NC0020338_Environmental Assessment_19961004

KP®ES DOCUMENT SCANNING; COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit: NCO020338
Yadkinville WWTP
Document Type: Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
Correspondence
Instream Assessment (67B)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit - -
History
Document Date: October 4, 1996
W12X ctmcumeat IM pz`iaatect 013M$-erase XMFser-ignore Wny
content o�fire srex-�amide

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 'T41• •
Division of Water Quality A&
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary D ' E H N R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
October 4, 1996
MEMO
To: Melba McGee
From: Michelle Suverkrubbe
Through: Alan Clark Alr--
Subject: Yadkinville Environmental Assessment
NPDES Permit#NC 0020338
Yadkin County
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has signed off on the above project and now
releases it to DEHNR for review. Six copies are attached. We would like to request that this
document get priority status and a quick, no time extension review through DEHNR,if possible,
prior to circulation through the Clearinghouse.
Thank you. Please give me a call at(919) 733-5083, ext. 567 if you should have any
questions.
cc: Andy McDaniel -DWQ- Instream Assessment
Steve Mauney-DWQ- WSRO
mis:\yadkinea.doc
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

f
Memorandum
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section, Instream Assessment Unit
To: Michelle Suverkrubbe
From: Andrew McDaniel AA
Through: Carla Sanderson lSC]
Ruth Swanck�ZS
Date: October 4, 1996
Subject: Review of Revised Environmental Assessment
Town of Yadkinville
NPDES Permit No, NCO020338
The Instream Assessment Unit (IAU) has reviewed the second revision of
Yadkinville's EA, submitted tolthe Division on September 12, 1996.. Listed below are
the three principal concerns which remained after the IAU reviewed the first.revision:
• The planning period was not stated in the document.
• A wastewater characterization of Unifi's expanded contribution was not presented.
• A cost comparison for spray application versus a conventional treatment plant was
not presented.
The second revision of the EA has addressed each of these concerns to a degree,
although not to the level of detail we typically like to see in environmental assessment
documents. Engineers in the Permits and Engineering Unit (P&E) have reviewed the cost
estimates for spray application presented in the second revision and have indicated that
the estimates are reasonable. Therefore, the IAU recommends that the EA be released to
the CIearinghouse for further review.
Since the review process for the Yadkinville EA has been more involved than
most, a summary of this process to date is outlined below:
• After reviewing the original;EA, Andrew McDaniel and Coleen Sullins co-author of
the memo to Monica Swihart, dated April 17, 1996, outlined concerns about the
proposed expansion of the Yadkinville WWTP.
• In response to comments submitted by the Division, Yadkinville's consulting
engincering firm, Environmental Services, submit a revised EA on August 1.2, 1996.
• The IAU reviewed the revised EA and continued to have concerns about the project.
Per Michelle Suverkrubbe's recommendation, Andrew McDaniel sent a letter directly
to Environmental Services outlining subject matter the EA should address in more
detail.
i

r
• In response to this letter Engineering Services submitted the second revision of the
EA on September 12, 1996.
• The IAU and P&E review the second revision and agree; the document should be
released to the Clearinghouse for further review as stated above in this memo.
cc: Colee11 Sullins
Tom Poe
Larry W. Adams, Town Manager
Winston-Salem Regional Office

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
IT4
Health and Natural Resources o
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary E) E H N FI
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
August 27, 1996
David Dickenson, P.E.
Engineering Services, P.A.
P.O. Box 1849
Garner, NC 27529
Subject: Yadkinville Environmental,Assessment
NPDES Permit No. NCO020338
Yadkin County
Dear Mr. Dickenson:
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has reviewed the revised copy of the
Yadkinville Environmental Assessment (EA) dated August 12, 1996. After reviewing the
EA it appears that several issues need closer examination before the document is sent out to
the Clearinghouse for final comments. These issues are outlined below:
• Further explanation/detail should be provided concerning the planning period addressed
by the proposed action and how the 3.0 MGD need was derived. Page 2 of the EA
states tl]at one industry (presumably Unifi) is planning expansions which will total 1.59
MGD in six years. Since the town is approaching its 1.0 MGD capacity now, it appears
that in six years the expanded plant will already be near 80% of its capacity. Tile town
should be aware that per 15A NCAC 2H .0223 (1) no sewer line extensions will be
issued for a WWTP at or over 80%, capacity until an engineering evaluation of future
wastewater treatment needs is submitted to the Division. Therefore, It is in Yadkinville's
long range planning interests that the EA clearly state the planning period for this
expansion (i.e. 6 years, 20 years). In addition, page 2 of the EA states that the planned
IndUSLrial pi'j-3LI.uti0I", ..i �:iiullly.
population projection was not clearly presented in the EA along with an estimate of
increased residcntial-waste flow. The EA should outline all anticipated industrial
expansions as well as increased population pl'oject.ions to ensure the town's future
wastewater trcatinents needs will he met.
• Although Yadkinville has not had chronic problems passing its toxicity test, the WWTP
did fail once in 1994 and once again in 1995. In order to prevent escalating toxicity
problems it is important that the town be fully prepared to treat the increased industrial
waste flow. Therefore, the EA should present the anticipated characteristics of the waste
stream from Unifi including oxygen consuming wastes, toxicants, and color. Past.
treatment performance may not, he indicative of I'uture performance especially if the new
industry is sending, the plant highly' rc fr'activc BOD. A waste charactcri ation wil l aid the
town in evaluating the need for a pretreatment program for Unifi while in the design
phase.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Ai`irmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

}
4
The EA should present a proactive plan to prevent toxins from entering the receiving
stream instead of a plan to react to them as described on page 11. If color will be a
significant component of the waste stream the EA should outline measures for
minimizing color in the effluent.
• Many of the criteria necessary for the implementation of a spray irrigation system appear
to be met in Yadkin county. However, the EA only gave a brief estimate of some of the
costs of such a system and never gave an overall figure. Before this type of treatment
facility is ultimately discounted the EA should include a detailed cost analysis for a spray
irrigation system which is compared to a cost analysis for a conventional WWTP.
Note that an error was made in a letter sent to the Town of Yadkinville dated
October 26, 1995, in which speculative limits were listed for the proposed expansion of the
WWTP. In the letter, the residual chlorine limit was listed as 28 mg/L. The letter should
have read that the residual chlorine limit would be 28 ug/L. This error was reflected in the
original EA submitted, however the error appears to have heen corrected in the revised EA.
If you have; any questions concerning speculative limits or any issues outlined in this letter
please do not hesitate to call me [phone] ext 513.
Sincerely,
Andrew McDaniel Jr.
Environmental Model6r
cc: Michelle Suverkruhhe
COICCII Sulli;IS
Tom Poc
Larry W. Adams, Town Manager
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Central Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ,
Jonathan I Howes, Secretary ® FI
John N. Morris, Director
t
May 23, 199b ,��-1 e\GC
Mr. David Dickenson, P.E. rs
Engineering Services, PA , emu
P.O. Box 1849 �� � Ltd
Garner, NC 27529 ��1
RE: Proposed Water Treatment Plant Expansion, Town of Yadkinville
Engineering Services Project No. 96120
Dear Mr. Dickenson:
The Division of Water Resource s'(DWR) has reviewed your letter of May 21, 1996,
received by facsimile on the same date, which described Yadkinville's proposal to expand their
water supply intake on South Deep Creek. We contacted Mr. Curtis Weaver of USGS regarding
7Q 10 estimates for South Deep Creek. Mr. Weaver reviewed the 7Q 10 low flow estimate for the
creek at the U.S. Highway 601 Bridge and estimated the 7Q 10 to be about 8A cfs.
The DWR has no objection to Yadkinville's plans to withdraw up to 1.7 cfs when flow
downstream of their intake is at or below 8.4 cfs. We also have no objection to Yadkinville
withdrawing as much water as it needs when flows downstream of the intake are at or above 8.4
cfs, the 7Q 10 low flow.
Please contact me at 919-715-5424 if you have any questions or need any additional
information.
Sincerely,
Steven E. Reed
Environmental Supervisor
cc: John Sutherland, Woody Yonts, DWR
uth`Swanel;-DEMD
Lee Spencer, DEH, Winston Salem
Stephanie Goudreau, Joe Mickey, WRC
Joe Holbrook, Paul Jordan, Dept. Of Commerce
Rob Williams, NRCS
Larry Adams, Town of Yadkinville
P.O. Box 27687,Raleigh,North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer W%recycled/ 10%post-consumer paper

FROM : ENGINEERING SERVICES FAX NO . : .9196627320 05-21-96 05:48P P.02
d
ENGlNEEitI NG `�� '
5 E H V l C E S , P A
Mr. Steven E. peed,Environmental Supervisor
Aquatic Ecology Section
518 v11 m w Ck)�I:k, Division of Water Resources
I'.O, Bm 1841) P.O. Box 27687
GAKNI.E;, NC 27529 Raleigh,NC 27611-7687
■
1)11)'11 nN): RE: Proposed Water Treatment Plant Expansion,Town of Yadkinville
919,662.7272 Engineering Services Project No 96120
FAN!
Dear Mr. Reed.
We appreciate your taking the time to meet with us on May 13, 1996 to
discuss the proposed expansion of the Yadkinville water treatment plant. As
we discussed, the town needs to be able to produce up to 5.5 MGD of water to
satisfy the needs of their industrial and residential users. The town currently
withdraws water from the South Deep Creels, which has a normal flow near
the intake point of 69.3 efs based on a USGS document entitled Low Flop:
Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina, USGS Water Supply Paper
2403" The daily average withdrawal rate required to operate a 5.5 MGD water
treatment facility would�be 8.51 cfs.
The 7Q10 flow for the stream based historical data is 8.5 cfs. used on our
discussion, it is our understanding that whenever the stream flow is at or
below the 7Q10 flow, the town will be able to withdraw up to 1.7 cfs froze. the
stream. It is also our understanding that the tovm can withdraw as much water
as the town needs as long as the flow rate downstream of the intake point is at
or above the -7Q18 flow d 8.5 cfs.
It is the town's intent to provide a reservoir to supplement the town's water
Supply during periods of low flow. 'I Ws reservoir would be designed to satisfy
the low flow condition of the 60Q40 flow, which is the lowest average flow for
a 60 day period that would be anticipated in 40 years based on a statistical
analysis of historical flow data. The size of the reservoir anticipated will be
approximately 250 million gallons. The reservoir will be of the offstream type,
located to try and minimize adverse environmental impacts.
A c 4�M,�A I'I'M 1 NT I lI
EV( FI.lFNC'I"
i

FROM : ENGINEERING SERVICES FRX NO. : 9196627320 05-21-96 05:49P P .03
Mr. Steven Reed May 21, 1996 Page 2
While we understand that the Division of Water Resources cannot approve the
project as a whole at this point, we would like a confirmation from your officc
that the withdrawal rates expressed in this letter are agreeable to you, and that
the flow data expressed in this letter are consistent with your knowledge of the
stream flow conditions_
The Town of Yadkinville is anxious to begin the process of planning,
designing, permitting, and ultimately constructing the facilities necessary to be
able to ,provide its user base with a 5.5 MGD water treatment facility. Your
assistance in this matter is grcatly appreciatcd, and we request that you reply
to this letter as soon as possible. If you have specific questions about any of
the information contained in this letter,please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
ENGFNEERING SERVICES, P.A.
y1
,David Dickenson, P.E.
cc: Woody Yonts, Division of Water Resources, DEHNR
Larry Adams, Tovm of•Yadkinville

-E,,N cINEER=.INc ; May,14, 1996. - t �
S E R V I C E S.,, 1' p'
Mr. Don Safrit _
Water Quality- Technical Support Branch ,• .7,: '.;� �''t:~'"` -
5i8•Vivac,r: Couur.- ; DEHNR
P.O. BOX 1849 .' P.O. Bok 29535
-.GARNER, NC 27529 `Raleigh,NC 27626-0535 -
TFi,F.P�rONF.: RE: Proposed Yadkinville Waste-Water TreatmenfiPlant Expansion -
\ 919.662.7272 Engineering Services Project No. 96145 -
' - Fix:
TDt-a, Mr Ca frit f
919.662,7320 _
As we discussed in the meeting held in your office on May 13, 1996; the-, -
' Town of Yadkinville would like to.consider-future expansions,of'their waste
water treatment plant to as much as 5.0'MGD. In order)to, assist them in
- deciding whether or,not they wish to considef such an expansion atAhis,time,
'we" would'like to request that speculative limits'be provided to-us for total Ln �_.
F' flows of 4.0 MGD'and 5.0 M_ GD. , _ -� r
' In addition,-we ma a 1 for an upgrade of the,existin waste water-treatmerit `u '
Y" .Ap Y Pg g _ r r�
plant-to 1.2-MGD once the environmental assessment and NPDES permit has o
_ been approved. If an-upgrade of the plant to 1.2 MG1346uld afflict the current
_ permit limits, we would also like speculative limits to be issued for 1.2 MGD.
`u We,appreciate your assistance with this,matter. If you Have any questions,
_ please do not hesitate to call.
. - `Sincerely,
ENGINEERING SERVICES P.A. ' s
(D 0
\ David Dickenson, P.E: 1 `
cc: Larry Adams, Manager; Town of Yadkinville _
"n COMM[I'MENT TO -
EXCELLENCE"

w
MAY 5 mo
MEETING MINUTES
TOWN OF YADKINVILLE
PROPOSED WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION
MAY 13, 1996 r
NAME REPRESENTING TELEPHONE
David Dickenson Engineering Services [phone]
Harry Dail Engineering Services [phone]
Jim Johnston DEM - Winston-Salem [phone]
Regional Office
Don Safrit DEM - Water Quality [phone]
Technical Support Branch ext 519
Bo McMinn DEM - Pretreatment [phone]
ext 539
Tom S. Poe DEM - Pretreatment [phone]
ext 522
Paul Jordan Department of Commerce [phone]
Joe Holbrook Department of Commerce [phone]
Meeting minutes are as follows:
I. Based on review of monitoring reports by the Winston-Salem Regional Office of
DEM, the Town of Yadkinville had previously allocated all of the capacity of their
existing waste water treatment plant. The existing plant has a permitted capacity of
1.0 MGD.
2. An environmental assessment has been submitted by Engineering Services for a
proposed expansion of the waste water treatment plant from 1.0 MGD to 3.0 MGD.
The environmental assessment has passed through the staff review stage and has been
returned to the Engineer with comments.
3. The Town of Yadkinville would like to be able to provide an additional 40,000
gallons per day of flow to Unifi as soon as possible. This amount of flow was
originally granted to Unifi, but was taken away and allocated to other users. Unifi
would like have this flow returned to them.
4. If Unifi is granted an additional 40,000 gallons of flow, the pretreatment permit for
Unifi may also need to be amended to allow for the expanded flow.
5. Since the Town of Yadkinville is currently under a flow moratorium, the Town
cannot allocate any additional waste water flow. Since the Town has been placed
under a moratorium, they have undergone an extensive infiltration and inflow
removal program in an effort to reduce the flows at the plant. Plant flows are now

Meeting Minutes May 13, 1996 Page 2
well below the plant capacity, and the Regional Office of DEM has agreed to review
the plant flows, infiltration and inflow work, and the Town's ongoing program to
repair inflow and infiltration problems in an effort to allow the Town to allocate flow
that has been made available under the existing permit. It will be the Town's
responsibility to submit copies of monitoring records, inflow and infiltration work
performed, copies of meeting minutes of the Town Board where the budget items for
I&I work was approved, and other materials as necessary to support the Town's
request for additional flow allocation. The basis for the additional flow allocation and
the lifting of the flow moratorium will be the difference between the permitted flow
of the plant and the actual flows at the waste water treatment plant.
6. The Town may also wish to consider expanding the plant to a capacity larger than that
requested in the environmental assessment. The Town would like to have speculative
limits issued for flows of 4.0 MGD and 5.0 MGD to determine whether or not they
wish to amend the environmental assessment and request a larger plant expansion.
7. The Town may also wish to have their existing plant upgraded to 1.2 MGD. The
Town understands that this request can be considered only after the environmental
assessment and the NPDES permit for the expansion have been approved, and that an
engineering justification for the upgrade can be provided. If the upgrade to 1.2 MGD
would change the existing permit limits, the Town would like speculative limits to be
issued for a 1.2 MGD flow.
8. The Town of Yadkinville would like to be able to provide additional sewage capacity
to serve the needs of Unifi, which will need an additional 530,000 gallons per day of
flow in 24 months, an additional 530,000 gallons per day of flow in 48 months, and
an additional 530,000 gallons per day of flow in 74 months. Design of the waste
water treatment plant expansion will be intended to allow for these expansions, and to
be able to handle the type of waste water that the industry will generate.
Copies of these meeting minutes will be distributed to all attendees and to the Town of
Yadkinville. If you have any questions or comments about the meeting minutes, please
call our office as soon as possible.
Signed:
ENGINEERING SERVICES, P.A.
ouwl
David Dickenson,

Barnwell's Desktop UBOD model
The ultimate CBOD may be calculated by using a desktop model derived by Thomas
Barnwell. This model determines the least squares fit regression equation based upon the data
from the test. Data points from the long-term BOD test are entered into the model, which
predicts a UBOD , (or the UBOD = X output) and the predicted first-order decay, (k) of the
sample. The decay rate is represented by the slope of the predicted curve and the UBOD is
determined from the asymptote, (the point of the curve at which it straightens out and would
approach infinity on the time scale; the curve is a log curve).
The program is menu driven and is easy to use, but it does not have a good editor. Therefore,
be careful in entering data or you may need to start over. Most of the IBM computers have
screen menus and batch files to initiate the UBOD Program. Once you have initiated the
UBOD model, choose the "Input Data" option. At the prompt, input the number of samples
taken. The test may have been run for 180 days, but the BOD may have only been measured
on 19 separate days over that period, therefore you would enter 19, (often the BOD was taken
on day zero, which is also counted). A screen will appear then which asks you to fill in the
day and corresponding cummulative BOD. (Note: if you entered the wrong number of
samples, you cannot edit the table and you must begin again).
After you have completed this, hit F10. This will put you at the bottom of the screen where
you will be asked for a first and second guess for the bottle decay rate. Good starting points
are usually 0. 1 and-0.3, respectively. The choices for decay rate input should reflect an
expected range "f the bottle decay rate. At this point you should save these inputs as the
predicted decay rate may be out of this range and the model will bomb. To do this, hit FIQ
again to return to the "main menu". Choose option 4, "Save the data", and name this file
accordingly. Successive iterations are run by the model until the decay rate (k) is found
within this first and second guess criteria.
Once you have saved the data set, run the program using menu option 3, "Run the data
through the program". Some IBM's bomb-out! Depending on which IBM you are using, a
graph of the regression will be displayed or the program will display the output and bomb
out. If your computer displays the graph, simply write down the k, (predicted first-order
decay), the UBOD, (predicted ultimate BOD), and the sum of squares. If your computer
doesn't display the graph, but instead bombs out, you must hit the "pause" button on the
keyboard very quickly after running the program. You will see a display of these three
numbers as well as some of the output from the iterations. Again, write down the k, UBOD,
and sum of squares.
What comprises UBOD, and how are the components determined...
Originally, the Level B model used an ultimate BOD concentration with a single decay rate.
As modeling improved, this input was broken down into its two components; nitrogenous
biochemical oxygen demand (NBOD) and carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD).
These two components use different multipliers in their model applications.
The NBOD uses a multiplier of 4.5 which is based upon the stochiometric equations of the
ammonia 1 oxygen reaction:
NH3 + 202 ----------> { NO2- + NO3- ) + H2O + H+
[4.5 mg of oxygen are required to completely nitrify 1.0 mg of NH3]
While Barnwell suggests that nitrification suppression be used for the sample analysist, our
protocol does not suppress the nitrification, (NH3 ----------> (NO-2 + No-3) ) process taking
place within the sample. In fact, the nitrification data is used to derive an NBOD input to the
model:

NBOD = 4.5 * (Final NOx - Initial NOx ).
If the NOx concentration decreases, denitrification may be taking place. You should also note
what is happening to Total Nitrogen, (TN). The TN should be fairly constant during the test,
(Note: TN = Organic-N + N 13 + NOx = TKN + NOx). Most water quality books will
have a good description of the nitrogen cycle, which may give you some insight if the data
looks strange.* When the NO. concentration decreases, the initial ammonia concentration
multiplied by 4.5 may give you a reasonable estimate of NBOD, (although you must be
careful to note whether any organic nitrogen may also have been converted to ammonia and
subsequently nitrate/ nitrite).
This number, (NBOD) is then subtracted from the UBOD = X output from Barnwell's model.
Since UBOD is composed of NBOD and CBOD, subtracting out the NBOD component from
the ultimate BOD, leaves only the CBOD component:
CBOD = UBOD - NBOD.
The carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) is then divided by the BOD sample
reading on day five, (CBOD/ BOD5) to determine a multiplier or conversion number to use
for the BOD5 limit in the modeling analysis so the entire oxygen demand can be represented.
Modeling analysis are run with CBOD inputs, (based upon the BOD5 limit given in the
NPDES Permit), therefore given the difference in resilient nature of different biochemical
oxygen demands, the multiplier will represent the CBOD component and rate at which the
waste is degrading.
What does_a_Long-Term BOD reveal....
NPDES Permit limits are based upon a BOD5 sample reading. This time frame was
developed based on the 5-day time of travel of the Thames River, where much of the original
work was done. While the five day incubation period works well for administrative purposes,
it does not protect for the actual exertion which may be far more dramatic. The graph,
(below) indicates the possible exertion of an effluent sample upon a receiving stream.
ONO
asyrnPtote
wtema
sutfiaent .
rytnumberol nitrogenous biochemical oxygen
BOD oTam
demand,NBOD
(w)
Hui fear,
dcd r•
Wat �dUkj
ment Water Quality
er ovaulY
shown
chobatwg GeorgeT loos and Edward D:Schroeder,
NO line
8A -WesleyPubishin9 ComPanY,Inc.
ddison
......................................::
P.
121,
lncliern>CafY(3e
.0 3C?3..:.:...:.:.:.:...:..
5-days
'rime
t "Least Squares Estimates of BOD Parameters",Thomas O.Barnwell,Jr. A.M.ASCE.,Journal of the Environmental
Engineering Division, Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 106, No. EE6, December, 1980.
*Principles of Surface Water Quality Modeling and C20trol, Robert V.Thomann and John A. Mueller, Harper
Collins Publishers, 1987, pp. 273 - 274, 297 plus.

i
;
y�.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
April 17, 1996
MEMORANDUM
TO: Monica Sw1hart
FROM: Andy McDaniel
Coleen Sullins
g
THROUGH: Carla Sanderson
Ruth Swanek
1(1i�on Safrit.*
SUBJECT: Yadkinville Environmental Assessment
NPDES Permit ## NCO020338
Yadkin County
We have completed our review of the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the proposed
Yadkinville wastewater treatment plant expansion from 1 MGD to 3 MGD. The basis of
the need for the expansion is established as industrial user growth and continued
population growth of the area. Based on current flows to the facility and allocated flows
to signiFcant users, we concur that additional waste treatment capacity is needed. The
document briefly mentions that a current industry, Unifi, is constructing an expansion
that will have high capacity demands and that similar industrial expansions are projected.
Further explanation/detail should be provided of the planning period addressed by the
proposed action and how the 3 MGD need was derived. The document should also
provide an analysis of the waste characteristics that are projected with the known
additional industrial flows, including a discussion of how the treatment plant will ensure
that adequate treatment is provided for those constituents. For future projected industrial
growth, the document should discuss what measures will be taken to control the
introduction of toxic substances.
The Environmental ConsequenceslIntroduction of Toxic Substances portion of the
document states that "little control can he exerted" over users of the system. Control can
^�.•^•^:�i rr� r.i,� , .rCi?Tii 'i'Ti�ii��' ;�;^ n r^i ni•�it:iient veriii!ts.
i)G CnCi L�U Vl'L] iri��,;u iu. u,,.,..�. �,. ... __ .. _. i i ii�.. �ii ., r .
This section also states that the treatment plant will'be designed fclr domestic waste with
some provisions made for known pollutants or contaminants that may occur as part of an
t< industrial process". Therefore, the document needs to also address how future industrial
growth will be handled through the pretreatment program to ensure that those substances
5 `l which the facility is not designed to treat will be adequately addressed prior to them being
discharged into the system.
In the Eutrophication of Existing Waters section of the report, a reduction of risk of
eutrophication is projected as a result of this expansion project. since improvements to
the system will substantially prevent nutrient loading in the wastewater. How the
treatment plant will prevent nutrient'loading is not discussed. The discharge will be
limited for ammonia, as mentioned in the project summary. However, is the treatment
plant also planned to be designed to provide biological nutrient removal (removing other
forms of imi-ogee and phosphorous)'? The removal of aninlonia in wastewater results in
COnvers1011 Of ffic ammonia to nitrates and n1tiites. If denitrlficanon is not proposed, the
nlltrierlts are still discharged, but in a different form than amnlonia.

We recognize that the construction of the wastewater treatment facility is proposed to
occur on the same property that the existing facility is located. Therefore, the
construction of the facility itself is not projected to have an impact on the immediate land
use. However, the expansion of the treatment plant is based on future industrial and
population growth in the Yadkinville area and that growth will affect file existing land
use. The impact on land use, and subsequently the environment, associated with the
growth should be discussed and any, measures proposed to reduce the impact should also
be discussed in the report.
A summary should be included in the report of any instream data collected by the facility
to document the existing water quality conditions. Additionally, an evaluation should be
provided of any ambient data that is available in the vicinity of the discharge.
Information on the location of ambient stations may be obtained from the Instream
Assessment Unit (Andy McDaniel @ 919/733-5083, ext. 513).
Based on the analysis done on a spray irrigation system, it appears that this is all option
which should be considered more closely. Yadkin County is a very rural county with
Yadkinville being the largest town with a population of 2,670. Given the rural nature of
the area and the preliminary soils analysis, which states that the soils are generally
suitable for land application, spray irrigation seems to be a potential alternative that
should be evaluated more seriously. The report rejects spray irrigation on the basis that
this alternative is a different type of wastewater treatment system than Yadkinville
currently has and as a result would require an additional set of personnel to run the
system. In addition, the report suggests that maintaining a different type of treatment
system could cause administrative problems such as maintaining separate testing
procedures, filing separate monitoring reports, etc. These arguments are not supported by
a cost analysis. Additionally, the report erroneously states that an equal area of set aside
is required for a spray irrigation system. Equal set aside areas are required with
subsurface disposal systems, but not for surface land application systems. The Town
should conduct a cost analysis for implementing a spray irrigation system before this type
of treatment facility is ultimately discounted.
No analysis is provided in the EA of the potential to implement a reuse system. With a
significant number of industrial users as the basis for the needed expansion, the ability for
them to use reclaimed water as a source water for process and nonprocess water supply
needs should be investigated and discussed in the report.
As a mitigative measure the report states that the Town will try to implement
conservation programs to reduce the amount of waste flow associated with the growth.
Implementation of building codes which require use of low flow fixtures in new
construction and reconstruction is one method of reducing lire wasic ilUw prvjeuiu6 fro,,;
new growth. Low flow fixtures will ensure that capacity is available for continued
longterm growth. Additionally, the'report does not evaluate the extent that infiltration
and inflow (1&1) affects the existing capacity of the system. if the Town has an I&I
problem, addressing the problem may also free up capacity within file system for
wastewater treatment.
{n conclusion, an eri,or was made in a letter sent to the Town dated October 26, 1995, in
which speculative limits were listed for the proposed expansion of the Yadkinville
wastewater- treatment plant. In the letter. the residual chlorine limit was listed as 28 nrg/l.
The letter should have read that the residual chlorine limit would be 28 µe. This error
was reflected in the EA submitted and should be corrected. The Town will be notified in
writing of our error.
cc: Dave Goodrich
Tom Poe
Steve Mauney

ENGINEERING .
sE RVICEs _PA March 1, 1996 ]� '
Ms. Monica
Swlhart
51S VILLAGE COURT' . North Carolina Division-of-Environmental.Management 041
P.O. Box 1849 _ P.O. Box 29535
GAP,NE`. NC 27529 Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
TLLEPHONL: - RE: Environmental Assessment for the Yadkinville Waste Water Treatfnennt
919-662.7272 Plant Expansion, Project#96115 �.
F''x' Dear Ms. Swihart:
0A C40—
919.662.7320
Enclosed as you have requested are four (4) copies of the Environmental
Assessment for the proposed expansion of the waste water treatment plant for
the Town of Yadkinville. The proposed expansion wiil increase the capacity of
the plant from 1.0 MGD to 3.0 MGD; The report outlunes the known impacts
of the proposed project.
Please begin your staff review of this document. If you have any questions, or
need additional copies of the report, please call me at [phone] or (919)
859-3861,
Sincerely,
ENGINEERING SERCES, P.A
' r
David Dickenson, P.E.
cc: Larry Adams, Town of Yadkinville
TV
_—.
"A COMMITMENT TO

' AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Title of Activity i
Town of Yadkinville
Expansion of Waste Water Treatment Plant
Responsible Ay-ency
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
I
Name, Address and Telephone Number of State Agency Contact Person
Ms. Monica Swihart
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
' P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Telephone: [phone] ext. 567
t
"tap .
r
+_• 12297 .•c_
.' C-j
' i
OAV I D
ENGINEERING SERVICES P.�.
P.O. Box 1849 Garner, NC 27529
[phone] FAX [phone]
March 11, 1996
1
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Page I
PROJECT SUMMARY Page I
NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT Page 2 f'
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Page 6
1 MITIGATIVE MEASURES Page 10
LIST OF TABLES
Table I - Speculative Limits Page 2
Table 2 - Treatment Plant Performance Page 8
LIST OF APPENDICES I.
Appendix 1 -National Wetland Inventory Map Page 12
Appendix 2 - Speculative Limits Page 13
Appendix 3 - Copies of Daily Monitoring Reports Page 14
Appendix 4 - Schematic of Treatment Process Page 15
I.
1
I

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 1
EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
General
Yadkin County lies in the northwestern part of North Carolina, existing almost entirely
within the rolling Piedmont Plateau. The county has an area of 214,400 acres. It is
bounded on the north by Surry County, on the east by Forsyth County, on the south by
Davie and Iredell Counties, and on the west by Wilkes County. The Yadkin River forms
the boundary between Yadkin, Surry, and Forsyth Counties. Yadkinville is the county
seat, and has a population of 2,670, based on information provided from the North
Carolina Office of State Planning.
Topography
Except for the small area of the Brushy Mountains in the northwestern part of the county,
Yadkin County is on the Piedmont Plateau. The average elevation is about 1,000 feet. The
lowest point in the county is about 710 feet and is on the Yadkin River at the mouth of
Deep Creek. The highest point, at the top of Brushy Mountains west of Rena, is more than
1600 feet.
' The county is drained by the Yadkin River and its tributaries, mainly Logan, Forbush,
Deep, North Deep, South Deep, and Turner Creeks. All of these streams run into the
Yadkin River along the eastern boundary of the county.
Land Use
Land use within the Yadkinville planning area is controlled by the Planning and Zoning
Board. Within the town, most of the land area is occupied by single and multi-family
Iresidences, along with some retail, commercial, and industrial businesses. The Town has j
adopted zoning ordinances to control growth and land use, and the Town reviews plans
for development to insure compliance with the zoning ordinances.
y
PROJECT SUMMARY
' The Town of Yadkinville is currently planning to expand their waste water treatment plant
from 1.0 MGD to 3.0 MGD to provide additional capacity to satisfy the anticipated
demands. Industrial use of water is currently high, and proposed industrial expansions in
the county promise to create additional demand in the near future. The expansion of the
existing treatment plant will be compatible with the existing treatment plant, providing the
same type of treatment as the existing plant. The plant will consist of 30 hour deep tank
fine bubble aeration, secondary clarifiers, and chlorination and dechlorination systems. A
schematic of the treatment system is included as Appendix 4. The water quality for the
proposed plant will be targeted toward the speculative limits provided by the Water
Quality Section of the DEHNR dated October 26, 1995. The limits expressed are as
follows:
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 2
TABLE I - SPECULATIVE LLMTS
1 Parameter Summer Limit Winter Limit
Waste Flow m d 3.0 3.0
BODS m 30.0 30.0
NH3-N m 2.0 5.2
Dissolved Oxygen m 5.0 no limit
' Total Suspend. Solids m 30.0 30.0
Fecal Coliforra #1100 mL 200 200
Residual Chlorine m 28.0 28.0
H S.U. 6-9 6-9
Based on the proposed design for the treatment plant, the Town should have no difficulty
in meeting these limits on a continuing basis.
NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The Town of Yadkinville currently operates the only large scale waste water treatment
plant in Yadkin County. As the county continues to expand, the need for waste water
treatment capacity continues to expand. Currently, the Unifi industry in constructing a
large new facility which will have high capacity demands, and similar industrial expansions
are anticipated.
The current town population is 2,670 which represents just over 8% of the population of
the entire county. The population within the town has grown 5.7% since 1990, and the
overall county population has grown 7.8% over the same period. The average growth in
North Carolina over the same time period was 6.5%, so the population in Yadkin County .
is growing faster than the state average.
r
Based on 1995 daily monitoring reports between January 1995 and August 1995, the
Town has averaged 0.8228 MGD against a permitted capacity of 1.0 MGD. In October,
1995, a Iocal industry requested that they be granted an additional 120,000 GPD of flow.
When this flow is added to the existing flow, in addition to other anticipated industrial
expansions and residential growth, the need for a plant expansion becomes clear.
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
In many cases, there are viable alternatives to the expansion of mechanical waste water
1 treatment plants that discharge to surface waters. Spray irrigation systems, constructed
wetlands, routing increased or surplus flows to existing plants that are underutilized, and
the requirement that additional industries, commercial developments, or residential
developments construct their own waste water treatment systems are all options to
increasing the capacity of an existing plant. Allowing the existing plant to remain in place
and preventing flow expansion through flow moratoriums or removal of excessive
1
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

' Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 3
infiltration and inflow are also possibilities. All of these alternatives will be discussed in
detail, with the advantages and disadvantages of each described. It is important to note
that as with any alternative analysis, virtually any option can be made to work if it is
assumed that neither time or money is a constraint. Since time and money are usually the
major constraints on the design and selection process, the alternative selected is usually
chosen because it is the most efficient and practical solution in terms of time and money
for the foreseeable future. With these criteria in mind, the discussion of the alternative
analysis is as follows:
SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
Spray irrigation systems can be an excellent means of waste water disposal. Influent can be
pretreated in ponds or lagoons to remove the majority of the BOD and suspended solids,
and the effluent from the pre treatment is then land applied over a relatively large area of
land with a suitable cover crop. The land application of waste water can create some cash
return if the cover crop selected has economic value, and so the cover crop is often
selected on that basis. Cover crops selected may be rotated on a seasonal or annual basis,
or a combination of both. Depending on the exact nature of the waste water, application
of water on the crops may provide both a consistent source of water and essential plant
' nutrients, and the result may be luxurious plant growth. Since the waste water is applied ;.
on land, it is relatively easy to inspect the application area for problems of ponding, soil
poisoning, erosion, or uneven application.
Spray irrigation also has some limitations. The land application area will be relatively
P Y g Pp Y
large, with an equal area set aside as a reserve area. All soil intended for land application r.
must be compatible with that type of treatment, and be able to drain reasonably well as
well as provide adequate treatment of the waste water in the soil. Also, it is essential that a
suitable cover crop can be maintained year round to provide a sink for the plant nutrients
tcontained in the waste water, to help prevent erosion, to provide a sink for any heavy
metals in the waste water, and to allow for a greater evaporation rate from the ground
through the increased surface area provided by Iush plant growth. Soil types or climates
which are unsuitable for year round crops or with poorly drained or very coarse soils will
not be economically adaptable to spray irrigation systems. Also, large land areas that can
be used for this type of treatment must be available at a reasonable cost. Spray irrigation
systems also require constant maintenance and observation to keep them running at peak
efficiency.
In the case of Yadkinville, some of the criteria for a spray irrigation system appear to be
met. The soil map made by the Soil Conservation Service indicates that the majority of the
soils around the Yadkinville area are moderately well drained. Soil types in the area vary, `
but the five predominant types are Cecil-Appling, Madison, Lloyd-Iredell, Hayesville-
Cecil-Halewood, and Mayodan-Wadesboro. The Cecil-Appling soils are deep, well-
drained, medium textured soils over gneiss, granite, and schist on broad, gently rolling
ridges. The Madison soils are moderately deep, well-drained, medium textured, micaceous
soils over quartz mica schist and mica gneiss, on rolling to steep ridges and slopes. The
1
' EngineEring Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 4 I
■ Lloyd-Iredell soils are deep to moderately deep, well-drained to moderately well-drained,
fine textured soils over granodiorite, on gently rolling ridges. The Hayesville-Cecil-
' Halewood soils are moderately deep, well-drained, medium textured soils over gneiss and
schist, on narrow sloping ridges and steep slopes. The Mayodan-Wadesboro soils are
deep, well-drained, medium textured soils over Triassic sandstone and shale, on broad
' gently rolling ridges. These soils are primarily upland soils, with some alluvial soils along
stream beds. All of these soils are capable of supporting crops, although selection of crop
types would have to be made carefully to match the crop with the soil type.
The climate in the area is also generally favorable for crop growth, with a long growing
g Y Pgr ggr g
season and adequate rainfall. Yadkin County has a mild, continental climate. Seasonal
changes are less extreme than areas further to the west. Summer is warm but not
excessively hot with average summer temperatures range between 70OF and 800'F. Winter
temperatures rarely drop below 0°F, but even so, cultivation of a cover crop in the winter
months can be difficult. Also, sustained cold temperatures can also freeze the upper soil
boundary, making it difficult to land apply treated waste water.
Another additional problem with trying to establish a spray irrigation system is the lack of
manpower to operate the system. The existing waste water treatment plant is still in good
condition, and it will continue to be used. Operating two such distinctly different types of
waste water treatment systems would require two sets of personnel, which would greatly
add to the cost for the Town. Also, maintaining two different systems would create some
administrative problems in maintaining testing procedures and filing monitoring reports.
Because of the problems with cold winter temperatures and the practical problems of
operating two distinctly different treatment systems at two different sites, this option was
rejected.
CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS
Constructed wetlands are an environmentally sound way of providing waste water
treatment for small communities. Constructed wetlands provide a manmade setting that
resembles a natural wetland to filter waste water. A typical constructed wetland consists
' of a primary treatment lagoon, followed by one or several cells of secondary treatment in a
constructed wetland channel. The channel is constructed of a layer of gravel, soil, and
mulch resting on a liner. Wetland species plants are rooted into the soil base within the
channel. Primary treatment removes the bulk of the biological oxygen demand and
settleable solids. The constructed wetlands function to purify the waste water by removing
plant nutrients such as nitrogen and by trapping solid particles within the root mass. Trace
metals are also absorbed by the plant roots and by other organisms in the wetland. The
root mass helps to inhibit erosion of the soil base, and the solid particles that collect over
time help to restore any soil losses. Tertiary treatment can be provided in additional cells
' similar to the secondary cells, but the liner may be deleted to allow water to infiltrate into
the soil.
i
' Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 11996 Page 5
P � g
Constructed wetlands have several advantages over mechanical treatment systems. They
are aesthetically pleasing, they can be designed to use very little energy, and they can
' provide habitat for some wetland species. Constructed wetlands also have some
disadvantages to mechanical treatment systems. Their treatment efficiency is subject to
temperature and sunlight, there is little or no opportunity to fine tune the treatment
process by mechanical control, the plants and organisms in the cells can be very sensitive
to toxins in the waste water, and replacement or maintenance is difficult and time
consuming. Constructed wetlands normally also require a much larger land area than
mechanical treatment systems.
It is important to note that both mechanical treatment systems and constructed wetlands
both use similar biological processes to treat and purify water. Since constructed wetlands
do not have mechanical aeration, the water tends to have a lower oxygen content, and the I
bacteria that digest the waste water are Iargely facultative or anaerobes. Bacteria that
' digest the carbon in the'more oxygen rich environments of mechanical treatment plants
tend be obligate aerobes, as well as facultative bacteria. In either type of plant, it is likely
that all types of bacteria will exist, and in either case, the processes by which the bacteria
take up the carbon to incorporate into their cell structure is similar. `
' In this case, constructed wetlands would likely be a poor choice for waste water
treatment. The growing population in Yadkin County coupled with the industrial input to
the waste water treatment stream makes the use of constructed wetlands less viable.
Industrial contributions to waste water often create uneven flow conditions, and the
wetlands environment can be damaged by waste water components from industries. Also,
wetlands systems work best when a stable flow is maintained since there is no way to
mechanically alter the rate of flow through the plant. An area with a growing population j
will have a difficult time in maintaining quality effluent flow with the wetlands system. If
the plant is designed for a larger flow initially, waste water may remain in the system too
long and an algal build up will result, creating problems with suspended solids and
biological oxygen demand. If the plant is designed for the initial capacity, increased flow
over time may result in retention times too short to obtain adequate digestion of the waste
water. Cells can be added over time to compensate for increased flow, but such large scale
additions are an imprecise way to control effluent quality. Given these problems,
constructed wetlands will not be the best choice for Yadkinville's needs.
ROUTING FLOW TO UNDERUTILIZED TREATMENT PLANTS '
I
In some instances, a municipality or county will have more than one large waste water
treatment plant, and flow is often routed to the plants in a disproportionate way. In the
case of Yadkinviile, there are no other underutilized plants in the area, so this option does
not exist for the Town.
' Engineering Services,P.A. Gamer, N.C.

I
Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1 1996 Page 6
P � g
REQUIRING PRIVATE TREATMENT SYSTEMS
1 Many private homes and some industries have their own waste water treatment plants or
septic systems. The reliability of these systems is always in question, since many of these
systems are not well monitored or maintained. Often problems will not be found until long
' after the groundwater has been contaminated. These systems can be made to work
satisfactorily, given good soils, adequate design and construction review for the waste
water treatment systems, proper monitoring, and proper maintenance. For Yadkinville,
requiring private systems for all new industries will serve only to inhibit development.
Because the community is trying to expand its population and employment base, requiring
private septic and treatment systems is not an economically viable option. Also, by
maintaining one regional waste water treatment plant, the Town can better control the
quality of effluent and can limit the number of discharge points for waste water treatment
effluent.
CONTINUATION OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS
Yadkin County continues to develop at a rate that exceeds the state average. If the Town
does not take measures to provide adequate water and sewer services to new industries,
1 these new industries will site elsewhere and the Town will lose some portion of their tax
base. If new residents are not provided with adequate water and sewer services, they will
be forced to either rely on septic systems and wells or to live elsewhere. While septic
systems and wells can work satisfactorily in some areas, they can also be a severe problem
in others. A properly designed, well operated and maintained treatment plant can help
insure public safety, and remove the restrictions on lot size and soil permeability that ;
septic systems require.
Since the Town desires to continue to expand, and to protect the water and soil quality
for its residents, continuing to use the existing system exclusively does not seem to be a
viable option.
' ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
I
In general, the expansion of a waste water treatment plant on an existing treatment plant
site is not an environmentally damaging process. The land uses are compatible, and
properly operated and maintained treatment plant create few problems. Plant operators
monitor waste and water flows, and have some means of controlling the rate of flow and
the effluent quality. Environmental damage is minimal, and significant improvements to
ground water and surface water quality are often realized.
Environmental impacts will be discussed for a range of categories. Also discussed will be
P g g
mitigative measures for categories where environmental impacts are significant.
i.
1
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner, N.C.

1
Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 7
CHANGES IN LAND USE
The waste water treatment facility improvements will be constructed on the same site as
the existing waste water treatment plant, so no change in land use will occur. Some
additional land may be cleared, but the area requirement for the treatment plant expansion
is only a few acres.
WETLANDS
Based on a review of the National Wetland Inventory Map,L there are no wetlands areas
located in the vicinity of the proposed treatment plant expansion. A portion of this map
i showing the proposed treatment plant expansion site is included as Appendix 1 in this
report.
PRIME OR UNIQUE AGRICULTURAL LANDS
There are no areas of special concern related to agricultural lands. Most of the soil types
in the Yadkinville area are suitable for agriculture, but there are no special soils unique to
the proposed expansion site. Since very little land will be required for the treatment plant
site, no impacts to the agricultural resources in Yadkin County will be realized.
PUBLIC LANDS
1 There are no public lands or parks affected by this project.
fSCENIC AND RECREATIONAL AREAS
There are no scenic or recreational areas affected by this project.
AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL, OR HISTORICAL VALUE
The proposed treatment plant expansion site was reviewed by the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office to determine whether or not the proposed facility conflicted
with known historic or archaeological sites. It was determined that none of the proposed
work will affect known historic or archaeological sites. There were some historic
structures located in Yadkin County, but'these structures were well removed from any
planned construction work.
AIR QUALITY
Air quality will not be adversely affected by this project. The well aerated treatment
system should be virtually devoid of odor. A slight chlorine odor may be detected in the
immediate vicinity of the chlorination system, but this odor should not carry for any
distance.
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.
►1

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 8
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Groundwater quality will not be adversely affected by this project. Groundwater quality
may be improved significantly in areas where existing septic systems may be removed or
abandoned in favor of the public collection system for waste water. Groundwater quality
tdownstream of the outfall for the waste water treatment plant may also be improved as a
result of the improved effluent quality from the waste water treatment plant.
NOISE LEVELS
Noise levels should not be adversely affected by this project in any significant way. There
may be a slight increase in noise Ievels in areas immediately adjacent to pumping stations j
or to the waste water treatment plant. These increases should not be significant enough to
be noticeable by any residents, nor will they be significant enough to have any impact on
wildlife.
WATER SUPPLIES
This project will not adversely impact any water supplies, and may serve to protect the
water quality downstream of the plant. Based on a review of monitoring records from the
plant for January through August, 1995, the plant's record of performance based on
monthly averages is as follows:
1 TABLE 2 - TREATMENT PLANT PERFORMANCE
tParameter Permit Limit Average of Monthly
Averages - Ian-Aug, 1995
' Waste Flow m d 1.0 0.8228
BODS m 30.0 2.51
NH3-N m 16.0 <1
Total Suspend. Solids m 30.0 10.5
Fecal Coliform #/100 mL 200.0/100 8.0
Residual Chlorine m toxicity <1
H S.U. 6-9 6.5
Dissolved Oxygen m 5.0 6.8
i
Since the plant expansion will mirror the existing treatment process, it is reasonable to
assume that the expanded plant effluent quality will be similar to the results shown in
Table 2. Since the quality of the effluent from this plant is consistently clean and well
' . within the permitted limits, there should be no significant impacts to water supplies.
' FISH AND THEIR HABITATS
Fish habitats should not be adversely affected by this project. Water quality of the effluent
from the expanded and improved waste water treatment plant will be very clean and
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 9
should pose no hazards to local fish populations. Table 2 indicates the performance of the
existing treatment plant with regard to effluent quality, and the expanded plant will be
designed to perform at least as well as the existing facility. A chlorination system will be
used, but a dechlorination process will be designed to comply with the chlorine residual
limit as a minimum. Results shown in Table 2 indicate that the chlorine residual should be
less than 1.0 mg/l.
WILDLIFE AND THEIR HABITATS
A review of the maps at the Natural Heritage division of the North Carolina Parks and
' Recreation Department was made to determine whether or not there were any rare or
endangered species of plants or animals in the Yadkinville area. The maps did not indicate
any rare or endangered species near the proposed expansion site. Since the areas proposed
' for the plant expansion is only a few acres, and since the land is located adjacent to the
existing treatment plant, no significant impacts on wildlife or reduction of habitat should
occur as a result of this project.
INTRODUCTION OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES
1 No toxic substances should be introduced as a result of this project. If toxic substances
exist in the waste water stream, there is a possibnhty that they may be passed forward
either in the effluent discharged into the North Deep Creek or in the sludge that will be the
byproduct of the waste water treatment process. In either case, toxic substances will not
be a product of the treatment process. Little control can be exerted over businesses and
residents who choose to waste toxic substances by putting them into the waste water i.
collection system. Standard treatment processes are designed for domestic waste, with
some provisions made for known pollutants or contaminants that may occur as part of an
industrial process that contributes to the waste water stream. If unexpected toxic
substances enter the treatment system, they may or may not respond to the treatment
system. If they do pass through the treatment plant, there is at Ieast the opportunity that
their presence will be detected, and that may allow the Town an opportunity to trace the
source of the substance and prevent further problems. This situation is an improvement
over allowing these substances to pass unnoticed into the groundwater through private
' septic or waste treatment systems.
In general, as shown in Table 2, the performance of the existing treatment plant in
' Yadkinville is excellent, and well within the permit limits. Expected results from the
expanded treatment plant should be at least as good, and so no introduction of toxic
substances into the Yadkin River basin is expected as a result of this project.
EUTROPHICATION OF EXISTING WATERS
The risk of eutrophication of existing waters should be reduced as a result of this
expansion project since the improvements to the waste water treatment system will
substantially prevent nutrient loading in the waste water, and so will reduce the nutrient
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner, N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 10
P g
loading in the North Deep Creek at the discharge point. No other existing waters should
be affected by this project.
MITIGATIVE MEASURES
tNo mitigative measures should be required for this project, since no significant
environmental impacts will be realized as a result of the construction of the waste water
treatment plant improvements. Appropriate erosion and sedimentation control measures
will be used during construction to protect against land degradation, and permanent
stabilization measures will be used to prevent erosion or sedimentation problems from
developing over time. The discharge point for the treatment plant will be monitored, and
erosion control measures will be installed if erosion problems begin to occur as a result of
increased discharge.
The Town will make an effort to use reduce waste as a result of the construction project,
and contractors will be encouraged to dispose of wood materials at a composting site if
j possible, and to avoid the use of asphalt tack for stabilizing seeded areas. Waste materials
will be reused or recycled if possible.
The Town will also make an effort to use waste reduction measures during the
construction of the project. The Town will try to implement water conservation programs
to reduce the amount of waste water generated, which will reduce the load on the waste
' water treatment system. The Town will also try to educate their citizens on the proper
means of disposal for solid and liquid wastes in an effort to avoid overloading of the waste
treatment system with untreatable waste. �.
1 -
tEngineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

' Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 11
1
I
LIST OF APPENDICES
' Appendix 1 - Copy of National Wetlands Inventory Map for Yadkinville, dated 1994,
showing location of treatment plant and discharge point
Appendix 2 - Speculative Limits
' Appendix 3 - Copies of Daily Monitoring Reports, January - August, 1995
Appendix 4 - Schematic of Treatment Process
' Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 12
1
1 1
i
1
APPENDIX I
' NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAP
.1
1
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

4
1
;'17obbtins y'
j.
S.¢i1� � n .l 4•p9� _� � - ---- , • �"K - �• •NUJ
41
Hk
P551A6FSSIA
f ♦,` `�;-�� \ `r /' L }5s1 ��� '\
SPECIAL NOTE9847 �. _' - G• -
-
_ I ! ram` 7�
This document was prepared primarily by stereoscopic ' �- i i r,-
analysisofhighaltitudeaerialphotographs.Wetlandswere
identified on the photographs based on vegetation,visible.' ---,Cam
hydrology, and geography in accordance with Classifica- 1i o`_ C l 1 u r / ter``` `V, 9r
lion of Wetlands and De-epwater Habitats of the United -�� t �UBH� \ PU$ ih T I 945 :7 ``� �- S t
States (F4VS/O8S - 79/31 December.l979). The-aerial ~PUBHI�I; 13�~$�� /�4i ���`i l
typically reflect conditions during the specific .
' 'photographs
year and season when they were taken: In addition,there ri _ 5; $ r ,:�•• ��� 'P55ia °• 1
is a margin of error inherent in the use 'of the aerial n u�=q ' �h
It •:r
photographs.Thus,a detailed on the ground and historical nt ^ovear�
analysis of a single site may result in. a revision of the '-� -__ __- ` `-_� i.BJ , a� '
wetland boundaries established through photographic °_ 4 '�: -
interpretation.In addition,some small wetlands and those a �� BHh-• i ° 'r fit- �"`! �' iFR \/� ?
b dense forest cover may not be included on this_. 1 \fib pUg , ;• +�Pre•,areep erne , / r
:obscured Y y` t, "� 1 �. :e ,, '•: I _ rrr' PF-0IR \`; - -.� ,^r'
document:.' - a L°., a \ ]]�:. Y j " 1. 1 ..y. J i t
Federal,Stateandiocalregulataryagencieswithjurisdic- i' saa, y� �-� - ! tr �. � , 5 1r - I QFOfA Q -
e� s, '�_ . ? Yad��z>,raiEl �'Ir
lion over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a : '� _ b ,�' �' �� �, = 193�rr '1 Yadk le
different manner than that used in this inventory.There rs �1 •� r `t `�
d _ ✓ �.
noattempt,in either the.design or products ofthisinventory,
_15M �o2� - Ii �J n „• i , ',i - -Y II �,-
•L ,'I I :{• ~I�� �`'i _P _ - - a f -! -'�•�IJrIvC.iri JJ�� �U..0 42� M ,`. I!.i I- r
todefinethelimitsofproprietaryjurisdictionofanyFederal, `� J. u U�4}}� °_ -r r °.!, yTh ater'Ot - $_ :'RQAD
State or local overnment or to establish the geographical Il- ;r• ;,• t•1 oaa ii H tr �. `�r�wT -'
4.. DISCHARGE Sta he regulatory programs of government agencies. , -� ! t y•r H tai!,47 i lit r R��y ■ . I a ;�' 9r?;i it i \ �,. .,� �GE POINT
scope oft g rY P 9 _ _
Persons intending to engage in activities involving modi- I ii --�"-- ! �~:,li I.��� •�i� .t' Oaf t. .I• , .. I j�.�••�.d:�;�`—;;�---�.. II' ' 905. -
fications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek
' _the advice of appropriate Federal. State or local agencies ::i a - �� -L. I. I. \ �•• f �;
concerning specified agency regulatory programs and y .. _ J u'.— �� it ?�, -\•� t' I?SS(� /I y \,
a urisdictions.that may affect such activities.
�.. i
proprietary { JI a ^� p1 �`;o, �• �I''-I � J 4: j ,���\ i ��i I
`�L ' 'ii •So ihaidn n. c i'�• \ yr•• 9� .. / Il• r r�i 1\
SC
}?IJBHn�tj ..961 f1 ,� 4 • � ,.. Haw_ !: Tpayc
I.
.y'
-- '\`-_
J! l I J ENT—Pill SITE ,� •.
9� �UHh�- 1 f ',• 60l I! - - ��` nq m.N
�j ~ / 111 Y Pl}$1}� _✓ I }!j / - i O PtJB'Hn
PUBNh � I I---- ' - 4ade''t PUBH
I _ g ,!' !.Pars:? i -'! \ �' 36°07'30"
(LONE HICKORY) 529 40' 10.a MJ. TO U.S. 42r s3P000m.{' • ,�sc••o•-ceo�oe:c•�iu•vft w S..INGTO.• a c-,..v
' - - 4856 if SW .. - J MOcKSVIt_4E rT Mr. - - _ - .$0'37'30" - .. .
SYMBOLOGY EXAMPLE '
YADKiNVILLE, N.C..
' SYSTEM : .
SUBSYSTEM
,CLASS NOTES.TO THE USER
LZEM?F U.S.'DEPARTMEN.T.OF THE INTERIOR ENGINEERING SERVICES P.A.•Subsystems,Classes,Subclasses,and Water Regimes , � .
SU$CLASS.WATER REGIME' in Italics were developed specifically for NATIONAL GARNER, NC
FISH AND WILDLIFE.$ERVICE WETLANDS INVENTORY mapping.• i
UPLAND (NON-WETLAND►. Some areas designated as R4SB, R4SBW,OR R4SBJ
Prepared National Wetlands Inventory of e i
Base m vide United g Sury n of w(INTERMITTENT STREAMS]may n meet the d fni-
repo e y Nat nal elf tory (IN 1 APPENDIX 1
map provided by the U ed States Geological Survey. •This map uses the class Unconsolidated Shore(US):
On earlier NWI maps that class was designated Beach/ - NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY MAP
R2EAR
Bar(BB)UBH ,or Flat(FL),Subclasses remain the same in both TOWN OF YADKINVlLLE
(LENEAR DEEPWATER HABITAT) �� versions- '
SCALE J'=2000' DRWN. BY T.S.S_
DATE 03-01-96 CHKD BY C.D.D.

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 13
i
I
1"
' APPENDIX 2
SPECULATIVE LIMITS
f:-
1
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

State of North Carolina ;
Department of Environment, 17
' Health and Natural Resources 4 0�e2�
Division of Environmental Management
1 James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary I FE
' A- Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
October 26, 1995
' W. Adams,Town Manager
Larry g
P. Q. Drawer 816
Yadkinville, NC 27055
Subject: Speculative limits
NPDES Permit No. NCO020338
Yadkinville WWTP
Yadkin County
' Dear Mr. Adams,
Your request for speculative effluent Limits for the proposed expansion of the l
Yadlanville WWI'P to either 3.0 MGD or 3.5 MGD has been completed by the Technical
Support Branch. In order to receive final permit limits, a formal application will have to be
submitted to the Division's Permit and Engineering Unit.
Flow estimates for North Deep Creek at the discharge site have been updated since
your request for 1.15 MGD speculative limits in 1994. The updated flow estimates are
based on data collected at a USGS low flow partial record (LFPR)station located just
upstream of the discharge. The previous flow calculations did not incorporate the LFPR
station data. The following updated estimates should be considered a better representation
of the flow at the Yadlanville discharge site:
j.
Drainage area (mi2) =35.9
Average flow (cfs) = 35.9
Summer 7Q10 (cfs) =39
Winter 7Q10 (cfs) = 10.0
30Q2 (cfs) = 12.3
The tentative limits for conventional constituents are:
ca
Summer Winter
Waste flow (MGD) 3.0 3.0 r r;
BOD5(mg/L) 30.0 30.0 =,
NH3-N (mg/L) 2.0 5.2
r
D. 4. (mg/L) 5.0 no limit C17
' TSS (mg/L) 30.0 30.0 ,
Fecal coliform (#/100 m 200 200
Residual L)chlorine(mg/L) 28.0 28.0 -
pH (S. U.) 6-9 6-9
' F.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

S
I
If the EA demonstrates that the project may result in a significant adverse affect on
the quality of the environrnent, an Environmental Impact Statement would be required.
Monica Swihart of the Water Quality Planning Branch can provide.further information
regarding the requirements of the NC Environmental Policy Act.
If there are any additional questions concerning this matter,please feel fiv-- t t
o
contact Ruth Swanek or Andy McDaniel of my staff at(919)733-5083.
i
cerel
1 Donald L. S rit,
Assistant Chief for ort
Water Quality Section
I
1 I'
n
C`
CA
DLS/AHM
cc: Winsfon-Salem Regional Office E
Permits and Engineering Unit
Mr. David Dickenson, P. E.,Municipal Engineering Services Co., P.A.
Central Files

Yadkinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 14
APPENDIX 3
COPIES OF DAIL Y MONITORING REPORTS, JANUARY-A UGUST,
1995
i F
1
1
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO. &-3 C'O c-:a c+3 3 5 DISCHARGE NO. CC)l MONTH F}x] YEAR_1555^�
FACILITY NAME�:ti•.-s cF CLASS - COUNTY �4DIC>j -
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Cam'• 2 C CL -;a m S- GRADE= PHONE C25- C/
CER19:IEDLABORATORIES (1) A.->gC C (2)�
cxEcx BOX 1F oRc HAS CHANGED COLLECTING SANTLES_ - 4< 1 S
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
�.' ATIN:CENTRAL FILES x ZZ Z,::2c
DIY.OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGF-'vMiT (SIGNATLRE OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) .i :=DATE T�
:._DE2 R BY THE SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS `
P.O.BOX 2951.E ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
RALEICH, NC 276?6-D533
50050 00010 t 04400 1500601 00310 00610 I OO530 31616 00300 006M 00663 S". C/cam 7 c�/Cii<( Gi[fii
a x „ FLOW ENTER PA RAm ETER CODE
? •
L U F, s a EFI: w Z W S:] {�. Sal Z Z o ABOVE NBBELO `ND UNITS
Q$ ~off FNF ❑ y� _ az ;U QU 1z� dQ u ?U
c�
E v7
a E c U `�- fU W xF" F-v x {:O Fr O E /=
cr o o a zU dz u z a c
c�
HRS H R S YIN 11GD 'C UNITS UCIL ti1GIL VIGIL VIGIL W100ti1L 31G/L MG/L 41C/L
83 0 l N 5`!4 �` I i•I C C,_<ii" I I I
.3i .0 c( _ lj:': ;:CF I< oc f R,.:. K I a aroM:
b 4 14 SIQ I J ° C°.3 1</Qc. I
• 7loxOo '.:�� ' � �.�5 � �. LJ'.:4, I -::�,<..I ;.f �rrr:
51�9 a n ti 9 3 115- 1 I
gla ..
G
I. 2. Y.? 16.s511. -D 9.
C� I < t �
:,
13
-70
16
17 S'cJ �.�•��. ,,S y:3;: .f:S° 'I �G'2''? 1+ovl : u -� r . z �:} ... ..
s csvU Y , 7 5 5 I l ' c•1 ;i��, l < 15 G 7. Z -3 <
gIG CG S' Y:'.I .' `l� 1- a. f:;. I<iCcO
�
'O o4av I l -)r
>"
4 tYCu Y s` loc. I «�
2loo3, w. M r•�r..
5 c,
[�. �'.., ..,: i ..J^ue., 3:,S:r s�.. QC� >..�...>:r�, f�iMr. „"r°f;.�,�.� '�.;<; �` '��.> ..��Y�w-A. -;+�et�•
91
J
1 f4e L-`3 � caa � °' :. �v'z:�rs. .a> ;. �,xti,t '.` ,� .�•� ::s „�.y3, �
x xnm
AVERAGE t1 ' I5 C" K Tarr (a < f I :37..., I F. �.bti !.!l Cl.r! < 1 <
-� •� � MAJQ3iIJM�:.c<��..,: �.�:y.��. sro .c.. .: -���i �..� �::1' ��� .� :s :r:���x•�-��� < {; .:�;.�..: ::w�;..,-•,�
MINIMUM <Q
1 MonodyLUx6t �o ac /�U 3� -7 175 S8
D15.M Form MR-1 (12193)

EFFLUENT
I
JES,
PERMIT NO..A)C G C, De 33�i DISCHARGE NO. O4 r MONTH F� �S
FAC}Zn'Y NAMffi-7 ,,, ec� c "CC�' CLASS COWTY �/4 r�1711
RATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC)c-.j,Q, t—, /zaam S GRADES PHONE
TIFIED LABORATORIES (1) g.0 AC (2) j
HECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSONS)COLLECTING SAMPLES A,24_r 1zC S
ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to: 1
1 :CENTRAL FILES X -0'1Z}?_11 Q �IG
)fV.OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (SIGMA OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) _ DATE F
TR BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT LS
X 29535 ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY K14OWL£DGE GK NC 77626-0535
- - i
50050 1 OW10 I 04400 SOW 00310 OM10 00530 31616 00300 00600 00665 c ttP
_x GVo1 p/G e/o 51i
d FLOW ENTER PARAMETER CODE
�— E± W +,c y ABOVE NAME ANDUATCS
Gcz w W :5 W z B ELO W
cS o rn IN ❑ �� �x ❑� p� azCa an J�
�o Go •-O F. UW7 O3- Fo Fpp-Y
.cam v7W] CaN �E p � wO E ��
o o aQ txz7U ez �� u� ,o z -
o G x °' Q
v
HRS HRS YIN h1GD -C UNITS UG/L MG/L Mr= MG/L 01100ML MG/L MGfL MG/L m&
Rio ". ;, . .: �5 (; l51,','; s -& ;
s x n: >-
•r 3` ,';�'. .�`a`"s.,
s x) r ti '7
s co r:,.
J,
man „w
130 C. 7
.i. T;,
:}5 � �a' � 3 { � �; x � s :a^sz• x m, x�� ��.` �F °"' '�, -M � �js� r -�'w..« w,��.�� 1
18c,
C6 9$$ �( <foc 0 7•b/
�ICenci! �✓ 1 aOU I K•(/ < OCQ
-,cc Lk (a a W7•q
..
..,,. ..7
^r
170
x .x
900 `731 L ' C..2 Q
2$ QY� �; �Zy �: JrQ e t 4`� E' rk 4 *y }
. .z x.r;. ., r[ x. y=_ .. .,. �` ..:, ..,,., ,.. xar.. ��i,
r-o0 1 AJ
. ���e�` �^' la•Z.i /04u:�a� ro�<j.. 1 .,�a.a, ,;,,. �- raru�,q�w ": g:.Is �>,,� -:� r,.*�:.,.:•'
i
-n .: ,: .::,...v��"'-a, sr.,:,.�:'•, ,a:...��,,.. ., wr�...>a�'s„r�.,., �' ,i.%;..• ..�: ,a„ � � waa,,. �a�;��; w.'" t�t':
f
aew hen � i;-< __.`.sue m, �^r--":•voss:,,,, <.�.,11.. ,.��x �--.N8T �.f`� s��rq.,r,..� -M'��„ � ..yq�.e� 4k `,,,�S,y� '';^a,...tw "x�F. ,e' �.. b ^',x`wx� �+"E'.t13 � '�.x� ;F-
3�
AVERAGE II �p5 !tf - �/cco 3 < f /O D3,� 0 9 rf 22
iMAJCIMUnt'S !'�'. f, GAT : :C/OOa' ;5; xf k,�.kn :� OG7 . .£rF i.a z 3� .'i✓
MINNUM sr 1a° crow <� < f 3 7 < <( ��
Monffily Limit 30 . (, 36 ;-'�OIYoo w3
DEM Form MR-I (12/93)

V' EFFLUENT '
NPDES PERMIT NO. LJ C cb Zo 3 Y' DISCHARGE NO. a o f MONTH.,L-�( �, cr S
FACILITY NAME ate•-1 or:,- CLASS-Z—T COUNTY Ug0,<,•w+
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE(ORC) c.;z' GRADE u1 PHONE 5 7 S
.� CERTIF•IED LAI30RATORlES (i)_/47 8,<c� r���'c7 _�ri,L_ _. (2)
•CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED ® PERSON(S)COLLECnNG SAMPLES,2.gL1,e,,-
Mail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
I ATTN:CZh rRAL F3LE5 x! y l rLp
bIV,OF P1IY1R4NMFNrALMA?(AGE',iLR^I (S1GNA'[UREDF OPERATOR W RRSPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
DEAR BY THIS SICKATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
PA.BOX x9S15 ACCURATE AND M.MYi.l:'IE TO THE HEST Of MY YNOWIZDGY-
RALEIGH, NC 27625-M35 i;i' ".•-
50050 000I0 00430 50460 D0310 D0610 00530 31616 00300 006M R 665 cn
P1
' Y U FLOW . ENTER PARAMETER CODE
�J
o •
CS u EFF �c7 y inABOVE NAME AND UhTfS
< = aG '� W Z W O H ELO W
ag o in INF ❑ �� ax GQ ZZ} ¢a❑ �Q{ U
OQ FZCa QW k QU E4Q
1 ❑ � u V p �,L•a �V �.� Cry t., QG.� G.3,� � y pC Oc. � •n � -
c. O
pF- O O A aV tz Gin Uu ❑ Z p; 4 4
HRS HRS Y(+1 MGD 'C UNiTS UGl MG/L 1 MClL MG/L I U!]OOML MG't MCIL -1G'L rib/c Ga/ c--A ew--Ic
1
cut.) s y 1 .13 /�- I 6•-3
J 4 �j sU f I
, - AT
61,3
I
pep ^bs-
10 oyco S' `7 3 S /4/° I G•! tcn
12l o1 zu
15
'57
lb t S � !7� lccc� .
s: d00 I :w17
• 18 .-9.50 `7�0 l�-4 I I I 7 �
i9 C53v z<
221a Co 9 ly 7 7-;-
24 cf�cc•
25 s b a - >"x i z r.Y., r
-��a=
26 c 3a ! $ °
28 r 9 I <rc
x
.29
::-70(: = a -Hai ..
30 c)& �f 3 <lQac�
e
.3t .
o </coo
AVERAGE ooa 6 < 9. 9.9 3 7.0 -7 <. C
MAXIINUM".y; ��:. 5:' C dQ0 v <,: < j G
MI�lIIrSLIh1 5�5 1� 1 <;oco [ 5 < i I < < -',•
Coma-(C)/Grab(Gl .-
Moa,i,ly Limlt -3 o /1. 3- Sao/,aO •3 v. 7 /7 ?y
DEv{Form MR-1 (I2193)

1 EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO.,J C CO.�C,3 3 8 _ DISCHARGE N0. 00 r MONTH Fq P2_L YEAR 19 75
AGILITY NAME 7o cr< c C �G CE� CLASS� COUNTY 4 4�744
OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) GRADE PHONE_916
RT=D LABORATORIES(1) �� A� L I r (2)
CHECK BOX IF ORC RAS CHANGED PERSON(S)COLLECTING SAMPLES ,,.2,--:
Imail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN.CENTRAL FILES x 9,S
DIY,OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGF-MMNT (SIGNATURSOF OPERATOR LN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
EHNR BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THATT'HIS REPORT IS
.O.BOX 29535 ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.to.BOX 29535 ACCURATEA f
RALEIGH. NC r62"535 {
50050 00010 004001 50060 00310 W10 00530 31616 00300 00600 00665 ce5S . 7 63ql 0/ .;
©� FLOW ENTER PARAMETER CODE
ABOVENAMEANDUNIIS
"u E = EFF Z W tat tm z BELOW
V Q$ `otn it INFO �Z h Zv 3�� ��t �k7 `a
❑ C]V C> <za CO te C7 Q t0 11
GalN � c� .j - cny
n
xV <z r�ntt Otg
a
HRS HRS YIN MGD 'C UNITS UG/L MGJL MG/L MC/L xllWML MG/L MG/L MG/L LiC, ,/L
.:. ::[/.�. -....r.-..-. --. ..w;•-_-. ,:r�y,,,,., ... „, , :,..4o;l.:v �a �,:.:« w.,« Y.�: -..`.".fi ..:"'�`$:, r,.,�,;�,r -�
2 , n 1 7S7 al I
v
Y `
i.:'Y a:.c .+°''"Ei,: -t;e- -°"Vx 7 La•. m fa. �t x. `,a:
6 sic R 7/ ' �` (.� <��la <,� < 15.$ 3.L
<f. < <.27 Imo.
a cFco 7c.
10 `l 30 31 T G . <roca
11 0 0 £f1• '< I° ticco
!2 w s5r� V. y i� r5
-13
s I !
i7 OXWd<.: � s< -.:e.Cl L.d="�.:. :t`!�-1l _---Y"cl 'e'ca v. ..,�wa- n�.1v, 3 r e,�a,$r.:.. « - :=� vs:`Y a`,« �kop•I:::: a3's. _r'. " a ..:: I
18 t3 8' a F3 7` !a alp L- 1060
19 co 5 r°: ter' = a1 41. r<: i
�II``//��
IE
ti
21
22 r 7-7-7 rr
�0 7
23 6<
24 c9 �. 55 IE S �/occ �.► f
E: Ctr1 - " :�. ""s" %C,a'� 4°�'•e:. d' d; �` ,' e a..,.u.w-' zx ?,_ Eu, -- n' s _ C7
26 c ncL I .7
cn
''29 '' ;sf A!; : :- ,r� , �.. ` :�, F`� �"' .,C ..3xck;�;,'k; rwx;;74 ti:'x` r z .:�M ' 3 f 'fr'Yu".'"'•r ,`4�'::r:�c
3a,1 I �`7f aa� .
'3{ {3.Y s:s; ,. `$~ x. .€�w +3.. -3'. � rz:,a,
AVERAGE 1�� - f c/aa� C + , ..ID .44 L : 15,5 D.cf 3. < 1 3'-�Z 3.
MAXI MUna i _... 3°:,'` <rGoo i 5 _
MINIMUM .J�� CIS j </CYjG <� < � L.0 i5_$ '7 <
.'Monthly Limit �I rn O dm ,as C, U
DEM Form MR-1 (12193) I
1 � �

EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO. n.)C_0 c•��, 3� DISCHARGE NO. coo i MONTH YEAR 141`1 S
(CIL=Nye,, CLASS_ COUNTY `ry
ERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC} 2l RL:� srLL!�-, _ GRADES PHONE R+v-L17 -2tyy
�- RTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) r,s Y AL (2)
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSONS)COLLECTING SAMPLES_
tail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
ATTN.CENTRAL FILES
�OF ENYiRONMLNTAL MANAGEMENT (SIGNATUREpF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
R BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT LS
BOX 13St5 ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
RALEICH, NC '_767&0535 t-
50050 00010 00400 50060 W310 100610 00530 31616 00300 006H 00665 ap p= ololiq orwrl s
a Y FLOW ENTER PARAMETER CODE
` c cn ABOVE NAME AND UNITS .
F`U F 4! Y EFF .:Ss7 CZ OW a�_ W Z BELOW
INF ❑ t� .. aCL C]U ZV `Ga �O t >� QCS <z
o a0 C t5z• a. cQr�O Oo OQ F'z° Uk•r
U
Oh O C =Q Z UL A z ` �.'`� 4 l
v -
HRS HRS. YNI MCD 'CI UNITS UGIL MGlL MGrL. MGlL wino L MG/L NlG/L MC/L ihu? L WLh
Ik �c i
? v+ Q J ..r65
cIoOU
4 1
'• y 'v9 � � tG:' 4_, {�a c�..•�?� ..s ��. ,�"�., 3z f. '�f arc,- �, :� � ia�>
6 700
cy."; ,^�'SU furd.l: N.0 - ,y,N,.:-..'Y '„--a'" `°'E. yY, - .x:f„'t= xa;ri ro is-h�� ...+tE• ...,. X, J''..�
S ow.
to -3oc ;t.7
�'l l p}jc.3' ` :�C)��, 7� •.r> �.= ..C"{D �F .a ' uw� �.. „,.,.,,: � '�: �#, �' �";3
i
12 9ao 4 7G q '�" 3 </ccyJ
13 7Gr)C. AJ. $I �...14 MC! ( J3'
'1$
6 Gam. :, .
1 os� o
18
20 043J
22 cc7 `3 C5 •-16.0 `:/000 n
24 �S'CO v 7- rS° G. 1rt10 C 7 s < M {r� �'•�Y 1
.. a
.2 .. ''.-• "- 'bfk, e aa,; •'�.,k'�_ :•Xsw-.�
.:.... . ,. < . .. �
26 13 — �(," ,94 taxe
28C j
Lu L. 3 jg;
3E} r 7 fir �. <lac>J
AVERAGE virc C. 1.0`I f(_ G 0•$ G. r.
MAXAiUM e 5x 37:,
MllN[MuM cc�
Comp.'(C)1;Grah(G);;rM gym.. Csc Cam =1r> .
Monthly Limit L �6 3 G !(, 3 C }co iec� 36
1-7 r
DEM Form MR-1 (12/93) I
1 ,

EFFLUENT
I-E-ShRNUT NO. DJ C- s DISCHARGE NO. c j� 1 MONTH _:Y�i v�=' YEAR 1 9 5
FACILITY NAME �,t_sL_Yr�� ��rct1= _ _ CLASS= COUNTY_
ClERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) rC'�`(_ l,'Zu_rayr�, GRADE 'lr PHONE-_ay�� }
TLF7ED LABORATORIES (1) HYiQzo Q,-ggLy7*-cr,45 (2) }
CxECK BOX IF ORC HAS C13ANGED PERSON(S)COLLECTING SAMPLES PG V-gx_
lfl ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to: - t
ATTN:CENTRAL FILES - 1
DIV.OF EMVIRO+'I'N=AL MANAGEb7ENr (SIGNATURJ qF OPERATOR IN R£SPONSLBLE CHARGE) DATE �
AINR BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS ;, I
Ps BOX Z9m ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. ..;.
RALEIGH, NC T762"535
i
50050 00010 1 00400 500601 003101 M610 005301 31616 003001 00600 00665 L>.) S p rc i rcti-t
>" a, FLOW ENTER PA RAM EI•ERCODE
� E • ;� rn ABOVE NAME AND UbiMrZ
4
EFF Z _ Y wz A Z BELOW f
INF
-'`4 1 C7 ❑ o. �O Oo 00 E IZjv';� WW�t O� Ia.O F�� 1j S
4j ° O E �ci �:� O�CwC k�0 ° �O OF" ha Yr i
_ U ..
u <Z v07 L) q Z r-r C IJ f
A O
HRS HRS Y1N MGD 'C UNiTS UG1L MOIL MM MG/L 01100ML MG/L MC/L MGIL ml. lut4kLlu!h I UL,f
•,:1 ._:. :i-.6�. .' �� ::, /mod
c�� 8 7 a 5" 3 c raocl
'," �.Y ,w> Y< Aa,r.�s5�R:r , . :J tr +c -
$ /oc L
30 � �� �Ce ,•, rR .. j
< to ... n I
..�, :� �s„Y-_ S�-��' F{'•[:?": +D'.J_1. �''": P�"���' �y„ g,`... "� _- n �M:; ,ram �-� .fin- w� �r I '
� 7 77 �5` 7 oneo <� I C <
"15�•��� '�3-?� ':�'i:i,' %��? �.:.�9 {�(�Ua; " �°ku: 3>2*w- ..�e.a'. a'% ,s,.z �� N„„,', d 4 3 •s �tR�:5 .�.y .r:r a "v'3..,in f
66,3cc) Y -15 6cL)
is
9 e;. ��;v< 'L -� .l.. � .:z:,. �:IF�;. ���Q60 ;5'a�" � '�°�. .s�"� % r�'�, ,<,,, "r, Si.,.,., ,,,�,r,<: s'„ :,.a`8s "'"}.bra �-;..e. r.. �t�=.,•5..+;� �'!
0�5 t) $ q7 5Q G.Cp rcoO j
C,
yV,, "M m;__ .'��`° ,,�h.e. �,s"�=a. .,w,�" ',"Sa. '",Y."e"s � :Rs-iu �. aY.i ', r,�� a.i`a,• � ,C,� ".�-. "+;<:' I
24 69Z
t(Y<< ': .dnM - Z '"Y`.,�' .+ `, Ks.
.25 G L </cod
}",)) '',,t [[ t t -.•'R'. .F �,ngs°y7'3'+,fit Z'S�t it ', f r., ,Fpua H i,m«`G '."''.,y.,yW,+., :� - rAl°'«'F^^;
�7I'°�" °�'..s. v"+"� �; „�m�,o•;x. ', o""ei°Ks„ Cvm. �c:�t �:<w".>
2$ d a� �,7t-Lct �a s �k?D �� i `�
9 66 g. SO,
�; ti' ,r„x ? �s Nr•• ,�,'.;„� H g�x-�r �"s ,� '� :a^,. y' ^Y.r; '� r--?k` a4',�i..sra
AVERAGE $S <f/ccGs < C' r `b 3 l C
MAXLI7UM moo,. �;= $ " 4 <.1.=
m1VLMum 51� ��! </tea .,: C l .�c� < I _ ..0
SlouthlyLimit 0 7 ? Y
DEIM Form MR-I (12193)
i

EFFLUENT i
LDES PERMIT NO. 2n DISCHARGE NO. 40 f MONTH_ ZU'LY YEAR, !
FACILITY NAME 04 CLASS Mr COUNTY ^ 4r,-J
I
PERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE(ORC),Pr-,?,Ly W,t r rAe23 ` GRADE PHONE 9/[i G 75- �<f
ERTIFIED LABORATORIES (1) W/0 - An T
r,4�Y ,.er-iL (2)
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PERSONS)COLLECTING SAMPLES
ail ORIGINAL and ONE COPY to:
CENTRAL FILES x ,.
DIV.OF ENYIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT :(S GNATU F 0 ERATOR IN RF-SPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
IFf BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
O.BOX 295M ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
ALEfGH. NC 27626 0535
50050 00010 00400 5W60 00310 OM10 D0530 31616 00300 006001 OWS
u FLOW ENTER PARAMETER CODE
> j' •
rq ABOVE NAME AND UNITS
4`U F ai EFF a z w W 4 � rC�S z 'z � BELOW
INF AU ZU CZq QO W <�
v� o i?oN o aw "� o
cc UO 'e
O✓ O �� ' aU Czwl
U t5
HRS HRS YIN MCD 'C UNITS -vcn- MGrL MG/L MGJL V100MI, MG/L . MG/L SIG/L frill L UU t*L U�1 G
2 C75'CO J 17 U
3
a
4 9 Al 4x Y 61 ;1 S m
6 o31�J 5S 51 d t/c >
h'
!6 Ss15
12 71-0 )-7
,.:.,,.. .,'� s p ,<a
t3 e7tx� :�: �; o :� � C :
< �T
D ,:. .{ I
Ib
17 �:�'; �fOa�V Y ',a. iw� 9 r;. ai YSe<, 4 $4 Z YVh •u?
'\
19 r r,
; I
�9
�Jy '
:''j5 �,a f',1.,?3- C!� "�'z-�w�2,f'.� �� °Y- '' � ,g.� x� �r ^_ �Y , tea._` •�,y°.,,g„� .$� xW ..r,�C:.' I`
28 9,
29 "?P"` f..J"� =, :�r„-} `x.7;�...-Y-X".. a -' - -�... `'.' .<F ",f..•:Aa,. :, `Sx, :c ;w '.-,U.—
3o AJ .971
31
AVERAGE ° J 41 t3 59 S•'6 1 ca
MINIMUM 4 �2 [
i(�
(C Monthly LimitQ 3O j,u� � 7 J75- 825
DF-M Form MR-1 (12/93)
' t

' r EFFLUENT
NPDES PERMIT NO.� C ODZD 33$ DISCHARGE NO. 00 J MONTH A +- YEAR l-----95 _ E
CILITY NAME u t CLASS _ CO
ERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE (ORC) Peccv W.,LQArns GRADE PHONE J10 -ro74 -1-IFY �
RTIFIEED LABORATORIES {1) G �A (2) � '•
CHECK BOX IF ORC HAS CHANGED PER ON(S)COLLECTING SAMPLES '('.,r i l I 'cc nil
LORIGINAL and ONE COPY Lo: y �
ATTN:CENTRAL FILES x W �
OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE.MEN7 (SIGNATU OF OPERATOR IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE) DATE
"BOX
hR BY THIS SIGNATURE,I CERTIFY THAT THIS REPORT IS
29535 ACCURATE AND COMPLETE TO Tl3E BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
RALEIGH, INC 27526-0535
50050 00010 •00400 50060 00310 00610100530 31616 00300 00600 4D665 5 670 iO3� ao
a Y u FLOW F.NTER PARAMETER CODE
' E • y ABOVE NAME AND UNITS
d U Fr = Z El y W -Z z p BELOW
S �n �a M >W �x
o p _ INF ❑ x ao 00 °O FAG U° oy FQ <° E
d u X O~ F,
1,�� k O g `'.gyp E"= a ., ¢ rS a
Ucs
HRS HRS YIN MCD 'C UNITS UG/L MGlL MGlL MG1I 91I00ML MGlL MGlL MC/L L ter L� 4
G :.s J. ;:
4
-.zs
peG to
a
Kid cc ,6
1 .83 �Lq�
}'
14 �GCL� 29 �/CCC7 I I j
"i
f
c% 1 �1° j o00 I < G44.7
7 Vat
14
O t s i
3 tom'
24 2a:0 $ is .7 LICtC
S ©6 tg J a„ lLl}, an9 ..
7/ .° a 1: o-i';£ f: `4 "7'' t' �_ r wsr'.5.:Ykv "i<. 4ee- :f2^':, ".'a a33.;. 7r •� sw ;;as, .r?°n•
-
9 Q$t` 'L}�K �. a., � �C7 t`.°':� •x. �i 3 .y,,.. �', ;4. ,>r.
� 14 E
AVERAGEu
0 FsC < L I LV �: A3 ...�` 2,.. �.
[ '
S. L r;.
;"C lGre� G f s ia�Y
htonchlr Limit 1, 3Q Ic 3� —f%, 3Uf#7
I
J DE.M Form MR-1 (12J93) '

1
Yaakinville Waste Water Treatment Plant Expansion March 1, 1996 Page 15
i
1
APPENDIX 4
SCHEMATIC OF TREATMENT PROCESS
1
1
i
Engineering Services,P.A. Garner,N.C.

RAW INFLUENT
i
BARSCREEN
VORTEX
GRIT SCREEN I
SPUTTER BOX
FLOW EQUALIZATION BASIN
SPUTTER BOX
q
N
Z
� Z
to D3 5
I' SLUDGE ro m
DIGESTOR o 0
¢ ¢
.:. : w w
SLUDGE DRAWFF
SPUTTER BOX
0
' 3
a
. . . - w
SLUDGE DRAWOFF CLARIFIER CLARIFIER
' a
. ww c�
z W o ENGINEERING SERVICES, P.A.
o o o GARNER, NC
z APPENDIX 4
SCHEMATIC OF TREATMENT PROCESS
TOWN OF YADKINVILLE
FINISHED WATER SCALE NONE DRUM BY T.S.S.
' TO OUTFALL DATE 03-01-96 CHKD

r
�eY1GI�.C� CDyYlj'1'�/1'CQ �Tor�la� �
- � p
=460 /0 Ot eW &1���Ty'
(Lk Iwf 1 f {'Yl ku
------------
�jdcl
bt
_a � chi
Old-7/1 -W
l�
L�
�v_{u Lc