NC0021890_Wasteload Allocation_19950310

NPDES DOCIMENT :MCANNIN` COVER SHEET
NC0021890
Granite Falls WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation fjy
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Staff Report
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
March 10, 1995
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerse side

//3/1 S - CA) //i7/5s- (e)
NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION //z 11' - (A)
2/ /9 s - CA) 0,)
PERMIT NO.: NC0021890
PERMITTEE NAME:
FACILITY NAME:
Town of Granite Falls
Granite Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 0.75 MGD / o. q o
Domestic (% of Flow):
Industrial (% of Flow):
99 %
Comments:
Flow increase to 0.90 MGD received 1/26/95.
RECEIVING STREAM: Gunpowder Creek
Class: WS-IV CA
Sub -Basin: 03-08-32
Reference USGS Quad: D 13 SW
(please attach)
County: Caldwell
Regional Office: Asheville Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 6/30/95 Treatment Plant Class:
Classification changes within three miles:
NonePLO
Requested by: Greg Nt .ich ' '
Prepared by; (1,(litib
Reviewed by: ,.)./a/nOttit
O• .5u rnegg wao a•9oorwad
�O➢„� 66-ei( 1 4.3
WQ\�L "611` we. wq
III
Date: 1/26/95
Date: 6 Maori ('t9 5
Date-.3 I C) b
7 /0
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
fk
i/ z7 s-
BzsD
C, 8)
Drainage Area (mi2): 35 Average Streamflow (cfs): 44
s7Q10 (cfs): 9.3 w7Q10 (cfs): 12 30Q2 (cfs): 17
Toxicity Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P / F11% for 0.750 mgd / 13% for 0.900 mgd
Limits: March, June, September, and December
Upstream Location: approximately 50 yards above discharge point
Downstream Location: approximately 2,000 feet below discharge point
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, &
conductivity; TP, chlorophyll a, & time of sample
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
Field 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.
Nutrient atad-chloroptryl -,a-stream-samples- all-be-cel k
during ly.
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
0.750 0.750
30 30
10 t monitor t
5.0 5.0
30 30
200 200
6-9 6-9
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/I):
NH3N (mg/I):
DO (mg/I):
TSS (mg/I):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (4/1):
Total Phosphorus (mg/I):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
Lead (µg/I) :
Zinc (µg/I):
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
t Weekly monitoring is only required November 1 through March 31 [no limit ]
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/I):
NH3N (mg/I):
DO (mg/I):
TSS (mg/I):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/I):
Total Phosphorus (mg/I):
Total Nitrogen (mg/I):
Lead (µg/I):
Zinc (µg/1):
Monthly
Summer
0.900
25
6.2
5.0
30
200
6-9
28.0
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
Average
Winter
0.900
30
15.4
5.0
30
200
6-9
28.0
monitor
monitor
monitor
monitor
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

A. W. Huffman Jr.
Mayor
Barry Hayes
Mayor Pro Tem
Linda K. Story
Town Manager
•FAr42,6"-- iHey6e-r
Moor> , oc, A648
TOWN OF GRANITE FALLS
P.O. DRAWER 10
GRANITE FALLS, NORTH CAROLINA 28630
Phone [phone] • Fax [phone]
January 17, 1995
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E. Director
NPDES Permits Group
Post Office x 29535
Raleigh, No Carolina 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Howard:
G,J
Council Members
Inez K. Clay
Herbert H. Greene
O. Wayne Johnson
Donald Kirkpatrick
Max V. McRary
RE: Deletion of Cyanide Monitoring Requirement
NPDES Permit No. NC0021890
Town of Granite Falls
Caldwell County
The Town of Granite Falls would like to formally request the deletion of cyanide
monitoring from our upcoming NPDES permit renewal. Since monthly monitoring
results for -the -past. five ' (5.) years have indicated that cyanide is not present
in our waste stream and no industrial waste exist which would contribute cyanide
to our waste stream it could be concluded that cyanide monitoring is no longer
needed in ourl NPDES permit monitoring schedule.
If you have any questions concerning this matter,•please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
A w
A.W. Huffman Jr.
Mayor
MSW/sw
cc. Linda Story, Town Manager
<< 1
,JAM 181995 Li
hF

A. W. Huffman Jr
' Mayor
Barry Hayes
Mayor Pro Tem
Linda K. Story
Town Manager
TOWN OF GRANITE FALLS
P.O. DRAWER 10
GRANITE FALLS, NORTH CAROLINA 28630
Phone [phone] • Fax [phone]
A. Preston Howard, Jr.,
NPDES P ' is Group
Post Off ce Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina
Dear Mr.
Howard:
January 17, 1995
P.E. Director
27626-0535
Council Members
Inez K. Clay
Herbert H. Greene
O. Wayne Johnson
Donald Kirkpatrick
Max V. McRary
RE: Modification, NPDES No. NC0021890
Town of Granite Falls
Caldwell County
The following modification is requested in our upcoming renewal of our NPDES
permit for the Town of Granite Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant.
1. Modification of rated flaw of treatment plant from .750 MGD to .900 MGD
as dicussed in the Technical Evaluation Report prepared by the Wooten
Company and submitted to the Division of Environmental Management on
February 28, 1994.
2. The deletion of points in the Treatment Plant Rating Schedule due to
the disablement of the polymer feed system equipment. This system was
'stalled on a experiential basis and not as a part of our overall treat-
t process.
These items have been discussed• with our Regional Environmental Engineer Mr.
James R. Reid and the standard permit modification fee of $150.00 is enclosed.
If you have any questions concerning any part of our permit renewal applica-
tion or permit modification request, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
AwHAA#0v-iiii
A.W. Huf
Mayor
MSW/sw
Jr.
cc: Linda Story, Town Manager
Ifj
}
r Nye
JAN 18 I995
y
•

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
S ubbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Granite Falls Waste
NC0021890
Domestic - 99 %
Existing
Renewal
Gunpowder Creek
WS - IV CA
03-08-32
Caldwell
Asheville
Nizich
1/3/95
D13SW
g250
Request # 466*
Water Treatment Plant
Industrial - 1 %
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
A)
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2): 35
Summer 7Q10 (cfs): 9.3
Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 12
Average Flow (cfs): 44
30Q2 (cfs): 17
IWC (%): 11 %
Expansions to tributaries to the Catawba River will be dealt with on a case -by -case basis in the Catawba
River Basin.
Facility achieving good treatment on conventional parameters with the exception of Residual Chlorine
which is excessive. [Please note that Residual Chlorine would be limited to 28.0 µg/I upon expansion]
Pretreatment has facility under Inactive Status
Instream monitoring should take place as close to to the upper portion (pooled area) of the Little Dam
impoundment as possible. Request Region comment as to possiblity of this,C„ S'E-E- „I4157726m,, in it) 7 wzr416_
Also, request Region comment on Inflow / Infiltration problems at facility with regards to possibleAQurf-'61°Etrs
expansion. SEcTjdti'�
Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers:
tt
Recommended b/-L-----7
F.�-IIKeo al
Instream Assessment: r .... .�
Regional a isor:
Permits ngineering:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY:
Date:
Date:
Date: 24/ o f 9 5
Date:
Li 15
„),

Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit:
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
TOXICS/METALS
Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P / F
11%
11%
March, June, September, and December
Existing Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3-N (mg/1);
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Coliform (/100mL):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (14/1):
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
Zinc (µg/I):
Cyanide (14/1): 45.0
Lead (µg/1): monitor monitor
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
* Weekly monitoring is only required November 1 through March 31 [no limit]
Daily Maximum
Recommended Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3-N (mg/1);
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Coliform (/100mL):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
Zinc (µg/1):
Cyanide (µg/1):
Lead (4/1):
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
* Weekly monitoring is only required November 1 through March 31 [no limit]
** Policy for recommendations under review
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
0.750
30
10*
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor
30
monitor *
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor
Average
Winter
Daily Maximum
Monthly
Summer
0.750
30
10*
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
monitor **
-mew
30
monitor *
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
monitor **
-a5 �—
Zinc: Max. Pred Cw 160
Allowable Cw 450
Cyanide: Max. Pred Cw 7.8
Allowable Cw 45
Lead: Max. Pred Cw 490
Allowable Cw 225
no Long Term Monitoring Plan available for future data
Monitor per NPDES Permit [Maximum Predicted 10% of Allowable]
46 out of 48 values < 5.0 µg/1
Monitor per NPDES Permit [Maximum Predicted 10% of Allowable]
only 11 data points available for review [maximum value 100 µg/1]
Monitor per NPDES Permit

_x Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
OR
No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: approximately 50 yards above discharge point
Downstream Location: closest possible downstream point within vicinity of _—
pooled area before "Little Dam"
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
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.
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
/s
/ iaeee55ibJQ-
b ry /J ; -tX( e
7-n4A .r does Am
%1!qv /4e etret/.1y
-� o//'ec t-h /
(10 .), :iet R►n � �e
ireomm ENvF0
Has the facility dfmonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment io c .
{ �-j,
If no, which parameters cannot be met? oe s (1749
facilities? Yes No /oo o / l�e.,i.vs/i2e
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
1s +lt e. e,oiy
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional _feet s, t'/e
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach updated evaluation of facility, including toxics spreadsheet, modeling
analysisif modeled at renewal, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

Facility Name Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant Permit # NC0021890 Pipe # 001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 11 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document). The permit
holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit
condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during the
months of Mar., Jun., Sep., and Dec. 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, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of
the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the
waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring
will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test
requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened
and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require
immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitble test results will
constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 9.3 cfs 7------llPermitted Flow 0.750 M G D Recommended bA
'�— 'IWC 11 % FaKeough.
Basin & Sub -basin 03-08-32
Receiving Stream Gunpowder Creek
County Caldwell Date t1 /Amoza.Y, 1195
1 V
QCL P/F Version 9/91

FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
Granite Falls Waste
NC0021890
Domestic - 99 %
Existing
Renewal
Gunpowder Creek
WS - IV CA
03-08-32
Caldwell
Asheville
Nizich
1/27/95
D13SW
Request # 8250 6
Water Treatment Plant
Industrial - 1 %
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
35
9.3
12
44
17
11% and 13%
Expansions to tributaries to the Catawba River will be deatt with on a case -by -case basis in the Catawba
River Basin.
Facility achieving good treatment on conventional parameters with the exception of Residual Chlorine * tk,d whs
which is excessive. [Please note that Residual Chlorine would be limited to 28.0 µg/I upon expansion] orr,r ,N r.
Pretreatment has facility under Inactive Status ✓ ��{.
Rti0N3: iN���F�
Ins am monitoring should take place as close to to the uperportion
th sooIed area) of the Little Darn ant FlNA �� �RaA
impoundment as possible. Request Region comment as to possiblity
Also, request Region comment on Inflow / Infiltration problems at facility with regards to expansion.
Expansion BOD5 summer limit based on keeping loading the same since discharge is into an
impoundment. Due to predicted retention time in impounqdment being less than 14 days, no nutrient
limits will be required at this time. 5JA.{ jie.41,0 Y)d.,! C4 o 4ria4 o p(a'�c)nrat is -� t W ki6
.t c/a -In a, rtt r. eln65r-,, TAU may ina,.jcl1 rh .ta✓N. ✓U,Al*✓�
Upon Region recommendation, cyanide monitoring will not be recommended. -m,y a4,0,7p ..ram v lit. rfrt
Request Region comment for summer instream monitoring of nutrients.
dr &ham o-F cl a ;-4needt&J,
q use Cons- o>L moo®
ial Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers: /�
a- Ls/ `7"/ e Gu /4// /s SAC c4e_ i F r e. / cha.),l
//7F! / `ire- A.,/7'i,,174/ `4/i/7/ly ,q,ni,/es i/i'A.
„if��
b�► '� t) 9WirA Mlf'P (gyp [7117-0LA's--1- -0 !�
ti A Map 1Y�C �1 i G TAOki NCO be cop i ed -fat, anr� i
Recommended by: _ ° Date: 3 Y w i 5
Instream Assessment: i�. q Date:
h V
Regional Ski Date:a, a U, (J, ,4
Permits & En 'neering: / Date:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SUPPORT BY:
rt.cv %e.vJ

Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit:
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
TOXICS/METALS
Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P / F
11%
11 % for 0.750 mgd / 13 % for 0.900 mgd
March, June, September, and December
Existing Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3-N (mg/1);
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Coliform (/100mL):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (4/1):
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
Zinc (µg/1):
Cyanide (1.g/1): 45.0
Lead (11g/1): monitor monitor
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
* Weekly monitoring is only required November 1 through March 31 [no limit]
Daily Maximum
Recommended Limits
Wasteflow (mgd):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3-N (mg/1);
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Coliform (/100mL):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (4/1):
Oil & Grease (mg/1):
Total Phosphorus (mg/1):
Total Nitrogen (mg/1):
Zinc (4/1):
Cyanide (4/1):
Lead (µme):
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
* Weekly monitoring is only required November 1 through March 31 [no limit]
** Policy for recommendations under review
*** Per Region recommendation
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
0.750
30
10*
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor
30
monitor *
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor
Average
Winter
Monthly
Summer
0.750
30
10*
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
not required ***
monitor
30
monitor *
5.0
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
Summer
0.900
25
6.2
5.0
30
200
6-9
wilt& ZS
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
Winter
30
15.4
5.0
30
200
6-9
m orz3
not required
monitor
monitor
monitor **
not required *** not required *** not required ***
monitor monitor monitor
Zinc:
Cyanide:
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
160 no Long Term Monitoring Plan available for future data
450 Monitor per NPDES Permit [Maximum Predicted 10% of Allowable]
7.8 46 out of 48 values < 5.0 µg/1
45 [Maximum Predicted 10% of Allowable]
490 only 11 data points available for review [maximum value 100 µg/1]
225 Monitor per NPDES Permit

Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
OR
No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: approximately 50 yards above discharge point
Downstream Location: closest possible downstream point within vicinity of
pooled area before "Little Dam"
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
Upstream and downstream samples shall be grab samples. Stream samples shall be
,collected. b - 1� per week during June, July, August, and September and once per
l'I" week during e remaining months of the year.
a G dp --- tip rovti j i /c tn,lo i }L L MoN-tc7R'(� £AJ R vG�t��� �° {� koNE.
�cS�10�P 1 a� i E UJA M �d E ►SWAT[ dP 'a, � e_ `the
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS ,ptironx�
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility d7onstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment
facilities? Yes No
If no, whic'i parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach updated evaluation of facility, including toxics spreadsheet, modeling
analysisif modeled at renewal, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.
"TO

Facility Name Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant Permit # NC0021890 Pipe # 001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 11 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document). The permit
holder shall perform Quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit
condition. The t test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during
the months of r., Jun., Sep., and Dec. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at
the NPDES tied 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, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine
of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of
the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survivaland appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require
immediate retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will
constitute nonco fiance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10
Permitted Flow
IWC
Basin & Sub -basis
Receiving Stream
County
QCL PIF Version 9/91
9.3 cfs
0.750 MGD
11 %
03-08-32
Gunpowder Creek
Caldwell
Recommended
Date 3 i%,Y, ►ori
Farrell Keough

Facility Name Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant Permit # NC0021890 Pipe # 001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic
Bioassay Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality is 13 % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document). The permit
holder shall perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit
condition. The first test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during
the months of Mar., Jun., Sep., and Dec. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at
the NPDES permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity ting results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Moni g Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code
TGP3B. Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall LIT complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
performed in association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine
of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of
the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly
monitoring will begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this
monthly test requirement will revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test to from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re-
opened and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require
immediate retesti.g(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will
constitute noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10
Permitted Flow
IWC
Basin & Sub -basin
Receiving Stream
County
QCL PIF Version 9191
9.3 cfs
0.900 MGD
13 %
03-08-32
Gunpowder Creek
Caldwell
Recommended b'` "-" -..-
Farrell Keough
Date L1imam Y, 1193

tea.ta1a..
Grapawd01- eV%
1.13AWL-riteatmshat
(�J
40
s¢'% soy
r•l°j-yt5
GR4.3 lit gnus
WA67r6 Wank,
TRzEn * r %Air
NC ObL1$cra
Vim'*i dP A ruts
C'RAn G2aaitcs FALL,'
ct,swit/2r - -to Lime Darn-.
R/0 rU I�jjIfk - ...
rizor►, -0 rh 3Afte.Y IDAt A 15A6e
0 'Iva •ARLIa Z'Si 0g0 AcaC-.g
!1 Mute 5
4017-0441 Fool Gap+pXttp I
pcee-
sihe
tiatxtzeilm croortosat%. betr% tnkr..3
taw L>ttE.
GooPOwQt2, GR[�tK
'r3360
5, 66Z, ga0 St3

Request #
Facility Name: Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant
NPDES No.: NC0021890
Type of Waste: 99 % Domestic 1 % Industrial
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal Stream Characteristic
Receiving Stream: Gunpowder Creek USGS #
Stream Classification: C Date:
Subbasin: 03-08-32 Drainage Area (mi2): 35
County: Caldwell Summer 7Q10 (cfs): 9.3
Regional Office: Asheville Winter 7Q10 (cfs): 12
Requestor: Average Flow (cfs): 44 o.e,00 mi.j
Date of Request: 3002 (cfs): 17
Topo Quad: D 13 SW IWC (%): 11 % )370
Existing WLA checked: x
Staff Report: x 1993
Topo checked: x not to scale map attached
USGS Flows confirmed:
IWC Spreadsheet: nr Basin Plan limits will be recommended for possible expansion
Stream Classification:
Nutrient Sensitivity:
Instream Data: x downstream location different than that required in Permit
F(Ft(TV IA= 6•2/15
1975: recommended limits of 20 mg/I BOD5, 6.0 mg/I TKN, 5.0 mg/I dissolved oxygen, 30 mg/I TSS, 200 / 100 mL fecal coliform, and
6 - 9 SU pH for 0.5 mgd discharge.
1976: remodeled w/ limits of 17 mg/I BOD5, 8.0 mg/I TKN, 5.0 mg/I dissolved oxygen, 30 mg/I TSS, 200 / 100 mL fecal coliform, and
6 - 9 SU pH for 0.5 mgd discharge. Some type of WLA procedure assessment was done. Suggestions from this were that an
additional Lake modeling analysis be done since the predicted DO sag for this effluent is just prior to the "Little Dam"
downstream before the waterbody enter Lake Hickory backwaters. This was pursued by changes in velocity to Reach 2 in the
Level B, thereby portraying lake characteristics (refer 1982 notes).
1981: addition of 15,000 gpd approved.
1982: addition of 21,900 gpd approved.
1983: WLA finalized for discharge of 0.865 mgd w/ Secondary Limits and 1,000 / 100 mL fecal coliform. Also, letter from consultant
has approximation of streambed characteristics from discharge point to "Little Dam". Memorandum of remodeling using
Level B'lakes analysis' determined limits of 30 mg/I BOD5, 12 mg/I NH3N, 5.0 mg/I dissolved oxygen, 30 mg/I TSS,
1,000 / 100 mL fecal coliform, and 6 - 9 SU pH for 0.5 mgd discharge. Finalized WLA later in that year had summer / winter
limits for both 0.5 mgd and 0.865 mgd. The following represents the limits for both flows, (respectively) for the summer, (winter
limits were Secondary for both flows): 24 (16) mg/I BOD5, 19 (11) mg/I NH3N, 5.0 mg/I dissolved oxygen, 30 mg/I TSS,
1,000 / 100 mL fecal coliform, and 6 - 9 SU pH.
1985: facility received funding for previously proposed upgrades, (delay to mis-rating of priority status). SOC modeling performed to
facilitate this process.
1988: reissued with same limits and addition of instream monitoring requirements, cyanide limit, zinc monitoring, and a chronic
toxicity test at 11 %.
1993: reissued with same limits and addition of residual chlorine, nutrient monitoring, and lead, (per EPA directive). Facility had
consistent pass rate for toxicity test. Facility has Cedar Valley Sox as SIU, (therefore the 10% Industrial rating), yet
Pretreatment had them on Inactive status, (EPA guidelines require the acknowledgment of this SIU). Pretreatment required no
further monitoring to be required.
DMR's
BOD5 values averaging below 10 mg/I. NH3N varies dramatically throughout the year, but are still well below limits.
Residual chlorine levels very excessive. phosphorus and nitrogen levels near 1.0 mg/I and 6.0 mg/I, (respectively).
Instream monitoring
indicating full saturation, (above 85% for most months) throughout the year. Downstream location different than that required by Permit;
because of impoundment prior to monitoring, I will request every effort be made to take instream samples at or just above "Little Dam".
Pretreatment
Email message and previous correspondence indicates that facility is under Inactive status
Region
James Reid [MRO] needs this WLA ASAP as facility will be asking for expansion to 0.900 mgd in the near future. I will note the Basin
Strategy requirements for expansion on the cover of the Fact Sheet.
Major concern per Staff Report is inaccessibility of downstream monitoring point; will call Region about resolution of this.
WS classification is enforced both up and downstream of discharge point due to the possibility of reverse currents when downstream
hydroelectric facility halts discharge.
Letter from Region, (dated June, 1993) indicating that Nis of concern to this facility, (hence the requested expansion forthcoming).

Existing Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/I):
NH3N (mg/I):
DO (mg/I):
TSS (mg/I):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/I):
Oil & Grease (mg/I):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/I):
Zinc (µg/I):
Cyanide (µg/I):
Lead (µg/I):
Toxicity Test:
Monthly Averages
Summer Winter
0.750
30
10
5
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
30
5
30
200
6-9
monitor
not required
monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
45 Daily Maximum
monitor monitor
Chronic (Ceriodaphnia) P/F at 11%; March, June, September, and December
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Weekly monitoring only is required November 1 through March 31 (no limit).
Upstream Location: approximately 50 yards above discharge point
Downstream Location: approximately 200 yards below discharge point
Parameters: temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, conductivity
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.
Zinc: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Cyanide: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Lead: Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
160
450 -required-per NPDCS Permit CURRENT' SOP NUT Es-rAbt,hlci
7.8 46 out of 48 values < 5.0 µg/I
45 --hot-required-per-NPDES-Permit c_iu entt. 60P ,ver esrAblahccl
490 only 11 data points available for analysis; facility needs to use lowest possible
225 detection level.
-Limit per NPDES Permit (lime. yo0
Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant NC0021890

Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant NC0021890
Upstream: 50' above discharge
Date DO Temp Saturation Fecal Conductivity
Nov-94 10.6 13 101% 78.4 83
Oct-94 9.4 18 99% 56.8 708
Sep-94 8.3 20 91 % 77 59.9
Aug-94 7 24 83% 170 57
JuI-94 7.1 24 84% 49.2 62.7
Jun-94 7.6 22 87% 233 61.4
May-94 8.2 18 87% 40.7 67.4
Apr-94 9.3 13 88% 110 77.8
Mar-94 10.8 10 96% 207 131
Feb-94 12 7 98% 2,000 59.6
Jan-94 12.7 7 104% 484 64.8
Dec-93 12 9 103% 104 66.6
Nov-93 10.7 14 104% 47.9 80.6
Oct-93 8.7 17 90% 41.6 76
Sep-93 7.6 23 89% 30.5 62.8
Aug-93 6.8 23 79% 27 59.7
JuI-93 6.8 23 79% 61 55.6
Jun-93 7.6 20 84% 43.1 51.4
May-93 8.4 17 87% 45.6 47
Apr-93 9.8 12 91 % 113 41.6
Mar-93 11.4 9 98% 81.8 45.1
Feb-93 11.8 9 102% 54.2 46.2
Jan-93 11.4 11 103% 829 41.6
Downstream: 500' below discharge
DO Temp Saturation Fecal Conductivity
10.9 13 104% 106.3 111
9.6 18 101% 66.5 832
8 20 88% 59 67.2
6.9 24 82% 327.6 71.3
6.9 24 82% 98.4 74.7
7.5 22 86% 351 75.3
8.1 19 87% 128 87.4
9.4 13 89% 70 98
10.8 10 96% 148 145
11.9 7 98% 1,370 73.1
12.4 7 102% 410 78.5
11.8 9 102% 27.4 80.4
10.6 14 103% 12.5 96
8.6 16 87% 7.8 97.5
7.5 23 87% 15.3 98.8
6.7 23 78% 31.4 77.2
6.6 23 77% 87.9 63.3
7.4 21 83% 63.1 58.7
8.3 17 86% 48.9 50.8
9.7 12 90% 51.8 55.3
11.2 9 97% 34.3 56.6
11.6 9 100% 56.7 57.1
11.4 11 103% 1,070 49
1/9/95

October, 1994 through November, 1993
Facility Name =
NPDES=
ow(MGD)=
701Oa (cI )=
IWC(%)=
Granite Falls WWTP Parameter = Cyanide
NC0021890
0.75 mgd
9.30 cfs
Cyanide Maximum Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Zinc [AL] imum Value
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Lead
Max. Pred Cw
Allowable Cw
Maximum Value
FINAL RESULTS I0% 1
6.0 rgNRb� •
7.8 ,uo-ri �d
45.0 46 ou N8 vatuc-s
45 o„lfl�
80.0
160.0 Ivor (I,iQ Ec1
450.0
100.0
490.0 CQ+L(1 1I dJtA
225.0 pos Jt0 max -
lei ikkial 1/2_
aliewabt )
Standard = 5 p011
n BDL=1/2DL if 1/2 DL RESULTS
1 2.5 * Std Dev. 0.7
2 2.5 * Mean 2.6
3 2.5 * C.V. 0.3
4 6 Oct,1994
5 2.5 *
6 2.5 • Mutt Factor = 1.3
7 2.5 * Max. Value 6.0 poll
8 2.5 * Max. Pred Cw 7.8 poll
9 2.5 * Allowable Cw 45 poll
10 2.5 *
11 2.5 *
12 2.5 *
13 2.5 *
14 2.5 *
15 2.5 *
16 2.5 *
17 2.5 *
18 2.5 *
19 2.5 *
20 2.5 *
21 6 Jun,1994
22 2.5 *
23 2.5 *
24 2.5 *
25 2.5 *
26 2.5 *
27 2.5 *
28 2.5 *
29 2.5 *
30 2.5 *
31 2.5 *
32 2.5 *
33 2.5 *
34 2.5 *
35 2.5 *
36 2.5 *
37 2.5 *
38 2.5 *
39 2.5 *
4o 2.5 *
41 2.5 *
42 2.5 *
43 2.5 *
44 2.5 *
45 2.5 *
46 2.5 *
47 2.5 *
48 2.5 *
1/9/95

October, 1994 through November, 1993
Parameter.. Zinc [AL] Parameter • Lead
Standard = 50 µg/l Standard - 25 µfill
BDL71/2DL If 1/2 DL RESULTS
50 * Std Dev. 24.4
80 Mean 57.1
70 C.V. 0A
40
60
5 * Mult Factor = 2.0
70 Max. Value 80.0 µfin
80 Max. Pred Cw 160.0 µg/l
60 Allowable Cw 450 µgn
20
80
70
n BDL=1/2DL if 1/2 DL RESULTS
t 100 * Std Dev. 30.3
2 5 * Mean 31.4
3 10 C.V. 1.0
4 5
5 20
6 60 May, 1994 Mult Factor = 4.9
7 20 Max. Value 100.0
8 20 Max. Pred Cw 490.0
9 5 * Allowable Cw 225
10 50 Jan,1994
11 50 Dec,1993
12 no more Lead data
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Agn
KA
Kin
1/9/95

Modeling notes for Granite Falls [NC0021890] expansion from 0.750 mgd to 0.900 mgd;
Due to discharge being only 0.8 miles above a dam, I modeled the discharge as a 1 Segment, 1 Reach under the
Level B model. I ran foul different scenario's, (using the O'Connor -Dobbins reaeration formula for numbers 3 and 4)
cutting the slopes down substantially. Run number 1 was with a 30 mgA BOD5 , 22.2 ft/mile slope, and the default
Level B components. Run number 2 had the same inputs with a 25 mg/I BOD5 , (i.e. keeping the loading the same).
Run number 3 cut the slope in half from 22.2 ft/mile slope to 11.1 ft/mile slope; this did not show a significant change.
Run number 4 cut the slope down to 5 ft/mile slope; again, no significant end result. As noted earlier, runs 3 and 4
used the O'Connor -Dobbins reaeration formula. I tried a run w/ a 0.1 fps velocity and calculating the O'Connor -
Dobbins formula for reaeriation (ka) and this yielded smaller end values for CBOD and NBOD, (not attached).
Under the Level B analysis, I did not include any R/O, (i.e. it was entered as zero) since the run was so short and the
7Q10 was so high its affect would be diminimus.
I reviewed he model for the Lenoir - Gunpowder Creek [NC0023736] discharge upstream of this facility. From the
Speculative for this plant to expand to 2.0 mgd the end CBOD and NBOD values were 0.05 and 0.00, respectively.
Therefore I used the model default background values in these runs.
Since this discharge is into an impoundment, my intent in this analysis was to determine what the oxygen consuming
loading might be. With a 30 mgA BOD5 and 6.2 mgA ammonia limit, the end values at the head of the dam would be
4.85 mgA and 0.93 mgA, respectively. Keeping the BOD5 loading the same from 0.750 mgd to 0.900 mgd would yield
an end value of 4.23 mg/I. I will recommend this second scenario, (i.e. keeping BOD5 loading the same) since this
discharge is into an impoundment.
The real concern with this discharge is nutrients. From the Dams Safety data base, the surface area is 11 acres and
the normal pool capacity is 130 acre-feet. Therefore, using the current SOP for impoundment retention times;
T s (V/Q) / 86,400
where: T = residence tilc (days)
V - volume (ft3)
Q . inflow (ft3 / ) 30Q2 is 17 cfs.
Volume is 130 acre4eet X 43,560 equals 5,662,800 feet3. Thus;
( 5,662,800 feet3 / 17) / 86,400 = 3.85 days retention time, which is well under the 14 day retention time
necessary to evaluate nutrient limits.
Granite Falls Waste Water Treatment Plant NC0021890

I.ea0iR_
Goapowdes_
waste, mare -a.
9lai i N[.Ooz.34, 66
35.3 }` 60'1
t° 10' Ho''
15ae
ACR.0 5
II AGQE
NO¢0411 FO0f Ggp10C-i
I�
warmer r*+oortotar4 bei►i►� tgt(b3
6E10,4 "Ls1I% pM
avraPOWcee C.R f &
AceC--x '3560 = S,4.6a,$00 V't3

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger
-Receiving Stream
Summer 7Q10
Design Temperature:
Segment
Reach
GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANTSubbasin
GUNPOWDER CREEK Stream Class: C
9.3 Winter 7Q10 : 12.0
25.0
'LENGTH' SLOPEI VELOCITY 1 DEPTHI Kd I Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka 1 KN I KN 1 KNR 1 KNR 1 SOD 1 SOD 1
1 mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft 'design' @20 'design' @20 Idesignl @20 'design! @20 'design! @20 1
1 I I
1 1 0.801 22.201 0.479 1 1.22 1 0.43 1 0.35 115.42
1 I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I 1 1
113.831 0.73 1 0.50 1 0.73 10.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 I
I I I I 1 I
I Seg # I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I Seg #
1
roo-L-\ 14-0
Flow
I cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.395
Headwaters ► 9.300
Tributary 1 0.000
* Runoff 1 0.000
c
CBOD 1 NBOD
mg/1 I mg/1
37.500 127.900
2.000 1 1.000
2.000 1 1.000
2.000 1 1.000
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
Reach
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Reach
Discharger
Receiving Stream
# I Seg Mi I
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
# I Seg Mi
D.O.
6.47
6.72
6.92
7.09
7.23
7.34
7.44
7.52
7.58
D.O.
CBOD I
6.63
6.59
6.56
6.52
6.49
6.45
6.41
6.38
6.34
CBOD I
MODEL RESULTS
: GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANT
: GUNPOWDER CREEK
coAcy LI(IP01-b-A‘j
1 D.O. I
I mg/1 I
0.000
7.440
7.440
7.440
NBOD I
4.51
4.47
4.43
4.38
4.34
4.30
4.26
4.22
4.18
NBOD I
DISC GE TO LITTLE DAM
AMMONIA 6.2 MG/L BOD 25 MG/L
KE PI JC.1 LonDI Ari Sq
: 0308
Flow I
10.70
10.70
10.70
10.70
10.70
10.70
10.70
10.70
The End D.O. is
The End CBOD is
The End NBOD is
7.58 mg/l.
6.34 mg/1.
4.18 mg/1.
DO Min
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach #
Segment 1 6.47
Reach 1
0.00
1
WLA
CBOD
(mg/1)
37.50
WLA
NBOD
(mg/1)
27.90
WLA
DO Waste Flo
(mg/1) (mgd)
0.00 0.90000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANTSubbasin : 0308
• Receiving Stream : GUNPOWDER CREEK Stream Class: C
Summer 7Q10 : 9.3 Winter 7Q1O : 12.0
Design Temperature: 25.0
'LENGTH] SLOPE' VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd I Ka 1 Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR 1 SOD 1 SOD I
I mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft Idesignl @20 Idesignl @20 Idesignl @20 Idesignl @20 Idesignl @20 I
1 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 t 1 I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.801 22.201 0.479 1 1.22 10.43 1 0.35 115.42 1 13.831 0.73 1 0.50 1 0.73 10.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 I
Reach 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1
Flow 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. I
I cfs 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.395 1 45.000 1 27.900 1 0.000
Headwaters) 9.300 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
Tributary I 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff I 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I
1 1 0.00 6.47 7.61 4.51 10.70
1 1 0.10 6.71 7.57 4.47 10.70
1 1 0.20 6.91 7.52 4.43 10.70
1 1 0.30 7.08 7.48 4.38 10.70
1 1 0.40 7.21 7.44 4.34 10.70
1 1 0.50 7.33 7.40 4.30 10.70
1 1 0.60 7.42 7.36 4.26 10.70
1 1 0.70 7.50 7.32 4.22 10.70
1 1 0.80 7.56 7.28 4.18 10.70
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi 1 D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow 1
o-y3M Q
DISCHARGE TO LITTLE DAM
AMMONIA 6.2 MG/L BOD 30 MG/L
Discharger
Receiving Stream
MODEL RESULTS
: GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANT
: GUNPOWDER CREEK
The End D.O. is 7.56 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 7.28 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 4.18 mg/1.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flo
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 6.47 0.00 1
Reach 1 45.00 27.90 0.00 0.90000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANTSubbasin : 030
Receiving Stream : GUNPOWDER CREEK Stream Class: C
Summer 7Q10 : 9.3 Winter 7Q10 : 12.0
Design Temperature: 25.0
!LENGTH' SLOPE' VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN 1 KNR I KNR I SOD 1 SOD I
I mile I ft/mil fps 1 ft 'design' @20 'design' @20 'design' @20 'design' @20 'design' @20 I
1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.801 11.101 0.392 11.35 10.34 1 0.27 15.75 I 5,161 0.44 10.30 10.44 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00 I
Reach 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1 I 1
1
1
1 Flow 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. I
I cfs 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 1.395 1 37.500 1 27.900 1 0.000
Headwaters) 9.300 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff 1 0.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
CUT SLOPE IN HALF / BOD = 25
O'CONNOR-DOBBINS REAERATION
Seg # I Reach # 1 Seg Mi 1 D.O. 1 CBOD I NBOD I Flow I
1 1 0.00 6.47 6.63 4.51 10.70
1 1 0.10 6.56 6.60 4.48 10.70
1 1 0.20 6.64 6.56 4.45 10.70
1 1 0.30 6.72 6.53 4.42 10.70
1 1 0.40 6.79 6.49 4.39 10.70
1 1 0.50 6.85 6.46 4.36 10.70
1 1 0.60 6.91 6.42 4.33 10.70
1 1 0.70 6.97 6.39 4.30 10.70
1 1 0.80 7.02 6.35 4.27 0.95mS040.70
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi 1 D.O. 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 Flow I
"•2.3 iil.k CUT SLOPE IN HALF / BOD = 25
O'CONNOR-DOBBINS REAERATION
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANT
Receiving Stream : GUNPOWDER CREEK
The End D.O. is 7.02 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 6.35 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 4.27 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flo
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 6.47 0.00 1
Reach 1 37.50 27.90 0.00 0.90000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANTSubbasin : 030E
Receiving Stream : GUNPOWDER CREEK Stream Class: C
Summer 7Q10 9.3 Winter 7Q10 : 12.0
Design Temperature: 25.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE' VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN 1 KN I KNR I KNR I SOD I SOD 1
1 mile 1 ft/mil fps i ft 'design' @20 Idesignl @20 'design' @20 IdesignI @20 !design; @20 1
1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1
Segment 1 I 0.801 5.501 0.320 1.49 10.29 10.23 14.46 I 4.001 0.44 10.30 10.44 10.00 10.00 10.00 1
Reach 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
1
Segment 1
Waste
Headwaters
Tributary
* Runoff
Flow 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 D.O. I
cfs I. mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Reach 1
1.395 1 37.500 1 27.900 1 0.000
1 9.300 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
SLOPE IS 5 FPM/BOD = 25 MG/L
O'CONNOR-DOBBINS REAERATION
Seg # 1 Reach # 1 Seg Mi I D.O. 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 Flow 1
1 1 0.00 6.47 6.63 4.51 10.70
1 1 0.10 6.54 6.59 4.47 10.70
1 1 0.20 6.61 6.56 4.43 10.70
1 1 0.30 6.68 6.52 4.40 10.70
1 1 0.40 6.73 6.48 4.36 10.70
1 1 0.50 6.79 6.45 4.32 10.70
1 1 0.60 6.84 6.41 4.29 10.70
1 1 0.70 6.89 6.37 4.25 10.70
1 1 0.80 6.93 6.34 4.21 09 /Q10.70
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi 1 D.O. 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 Flow I
4.z3rWJ L SLOPE IS 5 FPM/BOD = 25 MG/L
O'CONNOR-DOBBINS REAERATION
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : GRANITE FALLS WASTE WATER TREATMNT PLANT
Receiving Stream : GUNPOWDER CREEK
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The End D.O. is 6.93 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 6.34 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 4.21 mg/l.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
DO Min
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach #
WLA WLA WLA
CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flc
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1
Reach 1
6.47 0.00 1
37.50 27.90 0.00 0.9000C

x/z.
SAv')
• LEtvonz-G,0NPom4wor
&ffiveWl
Off/,2fO)
L�1S1:�
j�•raoilz w
jAs1241 N•�"
7Qro5C 3 (IS
74,oa= 4.3 c
0044.7 ie. e
3oq zs 5.8 c44
Nz
de
.6 l
02141.7655`ali
3
is v14
sR T.e.
•cg•
•
0 7.141'i 1680 `11
7r710 5..1 (SS
7?(O., = ,s,4
QA,4 T. 3oLIs
3cZ= 9.8,1)
o 2141 ? 3355 '91 --
!.+=143
79105 = 0.2
7q row L 0. 33 -
3?0Z • (J.4
0244i74070'+(
0/%' 34 4- Ai
7gt05: 1.1 cis
19100: I% ((a
Qh�4. 44.,is
3oqz. t‘ cis
qu lW744AZ
'�c� (•to LA
cArAy►gA a+` -
ENO C$pp O.0 5
N8p 0 : 0. 00
FROn- mod! ( fog, 5 pecvlAt,VG EX pnwisty 1-0
z.0INA.

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Greg Nizich
DATE: January 19, 1995
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
COUNTY Caldwell
PERMIT NUMBER NC0021890
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Granite Falls WWTP
P. O. Drawer 10
Granite Falls, N. C. 28630
2. Date of Investigation: 1-10-95
3. Report Prepared By: James R. Reid
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number:
IvA
Shuford Wise
704-396-7111
5. Direction to Site: From the intersection of SR 1107 with Highway
321 in anite Falls, proceed east for 1.6 miles to the intersection of SR
1754 (Meandering Way) and turn right. After 0.3 mile, bear to the right on
subdivision road. Continue to the end of the road at the treatment facility
adjacent to Gunpowder Creek beyond the dam.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude
350 47' 51"
Longitude: 810 24' 40"
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge
point on map.
U.S.G.S.
Quad No. D13SW U.S.G.S. Quad Name Granite Falls
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application? yes
Yes No If No, explain:
Page 1
6,z,45\ sk

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Hilly, 20% slopes, not in
flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: 500 feet.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Gunpowder Creek.
a. Classification: WS-IV CA
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 03-08-32
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
Receiving stream is affected by the backwaters of the small dam 0.8
mile downstream of the outfall. Adjacent land on this section is
undeveloped and wooded. Fishing is the primary activity along this
section, with many fishermen parking at the WWTP_ Below the small dam
on the Gunpowder Creek arm of Lake Hickory, there is considerable
subdivision development. Downstream uses include boating, fishing,
swimming, and water supply. The outfall is at the beginning of the
critical area section of Gunpowder Creek. Although the Town of
Hickory's water supply intake is just downstream of Highway 321, the
WS-IV CA classification is carried downstream to Highway 127 due to the
possibility of reverse currents in the lake when the hydroelectric
facility is halted. A WS-V & B classification is continued at Highway
127 due to downstream water supply uses and swimming activities.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted 0.750 and 0.900 MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater Treatment
facility? 0.750 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design
capacity 0.750 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations
to Construct issued in the previous two years:
Construction of a temporary pump station and force main (300 gpd) to
serve a dry industry (the industry's domestic wastewater) in the Town
of Sawmills. - A-to-C Staff Report for subject industry was dated
11-30-94.
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed
wastewater treatment facilities: Existing facilities consist of the
following:
Aerated grit chamber
Self-cleaning bar screen
Influent Parshall flume with continuous flow monitoring
Splitter box with adjustable slide gates
Caustic feed system
Page 2

2 parallel oxidation ditches with 3 submersible pumps each
for circulation and air injection
Air compressors
2 parallel peripheral feed clarifiers
2 variable speed sludge return pumps (one for each clarifier)
Variable speed sludge waste pump
Scum pump station
Chlorine contact chamber with gaseous chlorination
Rectangular weir for continuous effluent flow monitoring
Cascade aeration
Aerobic digester (old circular contact stabilization plant)
Vacuum assisted sludge drying beds with polymer feed system
Auxiliary power with automatic switch on
Land application of sludge
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater
facilities: none
treatment
g. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Ammonia, chlorine.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Program was placed on "inactive"
status 11-4-92.
in development approved
should be required not needed X
2. Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme: Aerobic digestion, lime
addition, thickening, land application.
a.
If residuals are being land applied, please
WQ 001618
Residuals Contractor AMSCO INCORPORATED
Telephone Number 919-766-0328
b. Residuals stabilization: PSRP X PFRP
c.
Landfill:
specify DEM Permit Number
OTHER
d. Other disposal/utilization scheme (Specify):
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): III
4. SIC Codea (s) : n/a
Wastewater Code(s) of actual wastewater, not particular facilities i.e., non -
contact cooling water discharge from a metal plating company would be 14, not
56.
Primary 01 Secondary
Main Tre
tment Unit Code: 100_3
Page 3

PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any
public monies involved. (municipals only)? no
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: none
3. Important SOC, JOC, or Compliance Schedule dates: (Please indicate) none
Submission of Plans and Specifications
Begin Construction
Complete Construction
Date
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of the non -
discharge options available. Please provide regional perspective for each
option evaluated.
Spray Irrigation: Not feasible.
Connection to Regional Sewer System: This is a regional sewer system.
Subsurface: Not feasible.
Other disposal options:
5. Other Special Items:
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Renew permit at 0.9 MGD in accordance with the facility's request (which was
transmitted in a seperate envelope dated 1-19-95). Also, eliminate the facility's
cyanide monitoring requirement as requested by the permittee.
The Town's cyanide limitation is 45.0 ug/1; during the past 24 consecutive months
21 cyanide values have been "less than detectable". Of the remaining three
positive cyanide values, the maximum concentration was 1.5 ug/1. With no
industrial flow and with the Town's past performance, there is no reason for the
Town of Granite Falls to monitor for cyanide.
Permittee has requested re -rating of the plant from 0.750 MGD to 0.900 MGD without
modification of the plant. Re -rating of the plant has been requested to allow the
Town to plan for and install sewer lines to serve the development around the North
shore of Lake Hickory and the increasingly developed Highway 321 corridor from
Hickory to Granite Falls.
Page 4

The existing facility should be able to be re -rated at 0.9 MGD. Two copies of
"Technical Evaluation in Support of Request to Re -Rate Wastewater Treatment Plant
Capacity" are attached (three were received; one retained in ARO). Also,
attached are my handwritten calculations comparing normal requirements for a 0.9
MGD plant with'llthe existing facility's components. All components should be able
to process 0.9 MGD. Aeration capacity seems to be the limiting factor; it would
be substantially exausted at 0.9 MGD. Since the increase in flow to 0.9 MGD (from
the current daily average of approximately 0.4 MGD) would be gradual, aeration
capacity is not of great concern. Should the need for increased aeration equipment
manifest itself, such equipment could be easily added. If necessary, a moratorium
on additional connections would be imposed until upgraded aeration equipment were
added.
Si nature o Re•• t Preparer
ater Quality Regional Supervisor
/ -- 1 9y 1s---
Date
Page 5