.030
0.2002
MC Group
0007
Dan River
0003
Springford
0005
0.500
3.336
0.020
0.1334
Stonecutter
0001
0.020
0.1668
0.500
4.170
Torrington
0004
0.070
0.0500
0.300
0.150
1.000
0.500
0.020
0.0100
Ultimate Textiles
0008
Watts
9
0.070
0.0175
0.300
0.075
1.000
0.250
0.020
0.0050
Column Totals =>
Basis for MAHL =>
MAHL from HWA (lbs/day) =>
Domestic Loading (lbs/day) =>
1 Allowable for Industry (lbs/day) =>
tal Permitted to Industry (lbs/day) =>
d Allowable loading left (lbs/day) =>
'o Total loading still available (%) =>
iustrial loading still available (%) =>
File name: Spin_BK3 Page: 2
Date printed:. 5/26/98, Time 9:21 AM
Andig
Nhib
1.6
drr45
0.5931
0.0050
0.5881
0.2343
NPDES
.0028
drr67
0.2554
0.0020
0.2634
0.2343
0.0290
11.4 %
11.0 %
0.225I
NPDES
.069
drr82
11.989
0.016
11.973
0.225
11.748
98.0 %
98.1 %
No
HWA
for COD
8.257
BPJ,
Inhib, =
0.5
ltrr28
15.638
0.225
15.412
8.257
7.156
45.8 %
46.4 %
0.349
NPDES
.0069
ltrr50
0.432
0.025
0.407
0.349
0.058
13.5 %
14.3 %

Spilldale
20664
IUP
�oun
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
INDUSTRY Industry
NAMES Permit/Pipe
(Listed alphabeticly) number
LEAD
Permit Limits
MERCURY
Permit Limits
NICKEL
Permit Limits
PHOS.
Permit Limits
SILVER
Permit Limits
ZINC
Permit Limits
Conc. Load
mg/I lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/I lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/I lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 lbs/day
Elmore
0002
MC Group
0006
MC Group
0007
Dan River
0003
Springford
0005
Stonecutter
0001
Torrington
0004
0.100
0.050
1.000
0.500
0.100
0.0500
1.000
0.500
Ultimate Textiles
0008
Watts
9
0.100
0.025
1.000
0.250
0.100
0.0250
1.000
0.250
Column Totals =>
0.075
NPDES
.034
Basis for MAHL => ltrr2l
MAHL from HWA (lbs/day) =>
Domestic Loading (lbs/day) _>
1 Allowable for Industry (lbs/day) =>
tal Permitted to Industry (lbs/day) =>
Ll Allowable loading left (lbs/day) =>
'o Total loading still available (%) =>
iustrial loading still available (%) =>
File name: Spin_BK3 Page: 3
Date printed:. 5/26/98, Time 9:21 AM
1.346
0.058
1.288
0.075
1.213
90.1 %
94.2 %
NPDES
.017u
drr60
0.0013
0.0000
0.0013
#######
Industry Permitted
at Detection Level
0.751I
Andig
Nhib 10
.121
4.906
0.018
4.888
0.751
4.137
84.3 %
84.6 %
0.0751
Andig
Nhib 13
l trr33
6.571
0.040
6.531
0.075
6.456
98.3 %
98.9 %
BPI,
Inhib, =
0.50
Itrr50
15.638
0.788
14.850
0.751
14.099
90.2 %
94.9 %

IUP
Zoun
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Spindale
20664
INDUSTRY Industry
NAMES Permit/Pipe
(Listed alphabeticty) number
Chloride
Permit Limits
Other
Permit Limits
Other
Permit Limits
Other
Permit Limits
Other
Permit Limits
Other
Permit Limits
Conc. Load
mg/l lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/I lbs/day
Conc. Load
mg/l Ibs/day
Conc. Load
mg/1 Ibs/day
Conc. Load
mg/I Ibs/day
Conc. Load
mg/I lbs/day
Elmore
0002
MC Group
0006
MC Group
0007
Dan River
0003
Springford
0005
1200
10,000
Stonecutter
0001
Torrington
0004
Ultimate Textiles
0008
Watts
9
Column Totals => 110,000I
Basis for MAHL =>
MAHL from HWA (lbs/day) =>
Domestic Loading (lbs/day) =>
I Allowable for Industry (lbs/day) =>
tal Permitted to Industry (Ihs/day) =>
tl Allowable loading left (lbs/day) =>
o Total loading still available (%) =>
iustrial loading still available (%) _>
File name: Spin_BK3 Page: 4
Date printed:. 5/26/98, Time 9:21 AM

37/01/1998 10:13 4
State of North Caro'. -'a
Department of Envi,�.nment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathon B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr„ RE„ Director
Ronnie Pack, Superintendent
Town of Spindale
P.O. Box 186
Spindale, NC 28160
Dear Mr. Pack:
PAGE 01
79 A
L7�HNR
Post -it* Fax Note 7671
Dare : �ie/r-°pagep ,-, s/
%�
To ri 4/AA/x, ,Oczie_
From A7
4';/ CJ�If r'I.S
Co_46ept
Co.
Phone it
Phone M
Fax N
Fax M
Subject: Exemption Request - 24 Hour Staffing
Town of Spindale
NPDES Permit # NC0020664
Rutherford County
This letter is in response to your letter of February 21,1994 concerning your request
for a variance of the new regulation that requires 24 hour staffing coverage at your
Wastewater Treatment Plant by certified operators.. Your request has been reviewed by the
staff of the Water Quality Section and is hereby granted with the following conditions:
1. The facility shall implement, operate and maintain the Telemetry Monitoring Plan as
outlined in your letter of February 21,1994.
2. In case of a power failure or an alarm situation, an appropriate certified operator
must be dispatched immediately to the treatment plant.
3. Failure of the monitoring system to detect a malfunction, the failure of the
monitoring system in reporting a malfunction, or the failure of an appropriate
certified operator in responding to a problem must be documented and reported to the
Asheville Regional Office by phone within 2A hours and in writing within five (5)
working days. Failure of a monitoring device or failure to respond to a problem will
not be a mitigating factor in any enforcement action.
4. A designated certified operator shall be on call during the periods when the WWTP
is not staffed. The Town shall provide in writing to the Asheville Regional Office,
within ten (10) working days of receipt of this variance, the notification procedure
and notification schedule of how contacts will be made when problems are reported.
The Town must notify the Asheville Regional Office at least tea (10) working days
prior to the implementation of any changes in this schedule.
p E 16) 11 W
/{� ii
,1.t' 13 .L:Jas
I
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone -1.9 733-7015 FAX 919=7•
4916
An tqual Opportunity Af iirrnotive Action Employer
50% recycled/ :0% post -consumer paper

�7/01/1998 10:13 4
PAGE 02
5. This variance shall be in effect until November 30,1998 and will be reviewed with
the renewal of the NPDES permit for this facility. A request for renewal of this
variance should be submitted with the permit renewal request. This request should
include the operational history of the system,frequency of malfunctions and actions
taken to resolve any such malfunctions.
6. The variance may be rescinded at the discretion of the Director in the event that the
compliance status or the conditions at the facility change or that the system in place
does not prove to provide adequate reliability or adequate notification.
The Division appreciates the efforts that the Town of Spindale has made to provide
reliable and efficient wastewater treatment and we look forward to your continued
cooperation. If you have any questions or need any further assistance in this matter, please
contact Forrest Westal ., Regional Water Quality Supervisor, of the Asheville Regional
Office at [phone] or Dwight Lancaster, Wastewater Plant Consultant, at (919) 733-
0026.
Sinc rely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.
cc; Asheville Regional Office
Facilities Assessment Unit
Central Files

3ciN
Subject: Town of Spindale WWTP, NC0020664
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 14:07:01 -0400
From: "Steve Pellei" <steve [e-mail]> Internal
Organization: Division of Water Quality
To: bethany [e-mail]
During phone duty this past week, recieved a call from John Hannah and
Kelly Sellers at(864) 949-1111. They are responding to comments to a
201 Facility Plan for construction grants regarding instream water
quality. In my attempt to track down the project I found out it was
assigned to you. Therefore I apologize for passing the buck.
What they what to know is what does instream WQ look like, 7Q10, etc. at
the present discharge location (Hollonds Creek) and/or at the new Qw
location (Holland near Catheys Creek).
I also referred them to ESB to see if their are any ambient stations
around there.
I suggest just giving them any info we have and let them draw their own
conclusions.
PS>..they called
again today. I told them to at least give you time to
peek at the file before they call._
Sorry for this
17(e so J f -„ k„{ rs CY k P,.
16t ID (5)
r7o, )0 (v\l)=
ki)
--10,.\--6)
o r
3 5-
4.s
o�15'0647O0
Py-oPOSEes { C � ` C Y-. ( Corr f col)
7a o (5) o
'6►uNJ) _
4, 'COTSis OJT V/7"../1rA
s,nVJn c\2 �%��a� [PRA Fr] � =
�J rr �,
' � 5-1 e (4 a S hn I r e c (Par4:1 a I sto oY"'`1cam►Cke� s Crl� C) I P ��
SeS kZe_ds0rkl , No►n
--c,t. -niciArr-es
CaTictAtiArl r une)-f-C / 3o ) s c �- es Sect; ,,�, eK%d-�-� o�-i .
0-0((?vicC
(C) NE 5uo r tnc l l .erg .e or S' cyc6le
S SAS ova
� r
�--0 Co n ff `off Cal e, s 41/\e v1 ? S S ec o v ci Oho a cl R
Via ove-rail
S ohs o: - - (n - Fa t r b i c� � S s, i � � ova �j a s e d
od o -
COer(
W h C b l9v ; Also X .
14 CAT/5 CiV4,, ���,( 1,1‘0\1/?1A-CI i scinpY ers . 1
� _ � Corva iQsc.e r f-iov•
e
u rn i -(re- din u s fir. esi h 95 2(e-I1-rlito
T3ray k, i1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, J ., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A7754: p r A
LDIENJI
Facsimile Cover Sheet
To:
From: .13e4-kart P,01+
Phone: [phone] extension 551
Fax: [phone]
pages, including this cover sheet.
(.5.\4Clelf745arm -Cron' DRAFT" $roacl CZ. 13 as invw de. Pia n)
Comments: Proose.d 5� �✓ � ���e?SI-. on 1-L-o1Irw1s Y 5
Cr1L : Cre&k-
¢/3/9$
Fax: ($a ata ' I I IQ
7ai(s 3.s ofs
iat,o(w)= 4.5 cis
D A '• I nAi 2
Qare= 1O.z Cos
7a i 0 CO = 2.0 cis
'70.10(w) = 2(o C.-S
DA 4I.(� w+�Z
pave = 62. c,cs
30(.2= 6.004s
300.2.- 35 c-�s
FRO 4 WASTE LOAD
pia CACTI o t4 F 1.Es (1940)
Overview of Water Quality
Water quality, based on benthic macroinvertebrate information, generally ranges from Good to
Good/Fair in this subbasin (Table 4.10). During the 1995 basin assessment, the Broad River
ti, water quality was Good at two sites, but Good -Fair at a site in between. Good water quality was
also found at Mountain Creek, the Green River, White Oak Creek and an upstream site on the
11:a:Second Broad River. Cleghorn Creek, Robinson Creek, and a downstream site on the Second
Broad River had Good -Fair bioclassifications. Fair water quality was found for Walnut Creek
and Catheys Creek below the Spindale WWTP. Poor bioclassifications have been recorded only_
,Prior to 1987. Water quality deterioration is associated with large point source dischargers in e
Rutherfor ton-Spindale area and nonpoint source runoff in other areas of the subbasin.
FRoM u5%5 SrAnoW 02►5064?do
(1990 DATA) s WASTE LOAD ALLocenoN
FILES .
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Latheys Creek and Hollands Creek
Catheys Creek has been given a use support rating of Partially Supporting based on three benthic
macroinvertebrate surveys conducted -between 1988 and 1995. _ The bioclassification has been
borderline between` Good/Fair or Fair using mountain classification criteria during all three
surveys. The creek is impacted by the Spindale wastewater treatment plant. Based on nonpoint
source work hops held in 1988, it was also indicated that the stream was receiving nonpoint
source runoff from agricultural areas. Hollands Creek (which flows into Catheys Creek) is rated
as Not Supporting based on data that is greater than five years old, but it is the receiving stream for
the Spindale wastewater treatment plant.
•
The Spindale WWTP currently discharges 6.0 MGD of domestic and industrial wastewater into
Hollands Creek. Historic macroinvertebrate data collected by DWQ determined this creek was not
supporting its designated uses due to point source inputs. The Spindale WWTP with an instream
waste concentration of 73% has had problems passing its whole effluent toxicity test. In order to
maintain compliance with its NPDES permit limitations and to relieve stress on the receiving
stream, Spi dale has elected to relocate its outfall to Catheys Creek, a larger receiving stream
approximatei.y 1 mile from its existing discharge point. In Catheys Creek, Spindale's effluent will
be 32% of the streamflow and should be able to pass its toxicity test. Hollands Creek should begin
recovery once the Spindale outfall is relocated.
In addition to relocation of the outfall, plant improvements will be made including the addition of a
dissolved flotation unit and replacement of weirs and baffles in the final clarifiers. These
improvements will enhance the operation of the plant and reduce the cost of sludge disposal. DWQ
recommends that Spindale continue toxicity reduction evaluation efforts and seek cooperation from
industrial contributors in order to obtain and maintain compliance with toxicity limits in Cathey's
Creek.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Spindale continue to pursue its efforts improve its wastewater treatment
and to relocate its treatment plant outfall to Catheys Creek. This should relieve conditions on
Hollands Creek and DWQ will monitor impacts on Catheys Creek. In addition, DWQ should
work with local experts to assess NPS contributions to impairment and it is recommended that the
NPS Team consider the Catheys Creek watershed as a possible target of their efforts, resources
permitting.
1\101-c Ca -Heys CrL . lis+ea 30 3 Cd) 5-1-
as an irnpaired wa}.e..r rneciium
�v;\-11 sea iter eni-ail-ian as a probity.,
O--,w 6ti6cn eys vs -tire -aryl are -few; 4oi,wld
Oft-o•h ;I Frv?*ure Ihdt•t5-E-ri es vc( INh i oak.
43nor/14.erord Co. Co oval as . we d is chaYg� r�
Avlbs -ice Ca-i-keys I -far uFsi-rearlei
The. -6lloA/1nq skeds a c°P. °� a WoY- LS�22�
\y, �'tn2 V��t�i Loac Caiiov�-�t'Ie5 1oW`tvt�
discharges ciowns4-rean-, inwlai-,ersked•

.1
..0 :444
tsf.t1. sts.sco
- - - - f t. 79ro+.27.i' .
ell :TIC
�stc•' _
_ = 4.zsiti1O
OZI
©i Ia5dS L16
�IQi9Mt�1t
git 133 c ...T-
s?Qu . tic$
�►'7Qps 3tafs
Salt& Goce tit
r
2Lj
Sf iF~
S"yr2Pf-24.3= 41.3
4:704s791.L7_4 =bS.6