NC0065587_Permit (Issuance)_20001222

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNIM& CO*ER SHEET
NPDES Permit: NC0065587
Frye Bridge WWTP
Document Type: �'Per-mit Issuance _
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Speculative Limits
201 Facilities Plan
Instream Assessment (6713)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date: December 22, 2000
Thus docameat is priated,oa rewse paper-igaore May
coateat oa the reQerse aside

;c`Jtate of North Carolina
bepartment of Environments •
and Natural Resources �f
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 22,2000
DIr.Jern•H. Tweed
Heater Utilities,Inc.
P.O. Drawer 4889 -
Can', North Carolina 27519
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0065587
Fn'c Bridge \C-\NTP
Forsyth County
Dear DIr. Tweed:
Division personnel have reviewed and approved the permit renewal for your facility. The final permit is attached to this
letter. This permit is issucrl pursuant to the requirements of the North Carolina Gcncral Statute 143-215.1 and the \lemorandum
of Agreement between North Carolina and the US Environmental Protection Agency dated December G, 1983.
The following items appeared in the draft permit,and remain in the final permit.
i The facilin will have to meet a summer ammonia limit of 2.0 mg/L and a winter ammonia limit of 4.0 mg/L by
\fay 1,2002. These limits are necessary,because the facility discharges into a zero-flow stream.
i' The upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for pH and conductivity have been deleted.
The sample n.pe for all parameters (cxeept pH and Fecal Coliform) has been changed from grab to composite at
the request of the Winston-Salem Regional Office (\\'SRO). The WSRO requested this change because the
facility does not yet have an equalization basin. It was also noted that an upstream pump station caused frequent
hydraulic surges in the stream. The recent issuance of an Authorization to Construct (AtC) for this facility may
alleviate the need for composite sampling,once all of the components in the AtC are operational.
i Quarterly monitoring for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus has been included in the permit. The Division
has included these monitoring requirements for all dischargers in the Yadkin-Pee Dee Basin.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable to you, you
ha%c the right to an zdjudicaton hearing upon written request within thiriv� days following receipt of this letter. This request must
be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the
Office of Administrative Hearings (6714 \[ail Senice Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made,
this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may require
modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. In addition, this permit does not affect the legal requirement to obtain
other permits which may be required by the Division of Water Quality' or permits required by the Division of Land Resources,
Coastal Area Dlanagemcnt Act or any other Federal or Local government. If we can be of further assistance to you,please do not
hesitate to contact Charles Weaver of my staff at (919) 7335083,extension 511.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
Qfr( �e,goodrich
ns
cc: Central Files
Winston-Salem Regional Office/Water Quality'Section
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit
NPDES Gnii/Peimii file j
Technical -\ssist once-&Certification Unit
1617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone[phone] FAX[phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/10%post-consumer paper

a
1 Permit NCO065587
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful
standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Heater Utilities, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Frye Bridge WWTP
NCSR 2998
near Clemmons
Forsyth County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary to Muddy Creek in the
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other
conditions set forth in Parts I, 11, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective February 1, 2001.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on May 31, 2004.
Signed this day December 22, 2000.
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC0065587
f
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Heater Utilities, Inc., is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a 0.027 MGD wastewater treatment facility with the
following components-.-
* Aeration basin
♦ Clarifier
♦ Aerated sludge holding tank
♦ Chlorine contact chamber
♦ Post-aeration
This facility is located on NCSR 2998 near Clemmons at the Frye Bridge WNVTP
in Forsyth County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into an unnamed tributary to Muddy Creek, classified C waters in the
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin.

t
S
I 1 ."' � :, tF�ho _� 1 ': �y .- r� �� �1. I � •\ \��� cb�_:a... �� \zsQ
- Izv3vel ;•r : -fit\•;P ew I \ " „ s't \ \ �� r \
.I Hadd>cukt
:A Cm3 .• - �, - 1 IIIII I�� :,:;a�. ���• -
• I / ' o it'll
I • f�' " , \ i > j111� ,I� . .1 IIrliIa I'1 ) � � � j I �I
II n \ l
., ; � ► � � � � � l\����� ��1_\`' I , ` �;\,�'•:'��� SIR ���' `l �`�, I. �� �.,
r! .^'I C�, � / n p� `) / `✓ � ,1 it( � � \lll, I a\3\ / �' �'�
`It �y �• ; lf,\l� ` �. .�5`b/QCl � il'`/..
V .9� �I _cb' c 'I 7 •. _z
439
l lu o 1
m
� GfKe
.
V i
..~> '��I \\ V, II V.I�In ,,'1 �� .I •� \� ( �� II l I I - '/ � ll® �I, i1 :-`\- /
N ,
Latitude: 35059' 18"
Longitude: 8002P 15" Frye Bride WV�TP
USGS Quad#: D 17NE
River Basin #: 03-07-04 NCO065587
Receivin_ Stream: UT to Muddv Creek Forsyth County
Stream Class: WS-Iy

t Permit NC0065587
t
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS—FINAL
During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until April 30, 2002, the
Pcrmittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the
Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample Locationi
Avera a Maximum Frequency Type
Flow 0.027 MGD - Continuous Recorder Influent or Effluent
BOD,5-day(209C) 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Total Suspended Residue 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
NH3 as N Weekly Composite Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen2 Weekly Composite Effluent
__Upstream&Downstream
Fecal Coliform 2001100 ml 400/ 100 ml Weekly Grab Effluent
(geometric mean) Upstream&Downstream
Total Residual Chlorine 2/Week Composite Effluent
Temperature IT) Daily Composite Effluent
Total Nitrogen Quarterly Composite Effluent
(NO2+NO3+TKN
Total Phosphorus Quarterly Composite Effluent
pH3 Weekly Grab Effluent
Footnotes:
1. upstream = at least 100 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at the NCSR 1493 bridge.
2. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L
3. The pl-1 shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NC006558Y '
j
A. (2.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS— FINAL
During the period beginning on May 1, 2002 and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to
discharge from outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT LIMITS MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
CHARACTERISTICS
Monthly Daily Measurement Sample Sample Locationl
Avera a Maximum Fre uenry Type
Flow 0.027 MGD Continuous Recorder Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day(209C) 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Total Suspended Residue 30.0 mg/L 45.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
NH3 as N (April 1 —October 31) 2.6 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
NH3 as N (November 1 —March 31) 4.0 mg/L Weekly Composite Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen2 Weekly Composite Effluent
Up stream&Downstream
Fecal Coliform(geometric mean) 200/100 ml 400/ 100 ml Weekly Grab Effluent
Up stream&Downstream
Total Residual Chlorine 2/Week Composite Effluent
Temperature (2C)2 Daily Composite Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+ND3+TKN) Quarterly Composite Effluent
Total Phosphorus Quarterly Composite Effluent
pH3 Weekly Grab Effluent
Footnotes:
1. Upstream = at least 100 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream = at the NCSR 1 493 bridge.
2. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/L
3. The pl-1 shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
There shall be no discharge of floating sobds or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

[Fwd:Frye Bridge NPDESJ
t
Subject: [Fwd: Frye Bridge NPDESJ
Date: Dion, 18 Sep 2000 14:23:12 -0400
From: Alike Templeton <mike.templeton cr ncmail.net>
To: Charles Weaver <[e-mail]>
Charles -
I believe this one is yours'. Steve left a voice mail last week, asking
who was in the lead on this permit, but I never got to call him back.
Maybe this info will take care of DEH' s objections to the permit (as if
I know what I 'm talking about here) . If you would, please call Steve and
let him knowthe- status. Thanks.
- Mike T
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Frye Bridge NPDES
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 11:03 :01 -0400
From: Steve Mauney <[e-mail]>.
Organization: NC DENR Water Quality
To: DAVE.GOODRICH@ncmail .net, MIKE.TEMPLETONgncmail.net
CC: [e-mail]
This NPDES NC0065587 is apparently on hold as it is listed as going to a
WS-IV stream using the wrong segment of Muddy Creek. The discharge is
into an unnamed tributary of Muddy Creek with the UT junction about 3 . 5
miles above the Yadkin/Muddy junction. The correct segment of Muddy
Creek is 12-94- (0. 5) which is class " C" .
Mike, this is the one we spoke about on the phone recently.
1 of 1 12/19/2000 354 PNI

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment ` •
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Bill Holman, Secretary
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
Kerr T. Stevens, Director ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January-3 t, 2000
Mr. Jerry H. Tweed
Vice President
Heater Utilities, Inc.
Post Office Drawer 4889
Cary, North Carolina 27519
Subject: Iss ance of NPDES Permit NCO065587
JJFry ridge WWTP
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Tweed:
This letter is to inform you that the Division has finalized its review and the comment period is
now closed for NPDES permit NC0065587. A final copy of the permit is attached to this letter. This
permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of the North Carolina General Statute t43-2t5.1 and the
Memorandum of Agreement between North Carolina and the US Environmental Protection Agency
dated December 6, 1983.
The following list has been included to outline the changes that were addressed in the draft
permit. These changes remain unchanged in the final permit.
➢ The permit expiration date has been changed. The permit renewal will expire on May 31,
2004. The expiration date has been revised so that an equal number of permit renewals will
come in at any one time. This change will allow the Division to issue permits more
efficiently.
i The stream classification for the unnamed tributary to Muddy Creek, at the location of your
point source discharge, has been changed from C to WS-IV.
i The summer and winter limits for ammonia have been revised. The facility will have to meet
a summer ammonia limit of 2.0 mg/I and a winter ammonia limit of 4.0 mg/I by May t, 2002.
These limits were incorporated into the permit renewal because the facility discharges into a
zero flow stream.
i Special condition E has been deleted. An EAA was submitted with the renewal application.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone[phone] FAX[phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/10%post-consumer paper

fie^
Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0065587 �Oe6
Fry Bridge WWTP
Forsyth County Vr" 1CY��U� U1 So
The upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for pH have been leted. Division
policy does not require instream pH monitoring.
i The upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for conductivity and emperatur
have been deleted. It has been determined that these sampling requirements ar n er
necessary.
i The sample type for all parameters (except pH and Fecal Coliform) has been changed from
grab samples to composite samples at the request of the regional office. The region requested
this revision due to the fact that WWTP does not have an equalization basin. In addition, it
was noted that an upstream pump station causes frequent hydraulic surges in the stream.
i Quarterly monitoring for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus has been included in the
permit. The Division has included these monitoring requirements for all dischargers in the
Yadkin Basin. The results of this additional monitoring will be used in the development of a
nutrient management strategy for the Yadkin Basin.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty
(30) days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition,
conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such
demand is made, this decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division
may require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. In addition, this permit
does not affect the legal requirement to obtain other permits which may be required by the Division of
Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land Resources, Coastal Area Management Act or
any other Federal or Local governmental permit that may be required.
If we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact Charles Weaver of my
staff at [phone], extension 511.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Central Files
Mr. Roosevelt Childress, EPA
Mooresville Regional Office
Point Source Compliance Enforcement Unit
NPDES Unit / Permit file

g1AJ
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment RECEIVED
and Natural Resources N.C. Dent. of E;-'NR 4 0 v
Division of Water Quality
APR 2 6 f,lq
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor `�� �
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary Mig ctl "c ;o L E H N R
Kerr T. Stevens, Director 0;O;lG9
C).rich
"' ._..._
April 19, 1999 � •. -.
MEMORANDUM
To: Homlean Chen (jv
Division of Environmental Health '"^ ?', hr„
From: Kim Murphy
Subject: Review of DRAFT PERMIT
Frye Bridge WWTP
Forsyth County
NCO065587
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the DRAFT permit and
return this form by 5/24/99. If you have any questions on the draft permit, please contact
Charles Weaver at 919/733-5083 ext. 511.
RESPONSE:
This agency has reviewed the draft permit and determined that the proposed
discharge will not be sufficiently close to any existing or know proposed
public water supply intake so as to create an adverse effect on water quality.
We concur with the issuance of this permit provided the facility is operated
and maintained properly, the stated effluent limits are met prior to discharge,
and the discharge does not contravene the designated water quality standards.
Concurs with issuance of the above permit, provided the following conditions
are met:
T/ 6/yote,�c rc
Sot/es /,J ;�z Qzcr.✓/.✓/G� f'�2cAH. TF//t/J A ./ C�QJ.RL/L,s-no.I,/a1.osr•.!�
Ok C7W"—' HL4.JS r-� /LLGT/.r / Y/f/S �.Fo6L21ly SNosL.O /.3L 2�[IU/2�D.
Opposes the issuance of the above permit, based on reasons stated below, ory
attached:
s �
4E r 4
r f
Signed Date:
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

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO065587
Facility Information
FacilityName: Frye Bridge
Permitted ow: 0.027 County: orsyt
Facility ass: Regional ice: WSRO
aci ity ermitStatus: xistmg USGS lopoQuaF__l)T717E_
(i.e. New, Modification,
Existing or Renewal)
Stream Characteristics
ReceivingStream: U I to Muddy Creek
Stream assi ication: inter c s
12-94-(16)
u asin: _ _ 30Q2 c s :
Drainage Area (mi ): Average Flow c s :
Summer c s o `
-911-1
Changes Incorporated into Permit Renewal
Proposed Changes Parameters Affected Basis for change(s)
Cover Sheet Changed expiration date from is is in response to an
July 31 to May 31. Permit Administrative change to
will expire in 2004. better align permitting and
Basinwide planning
tlll operations within the Division
of Water Quality.
Supplement to Permit Cover Stream c assi ication was U I to Muddy CreeT is
Sheet changed from Class C to classified as WS-IV. See
lass WS-IV Index Number 12-94-(16).
Effluent Limitations and--- Revised summer and winter New limits were impose
Monitoring Requirements ammonia and BOD limits. because the facility discharges
Page Facility will have to meet 5 into a zero flow stream.
and 2 limits three years (May
1, 2002) from the effective
date of the permit renewal.
Supplement to Effluent /Deleted SpecialCondition E. Facility submitted with
Limitations Page renewal application.
Effluent Limitations an e ete upstream and Division policy does not
Monitoring Requirements downstream monitoring require instream monitoring
Page requirement for pH for pH.
Effluent Limitations and Addedand I P monitoring This data will e used in the
Monitoring Requirements on a quarterly basis. development of nutrient
Page strategies for the Yadkin
Basin.
Summary
Facility has submitted an application for renewal. No modifications were requested in
the permit renewal.
Page 1
Version: February 4, 1999

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0065587
The facility discharges into a zero flow stream. Therefore, the facility is required to
meet very stringent effluent limits. Several facilities across the state have been faced
with the same problem and have either upgraded the facility to meet the restrictive limits
or moved the discharge location. We understand this is a burden on the facility, but we
need to be consistent across the board.-The facility needs to seriously consider
removing the discharge from this unnamed tributary due to the fact of documented
waster quality problems on this watershed.
Due to the fact that the facility has not identified any alternatives to direct surface water
discharge, the facility will be required to meet 5 and 2 limits (See attached EAA
document). The permit renewal was drafted with a compliance schedule of three years
to meet the revised limits. The limits will become effective May 1 2002.
The following notes were taken during the review of the application package:
• 303(d) List Review: Facility is not listed on North Carolina's 1998 303(d)
List.
• Review of Basin Plan: Muddy Creek is impacted by both urban runoff and
wastewater discharges. Elevated Fecal Coliform levels are common in this
watershed. Improvement in the water quality of Muddy Creek will require
additional action on the part of Forsyth County and the City of Winston-
Salem. .
• Wasteload Allocation (prepared 06/28/93): BOD TSS, pH and fecal limits
were determined to be secondary. DO was limited at 5 mg/l. Instream
monitoring was recommended for temperature, DO, and fecal coliform and
conductivity. Facility has requested that upstream monitoring for
Temperature and Conductivity be dropped. Region please comment on
this request.
The facility discharges into a stream classified as zero flow (both 7Q10 and
30Q2 are zero). The WLA included language indicating the discharge should
be removed when an alternative becomes available.
The permit renewal was drafted with 5 and 2 limits based on the fact that
they are discharging into a zero flow stream. The current limits will remain
effective the first three years of the renewal. After this time, the 5 and 2
limits will become effective. Region please comment of the time frame
given to comply with the revised limits.
• Results of EAA Prepared by facility:
The following discharge options were studied:
Page 2
Version: February 4, 1999

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NCO065587
Connection to sewers stem: No POTW connection available. This was
verified by the Winston-Sa em Public Utilities Planning Department.
Subsurface Disposal: Land adjacent to the existing package plant has been
considered unsuita e for a subsurface system. _
Land Application: Cost of this system was estimated to be very high in
proportion to the wastewater generated.
Relocation of Discharge: Cost of this alternative was estimated to be very
high in proportion to the wastewater generated. This may be the only
feasible option if they can't meet 5 and 2 limits.
Keep Existing Discharge: This alternative was considered the most
economically teasible option. Although they don't think they will be able to
meet 5 and 2 limits with the existing system. They are not sure how they are
going to fund the upgrade.
anti-24inn'ts ifthey plan to Continue �7
• DMR Review: /
One BOD and one TSS monthly average violation was reported in 1997.
One TSS daily maximum violation was reported in 1997. One BOD and two
TSS daily maximum violations were reported in 1998.
Effluent DO levels for 97 and 98 were above the limit of 5.0 mg/l (data
ranged from about 5.9 mg/1 to 11.4 mg/l)
Instream monitoring requirements appeared to be normal.
Proposed Schedule for Permit Issuance
Draft Permit to Public Notice: 02/27/99
Permit Scheduled to Issue: 04/12/99
State Contact
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached
permit, please contact Jeff Myhra at [phone], extension 597.
Copies of the following are attached to provide further information on the permit
development:
• Existing permit effluent sheets with changes noted
• Draft Permit
Page 3
Version: February 9, 1999

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0065587
Signature:
NPDES Recommendation by: l
Regional Office Comments
'gnature: \
Regional Recommendation by:
Reviewed By:
Signature: ate:
Regional Supervisor: D - �_
Signature: ate
NPDES Unit:
�l Page 4
Version: February 4, 1999

Permit No. NCO065587
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,/HEA_/THE .AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
PERMIT
TO DISCHARGE WASTEWATER UNDER THE
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
Incompliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1,
other lawful standards and regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Frye Bridge Wastewater Treatment Plant
NCSR 2998
southwest-of-Winston-Salem d4e,m r,.,s
Forsyth County
to receiving waters designated as an unnamed tributary to.Muddy Creek in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River
Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in
Parts I, II, and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective ov mkei 1,_1993_
IRA 3 Z00y
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July-3-1, 1998"
Signed this day Septe nbei24-1993—_
Original Signed By
Coleen H. Sullins
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Environmental Management
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
y'/ (d.5)
t3.2S,

Permit No. NC0065587
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a 0.027 MGD wastewater treatment system consisting of an aeration basin,
clarifier, separate aerated sludge holding tank, and_chlorination-with•chlorine contact chamber ., c
anti post aeration located at Frye Bridge Wastewater Treatment Plant, NCSR 2998, southwest
of Win Salem,Forsyth County ($L-e Pact-Iu-of tfiis Permit), and
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into an
unnamed tributary to Muddy Creek which is classified Class 'waters in the Yadkin-Pee Dee
River Basin. y
Cla.0 : 6✓S—Ic
e_ I_vB

A. O. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENT'S FINAL Permit No. NCO065587
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is authorized to discharge from
outfall(s) serial number 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below:
Effluent Characteristics Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements
Measurement Sample *Sample
Monthly Avg. Weekly Avg, Daily Max Frequency Type location
Flow 0.027 MGD Continuous Recorder I or E
el
OB,,5 delay' 20-C (u^kr) 30.0 mg/1 45.0 mg/1 Weekly — Grab E
u
Total Suspended Residue 30.0 mg/I 45.0 mg/I Weekly — Grab E
NH3 as N Weekly _ Grab E
Dissolved Oxygen" Weekly— Grab E, U, D
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean) 200.0 /100 mi 400.0 /100 ml Weekly — Grab E, U, D
Total Residual Chlorine 2/Week ' Grab E
Temperature Daily - Grab E
Temperature Weekly Grab U, D
Conductivity Weekly — Grab U,D
?N k-4 Gas E
-rr Cwakk y 61A4 E
* Sample locations: E- Effluent, I - Influent, U - Upstream approximately 100 feet above outfall, D- Downstream approximately 0.3 miles
below outfall at the NCSR1493 bridge
** The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 5.0 mg/1.
The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units and shall be monitored weekly at the effluent�u strum,
atWdbiV - reeam'by grab sample. d�v
,,v dv v v liva ..
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
Twr �ua/ Colile v e(u1r>•+_Cl�cu'/ v+yc)
bs i
0,

Part III \ Permit No. NC0065587
E. The facility discharges into a stream with 7Q10/30Q2=0 cfs. Removal of discharge is
recommended if a more environmentally sound alternative is available at an economically
reasonable cost. An engineering report evaluating alternatives to discharge is due 180 days prior to
permit expiration along with the permit reYiewal application. As part of the report, the cost of
constructing a treatment plant at the dischaige\\point to meet limits of 5 mg/I BODS, 2 mg/1 NH3 as
N, 6.0 mg/I DO, and 17.0 µg/I chlorine should also be included if there are no feasible alternatives
to a surface discharge. Upon review of/ihe results of the engineering report, the Division retains
the right to reopen and modify this NPDES permiNo require removal of the discharge or to revise
the permit limitations within a specified/time scheduler
I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health arid Natural Resources 4 0 0
Division of Water Quality
AW� K
James B. Hunt, Governor FEE N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
WATER QUALM SECTION
PERMIT NAME/0WNERS�ANGE FORM
1 t^tiRRFNTPERMILINFORMATION-
Permit Number. NC/ 0 /-L/ 6 /5 / 5 /Lj 7
1. Permit holder's name: MID SOUTH WATER SYSTEMS Mr. - FRYE BRIDGE (FORSYTH)
2, permit's signing official's name and title: THOMAS CARROLL WEBER
(P,erson legally responsible for permit)
PRESIDENT
(Title)
3; MailinSaddress• P.O. BOX 127 City, SHERRILLS FORD
Stagy NC ZSpCode 28673 phone:(828) 478-2785
II NEW Qh ER/NAME I ORMATIOlY:
1. This iequest'for a liame change is a result oF.
X a. Change in ownership of pmperty/company
gyp. Name change only
__c. Other(please explain):
IN
HEATER: UTILITIES C
2. New owres's name(niiate to be put on permit) ;
JERRY H. TWEED
3. New owner's or signing official's name and title: (Person legally responsible for permit)
VICE PRESIDENT
(Title)
4. Mailing address: P.O. DRAWER 4889 City CARY
919 467-8712 EXT. 37
State- NC Zip Code•,_ 27519 — Phone:( )
p•C.9"29535.FRalelgh.North Carolina Z7626-0535 Talephona(919)7335063 FAX[phone]
An E7ue1 Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled!10%post—onsumer paper

PERMIT NAME I OWNERSHIP CHANGE FORM
THIS APPLICATION PACKAGE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED BY THE DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
UNLESS ALL OF THE APPLICABLE ITD45 LISTED BELOW ARE INCLUDED WITH THE SUBMITTAL
REQUIRED ITEMS:
1. This completed application
2. Processing fee of$100.00 (Checks to be made payable to DEHNR)
3. Legal documentation of the transfer of ownership (such as a contract, deed, articles of
incorporation)
Certification must be completed and signed by both the current permit holder and the
new applicant in the case of change of ownership. For name change only, complete and
sign the application certification.
Current Permittee's Certification
I, THOMAS CARROLL WEBER attest that this application for
name/bwnership change has been reviewed and is accurate and complete to the best of
my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this application are not
completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not
included; this application package will be returned as incomplete.
Signature: �� J Date: 647Z9q'
Applicant's Certification:
I, JERRY H. TWEED attest that this application for a
name/ownership change has been reviewed and is accurate and complete to the best of
my knowledge. I understand that if aIl required parts of this application are not
completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not
included, this application package will be returned as incomplete.
Signature: V ( Date. �. 1 7�99
THE COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALL SUPPORTING
INFORMATION & MATERIALS, SHOULD BE SENT TO THE FOLLOWING ADDDRESS:
NC DEHNR,Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section, Permits and Engineering Unit
P. O.Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535

(/GOD d 5757
a Heater 202 Macth ar Court
Carolina
I. C Cary,North Carolina 27511
utilities phone:[phone]
u /ax:919.460.1788
WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICES P.O.Drawer 4889,Cary,NC 27519
June 22, 1999 M
0 D
iut� z2
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES
P.O. Box 29535 DENR - WATER QUALITY
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Re: Transfer (Name Change) of Mid South Water Systems, Inc. to Heater
Utilities, Inc.
Dear Sir:
On May 17, 1999, ownership of all of the assets of the water and
wastewater systems of Mid South Water Systems, Inc. was transferred to Heater
Utilities, Inc. Enclosed are the following applications for name change:
DISCHARGE PERMITS
PERMIT NUMBER SYSTEM NAME COUNTY
Lk(0074535 Pier 16 Marina Iredell 30 53 2-
.XW 0080691 Windemere Iredell 300 3
a4-,0067784 Governor's Island Lincoln 30 5 3 Z
NCO065749 Ashe Plantation Mecklenburg 30 y/Z
NCO065773 Willows Creek/Farmwood Mecklenburg 3670
LN00063860 Harbor Estates Mecklenburg 30V Y
,NC0063789 Mint Hill Festival Mecklenburg 36 g 3 y
NCO063584 Oxford Glen/Reigate Mecklenburg 3 6 7/Z
NCO065684 Country Woods East Union 3 a 7/y
sN'L`0058742 Country Valley Catawba 3o$3 L
tA0063355 Killian Crossroads Catawba 36$ )L
:NC0062456 Riverwood Estates Catawba 5.01 3 2
.60060593 Spinnaker Bay Catawba 3 0$ 3 Z
MTCO065587 Frye Bridge Forsyth 3o70q
Ply 075205 Alexander Island Iredell 3 0 $ 3
✓QC0056154 Castaway/Bridgeport Iredell 3 o $3 Z
►KO074772 Diamond Head Iredell '3 0 $3 2
L460062481 Mallard Head Iredell 301932
�072061 Fox Run (Filter Backwash) Gaston 3 0 6;7
L4 0084468 Keltic Meadows (Filter Backwash) Gaston j9av"
- C0086193 Maplecrest (Filter Backwash) Gaston 3 v$3 7
t.N�0086142 Oakley Park (Filter Backwash) Gaston 3 0$3 7
Nl60'069035 Southgate (Filter Backwash) Gaston 30937

Page Two
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES
June 22, 1999
Also enclosed are copies of the contract for sale of the systems, the
North Carolina Utilities Commission Order Approving the Transfer and Notice to
the Commission of the June 17, 1999, closing.
If I can provide further information, please do not hesitate to contact
me at 919-467-8712, Ext. 37.
Sincerely,
err H. Tweed
Vice President
JHT/rt
Enclosures

NORTH CAROLINA
FORSYTH COUNTY.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law toadminister oaths, personally
appeared D.H. Stanfield, who being duly swom, deposes and says: that he is
Controller of Piedmont Publishing Company,Inc.,engaged in the publishing of
a newspaper known as Winston-Salem Journal, published, issued and entered as
second class mail in the City of Winston-Salem,in said county and State: that he
is authorized to make this affidavit and swom statement: that the notice or other
legal advertisement, a true copy of which is attached hereto, was published in
Winston-Salem Journal on the following dates.
April 21, 1999
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper document, or legal
advertisement was published was,at the time of each and every such publication,
a newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications of Section 1-597 of
the General Statues of North Carolina and was a qualified newspaper within the
meaning of Section 1-597 of the general statues of North Carolina.
This 22 day of April 1999 6dW �a21L
ignam.e ifpV mating pdavill srAre ov XOXm CXflOIAU
vaNwoxMMir XaxmExExr coXa�sl�{.a±==
��'. aN� P0.5T OFF10EBp;'ffiT'
�aa r.Oti=F.�ro1�5AlEa SrA=.M Nn"PFAW�
Sworn to and subscribed before me,ails 22 day of April 1999 r,.
CJayb ld.GwyyepYad NtaTLamrq g4lelia Pl.Sry)aee
Dr WIaeNUW W rtpldbp.tle NrbfiaEr EmtonNr�
m lbymsa Cam�mbnpalmbbbauaarrrttb�Yam{ab
�Psav 44l blex tlCM b)!b W nElaa baDdN ma4
Notary Public m.P' ,,. mawiv..,X`Oi;.',wyv0�tlmu:aeo°�`P�O.eyr°tl n"y.,
r�se�.neapbmw<eceoneam�Wo.m
.1 pe6cmemgmryee Mmbus w.amnpmE `m.
My Commission expires:September 28,2000 ��raraomaav�aePXa acicne.r,.ab,
FaxM Omllem�ey IMDNIaMM
r.,p.0.m p','.Ixtiarca,ev
zr�ons,IX+aPri�'mly
e>e Nov Ivwm �r�••Te�o.�x sans�.
muX.amanmmxa.a
norm ara mmm e v u
-- ba ma.n.b mniXau elroanawl stoyzn!axa
OFFICIAL SEAL lmrarom MPDES erma tuner hm edon
�1 Nolary Public North Cw1h�,� � la,
CCA GmbNi b i x
` - m Em r.naw Ma �
COUNTY OFFOA r-n L
9N3J.p PoByC NO110E F
L 11REllriO RS11E•
KIMALEY OtiNSCN / nxrE NPoES EExlmmrraeEauowlNc
� .1n Ja 1 xwEs xv xwwlsn $aYw.pyu,u-'Rai us
My Commission Expires Rai >mrrt.� zmpGpa_ w pem.I mN..yaa
acssc+orz uS.lxv�i.sq
erIDrl Nnemc aaOvub�lM RTra Ys1A
Wv KSN G Aeyn n pNYaFA-ey raa RM Eaalfl aMdl laq a
]010 hr.a m Sa9 tla,No ppragap yp,rair y¢Ny fXNµ ern ra
� 2NIpE5 H>NCMIpIro.Nipp('patYBmNdEyabRZl1-'Aya1
Man Spaat 1NMeaeve.NC'f�leuappaeabaPrmNDNnnI ba
/� A 6XwMMO.VIu A�EI.n>4ry5r/av178'I VTaa POD
OAMM
m eaa]Uvnaspc+'n ve wCMiitoO hOyal4n Pxs,a
LOf�V qYm ii IIR YdEFYHpyya qMf°'=Npyrameba
efla aDM raD.e,ema:a a=waa mw seo-xe.v.ee�
a xPoEs xu xlms+sr:ua san wma$Sryrylpg�ff§5
PNdnX®E.&Ira$FPd.N(,'RSTdxssa@Wb'a �Drymb
r aanDc��mx,mmrE,lea F ma
C wam1 1rmmaRbam
. J\ xCSfl�S, uy anyn Lunar Omh axmrq®OW
J xcommmlmm.aN na.m.ban ae b w mr.mmeo
�alxr m uwer�a rhv vnN arn m w.y.exa.Pea pea
rot eay.Er as®IPVrnMa.mdaurlWloaa Op.mYjAlxp nr
ma�a .a eemwDv ms nor Gaq laiu:.w
alorr e:�w wumme b mamw.ealwyX nwn IM
aI-M&S M. L
� MraNSWS rcNCzmabavw1braN-
-r®1 N0114 K^.rFavi4.Orvu CuaTY.11X tdmh/ S
b ¢a GMr
w�moemrl aumemc waNe.nr non aD aeen:m anmaam.e
SCuay b Grysy CIpF.a Llm C mmn�lee Yab��Pn Cm Mr
s�.�rwlba>olam.aamaneaaoozrcwaam.eoos,am
em.V�elaNbaC flraP Ma�vmmees�arzanyvcv.�w�Ee
�+�=nae Da may anennwe.ar a�mm emD.aw .nnanma

7
f� 1G,b ?
MID SOUTH water Systems, Inc. y�sr y (`
PO Box 127 / / /�° Do iq !
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673
[phone]
4r4� qiw �r�- �tity�Q / '
May 12, 1999 /
Mr. Mike Templeton
NPDES Permitting Unit
P. O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
RE: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit No. NCO065587
Frye Bridge WWTP
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Templeton:
In follow up to our previous conversation, this is to advise that Mid South Water Systems, Inc.
objects to the Draft Permit dated April 14, 1999. The objection we have relates to the composite
sampling requirements for all parameters. Our objection is based on the fact that certain types of
samples can never be collected by composite means (i.e. pH, D.O., temperature, chlorine, etc.)
Furthermore, based on the size of the plant (0.027 MGD)we do not feel there is a real need for
the "composite" sample requirement.
Therefore, we respectfully request that the composite requirement for any parameter be stricken
from the permit.
If you should have any questions regarding this issue, please contact me at your earliest
convenience.
Sincerely,
Tony R. Parker ry
Vice-President Utility Operations (Jok I< f-I Pµ a l �tfa p;/ Ire
1+yrcu
r
TRP:jfr olkevo +y -k' 11;,,
` , rab 5 ret
t
F t .
)r4, uw /iwddr

Re: Questions from permittee
Subject: Re: Questions from permittee
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 09:57:55-0400
From: "Dave Goodrich" <[e-mail]> Internal
To: Mike Templeton <[e-mail]>
I agree with your comments and appreciate that Evans is just trying to understand his permit. Most of the time we
do send cover letters with the draft permits, so I'm not sure what the deal is with this one. My guess is that Jeff
simply applied the rules on the composite sampling and Evans is asking for consideration of deviance from these.
(It also could be that Jeff misapplied the rules, which allow grab samples for discharges <30,000 gpd.) Obviously,
his last comment is a wording issue. The 5/2 -- I'm not sure about this one. This shouldn't be a new requirement.
My take on this is to let Evans know that we're down staff and that it'll be easier for Jeff to get back to him after we
receive his written comments. Unfortunately, Jeffs schedule doesn't allow him to return calls like this during
normal business hours. One other option I didn't think of earlier is that he can leave a message on Jeffs
answering machine (ext. 597). I'll ask Jeff which he'd prefer for future reference. Thanks for your help.
Mike Templeton wrote:
I will call Mr. Evans back and remind him to put his comments in writing to us. In this case, however, he wants
to talk with someone who can explain why we made the changes in his permit, more for the sake of
understanding them than for challenging them. If he more clearly understood what is going on, he may not even
have any comments.
Soapbox note: I think we should routinely provide a summary of permit changes with the draft permits, either by
adding it to the cover letters or by enclosing the fact sheets with the permits. Permittees need to understand
what their permits require and why, so they can take the necessary steps to meet those requirements. At the
very least, it would avoid a lot of confusion among the permittees, which might otherwise lead to adjudications
or- at the least- more misunderstandings.
Dave Goodrich wrote:
Mike-
Did you tell Tony to put his comments in writing? If not, would you please call and advise him to do so?. This
will enable us to consider his comments in the final permit without having to rely on Jeff to fit a return call into
his rather hectic schedule.
Thanks,
Dave
Mike Templeton wrote:
Tony Evans of Mid-South Water Systems called this morning about the Frye Bridge permit(NC0065587)
now out for review. He has some questions/comments and would like to talk with someone about them. Is
this something for Jeff to handle and do his work hours here allow it? Please advise. Mr. Evans' phone
number is 828-478-2785.
Here are the issues he mentioned on the phone:
. switch from grab to composite sampling. Plant is 27,000 gpd, and comps are excessive even if the
plant does not have adequate equalization up front.
. 5/2 limits. Again, it's a small plant. He believes they can probably meet the limits for a while -with
plant improvements- but will have problems meeting them in the future.
. downstream sampling point. The road crossing given is a culvert, not a bridge. Just needs
clarification.
Mike Templeton
NCDENR/ DWQ/ NPDES
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
-or-
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-733-5083 x541
919-733-0719 (fax)
1 of 2 5/13/99 8:09 am

Date sent: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 13:34:54 -0500
From: Mark McIntire <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Frye Bridge (Heater Utilities)...
Thanks for the note. I just spoke with a lady from Heater Utilities.
She indicated that the draft permit proposed composite sampling for fecal
and pH. This is probably a mistake. Those are two of the parameters we
maintain grab samples for regardless of flow.
[e-mail] wrote:
> I think is one that had comments during the public notice period. If
> so, Dave and I are still working out some of the issues. I have four
> permits that need some clarification before we can issue them. I
> will check this weekend and get back to you.❑
> Take care!
> Jeff
Mark D. McIntire
Environmental Engineer
NPDES Unit - Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone], extension 553
mailto:[e-mail]
1 -- Wed, 8 Dec 1999 16:40:29

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesDivision of Water Quality (4: J0
=Stevens,
vernor R
etary
tor
Loa
Jc,,w.ety ZS,
-Apnf-d4-199
Mr. T4iomas-C-arroll Weber wee Pres;de'
Iv1id=South-Water-Systems-Inc. � �s.J c ,4r,�✓
P.O. -
ram! YH69
SLPvri.11s-F-o4A North Carolina a86-7`3 '
e'-A�, 2-7sr9
Subject: Draft NPDES Permit
Permit No. NCO065587
Frye Bridge WWTP
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Weber:
A draft copy of NPDES permit NCO065587 is attached to this letter for your review and comment.
Please review the draft carefully and submit any comments in writing within 30 days. Please be advised
that the following changes have been incorporated into the permit renewal:
The permit expiration date has been changed. The permit renewal will expire on May 31,
2004. The expiration date has been revised so that an equal number of permit renewals will
come in at any one time. This change will allow the Division to issue permits more
efficiently.
The stream classification for the unnamed tributary to Muddy Creek, at the location of yourldyl�
point source discharge, has been changed from C to WS-IV.
i The summer and winter limits for$AB-arid ammonia have been revised./fhe facility will _
have to meet a-$AD-limit-of-5-m5°7"ancr-ate ammonia limit of 2.0 ma/1/by May 1, 2002.
These limits were incorporated into the permit renewal because the facility discharges into a
zero now stream. -Ne-a Item ative discharge options-have-been>i den tified.�
i Special Condition E has been deleted. An EAA was submitted with the renewal application.
i The upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for pH have been deleted. Division
policy does not require instream pH monitoring.
P.O.fox
Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10%pgst-consumer paper

Permit No. NCO065587
Frye Bridge WWTP
Paoe 2 of 2
�I
The upstream and downstream monitoring requirements for conductivity and temperature
have been deleted. It has been determined that these sampling requirements are no longer
necessary. H y rcc..1
The sample type for all parameters has been changed from grab samples to composite
samples at the request of the Regional office. The Region requested this revision due to the
fact that the WWTP does not have an equalization basin. In addition, it was noted that an
upstream pump station causes frequent hydraulic surges in the system.
i Quarterly monitoring for Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus has been included in the draft
permit. The Division has included these monitoring requirements for all dischargers in the
Yadkin Basin. The results of this additional monitoring will be used in the development of a
nutrient management strategy for the Yadkin Basin.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Charles Weaver at [phone].
extension 511.
Si @rely,
f rev My
NPDE ni
cc: NPDES Unit

qv
MID SOUTH Water systems, Inc. Zy
PO Box 127
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673 �•. G(/v'D(/
January 27, 1998 [phone]
Mr. David Goodrich
NPDES Unit Supervisor Water Quality Section
N. C. DEHNR Division of Water Quality t
P.
Ralleeigh,N.C. 27626-0535 PO\ SO�RCti 0 t!
Subject: Permit No. NCO065587
Frye Bridge WWTP a
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Goodrich:
Mid South requests renewal of the above permit. In support of our request and to comply with permit
requirements,we are enclosing One(1)copy of an engineering report examining wastewater disposal
alternatives. A copy of the report is also being forwarded to your Winston-Salem office.
We propose to continue to discharge at the same location and with the same limits as in the current permit.
The engineering report concludes that upgrading the plant to meet limits of 5 mg/I BOD5 and 2 mg/l NH3-N
is economically unreasonable. Other alternatives studied in the evaluation were more expensive than the
plant upgrade. The plant serves a subdivision with 55 potential connections and there arc no plans for
expansion. With the low number of customers, the cost of an upgrade is prohibitive. Furthermore,there is no
indication that the discharge from the plant on the tributary is causing a significant detrimental impact. We
hope that you will be able to consider this as you review our renewal request.
We request a minor modification in the monitoring requirements as they may be written in the renewed
permit. We suggest that time upstream monitoring of pH,conductivity, and temperature be dropped and that
the monitoring of these parameters in the effluent be required at maximum on a weekly schedule.
I certify under penalty of law,that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,
or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted is, to time best
of my knowledge and belief,true,accurate,and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Sumccrcly,
Thomas Carroll Weber
President
cc: Winston-Salem Regional Office
L0924.WPD

MID SOUTH Water Systems, Inc.
PO Box 127
Sherrills Ford, North Carolina 28673
February 17, 1998 [phone]
Mr. Charles Weaver,Jr.
NPDES Unit- Water Quality Section
N. C. DEHNR Division of Water Quality
P. O. Box 29535
Raleigh,N.C. 27626-0535 IVJ
Subject: Permit No. NC0065587 -Renewal Request FEB
Frye Bridge WWTP CC)URCE BRANCH
Forsyth County
Dear Mr. Weaver:
In response to your request of February 9, 1998, I have prepared and enclose Three(3)copies of the NPDES
short form D and One(1)copy of an engineering report examining wastewater disposal alternatives for the
above site. It is our understanding that the current permit may be extended during the period that the Division
is reorganizing the NPDES renewal schedule separate from the actual renewal. We look forward to contact
by the staff assigned to our review.
Sincerely,
W. Ronald Haynes, P.E.
Vice President- Engineering
cc: Winston-Salem Regional Office
L0934.WPD

' ENGINEERING ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
OF NPDES PERMIT OPTIONS
FOR A 7Q10/30Q2=0 CFS DISCHARGE
FRYE BRIDGE WWTP
' FORSYTH COUNTY
1
1
8 Prepared for:
MID SOUTH WATER SYSTEMS
SHERRILL'S FORD, NORTH CAROLINA
1
Prepared by:
TRIANGLE ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
0N\GAR Zii',,y
`` � WS, �9
SEAL t1 s
_ 0219n 0 =
JANUARY 1998 W.
MIDSOUTH�FRYEBRDGIFRYEBRDG.DOC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. GENERAL INFORMATION I
A. Existing Facility 2
B. Compliance History 2
aII. EVALUATION 2
A. Connection to Sewerage System (Alternative 1) 2
' B. Subsurface Disposal (Alternative 2) 4
C. Spray Irrigation (Alternative 3) 5
D. Relocation of Discharge (Alternative 4) 6
E. Existing Discharge (Alternative 5) 7
III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8
IV. SUMMARY 11
1
tLIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Site Location Map
' LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Sewer Connection
Table 2 Land Application
Table 3 Relocation of Discharge
Table 4 Current Discharge
Table 5 Summary of Alternatives
Table 6 Monitoring History
MIDSOUTFRFRYERRDGFRYEQRDG.DOC

' ENGINEERING ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
' Facility: Frye Bridge WWTP
NPDES Pennit No: NCO065587
County: Forsyth County
' Pennittee: Mid South Water Systems
Address: Post Office Box 127
Sherill's Ford,NC 28673
a Receiving Stream: Unnamed Tributary to Muddy Creek
in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin
Topographic Location: Welcome Quad (#D 17NE)
(A location map with longitude and latitude of the
discharge point is attached as Figure 1 in Appendix A.)
Report Preparer: Triangle Environmental, Inc.
Mr. Richard DiMassimo, P.E.
Preparer's Certification: NC Professional Engineer# 21973
Preparer's Address: P.O. Box 41087, Raleigh, North Carolina 27629
[phone]
' Report Date: January 26, 1998
i
MIDSOUTH\FRYF:BRDG\FRYEBRDG.DOC I .

A. Existing Facility
' The existing facility is a package wastewater treatment system serving the Frye Bridge
Subdivision. The Frye Bridge Development is comprised of approximately 55 dwellings.
' The design flow for the system is 27,000 gallons per day. The treatment system includes
a bar screen, flow monitoring, aeration basin, clarifier, aerated sludge holding tank,
chlorine contact tank, and post aeration.
' B. Compliance History
8 Monitoring data for all of 1997 has shown an average daily flow of 0.0086 million
e gallons per day (MGD), an average biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) concentration of
8.7 mg/L, an average total suspended solids of 13.8 mg/L, an average effluent dissolved
oxygen (DO) concentration of 7.60 mg/L, and an average Ammonia as Nitrogen
concentration of 3.98 mg/L. Based on this data, the impact of the Frye Bridge discharge
' upon the receiving waters should be minimal.
IL EVALUATION
A. Connection to Sewerage System (Alternative 1)
1.0 Feasibility
The closest municipal sewer system to the Frye Bridge WWTP is the publicly owned
Muddy Creek WWTP. According to Stan Webb, WWTP Operations Manager, City of
Winston-Salem, the publicly owned treatment works (POTW) has sufficient flow
capacity and would be willing to accept wastewater from the subdivision provided
approval is given by the Winston-Salem Public Utilities Department.
' z MIDSOUIN\FRYEBRDGTRYEBRDG.DOC

' The closest sewer manhole was located at approximately 7,000 feet from the package
plant. It is feasible that a pump station and force main could be constructed to connect
Frye Bridge to the sanitary sewer system, provided that required right-of-ways could be
obtained.
e
2.0 Cost
' 2.1 Capital Cost
A breakdown of the estimated capital costs to install a pump station and force main to the
City sewer system are shown in Table 1. The costs include the installation of a new dual
pump station and controls with redundant power supply and a new 7,000 LF 4-inch PVC
force main. For cost estimating purposes, Triangle has selected a life expectancy of 20
eyears. Triangle assumes that two pumps will be replaced every seven years.
2.2 Operating Cost
The estimated operating costs are also included in Table 1. The operating costs include
the pump station power.usage, necessary maintenance for regular cleaning and repairs,
' and the sewer fee. The sewer fee is based on 100% of water consumption, and a usage
fee of$1.229 per 100 cf(100 cf=approximately 750 gallons).
1
M I DSOUTI t\F RYEBRDG\FRYEB RUG.DOC

' B. Subsurface Disposal (Alternative 2)
1.0 Feasibility
Triangle performed several soil borings within a 2-acre area adjacent to the treatment
plant. Based on soil boring information and information obtained from the Forsyth
County Soil Survey, the soils, in general, can be described as Pacolet clay loams,
Chewacla loams, with some Appling loams. These poorly drained areas consist of loams
' and silty clay loams from 0 to 2 feet, and clays and silty clays through a depth of
approximately 3.5 feet below surface. Evidence of a seasonal high water table of
approximately 3.5 feet was observed and a seasonal high water table of 1.5 feet below
surface has been published in the soil survey. Soils of this nature have been characterized
as provisionally suitable for land application systems. NCAC T15A .1942 states that sites
where soil wetness conditions are present within less than 36 inches below the naturally
occurring soil surface shall be considered unsuitable.
The topography of the area near the package plant can be described as hilly terrain with
slopes ranging from 10%to 50%.
In Triangle's opinion, subsurface disposal is not a technically feasible alternative due to
' the presence of marginal soils, a high seasonal high water table, and the degree of site
relief exceeding that recommended for these types of treatment systems.
2.0 Cost
Since subsurface disposal is not considered to be technically feasible, the cost of this type
of treatment system was not examined.
4
M IDSOUTI{\FR VEB RllG\FRYEBRDG.DOC

C. Spray Irrigation (Alternative 3)
1.0 Feasibility
Triangle investigated the possibility of constructing a spray irrigation disposal system for
Frye Bridge. Based on soil borings performed by Triangle personnel and a soil
classification of Chewacla loams, Pacolet clay loams, and Appling loams, Triangle has
recommended an application rate of 0.50 to 0.75 inches/acre/week. Triangle contacted
Mike Mickey,North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), Winston-Salem
Regional Office, who verified that these application rates were within the feasible design
range for this part of Forsyth County. Using a 0.027 MGD design flow rate, a spray field
of 9.3 acres is required. It is estimated that adding the required buffer areas to the spray
field could increase the total land requirements to 12 to 14 acres. A total of 32 acres is
potentially available as adjacent property. The 32 acres is a moderately to heavily
ewooded area consisting of young soft wood pines and cedar trees. Naturally occurring
drainage features and the presence of a creek and its tributaries could limit the total usable
acreage to less than 15 acres.
2.0 Cost
2.1 Capital Cost
' The cost to construct a spray irrigation disposal system has been estimated and is
presented in Table 2. It is estimated that a total of 40 to 50 sprinkler heads will be
required. In addition, a 60 day lined wet weather holding pond would be required. Since
there can be a high seasonal high water table in this area, there is the potential need for a
significant amount of fill to construct the dike walls, making lagoon construction costly.
Based on the permitted flowrate (of 27,000 GPD) as a design rate, the wet weather
holding pond would be approximately 1.62 Mgal (2/3 acre pond, 8' deep). Since there is
limited suitable space near the package plant, two pump stations would be required. One
5
MIDSOUrMFRYEBRDGTRYEBRDG.DOC -

' pump station to convey package plant effluent to the holding pond and a second irrigation
pump station.
2.2 Operating Cost
1 The estimated operating costs are also included in Table 2. The operating costs include
the transfer pump station power usage, the irrigation pump station power usage, labor to
perform necessary maintenance on both pump stations, and spray nozzles.
I). Relocation of Discharge (Alternative 4)
1.0 Feasibility
It is technically feasible to relocate the package plant discharge to a different stream or
downstream where the 7Q10>0. Triangle searched the USGS Water Supply Paper 2403
(Low-Flow Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina) for a continuous or partial-
record gauging station. No 7Q10 data could be found for the streams in question. A
tributary to the present receiving water is located approximately 4,000 feet downstream
of the existing discharge. Triangle has estimated that at this point the 7Q10>0.
Approximately four right-of-way agreements would be required to obtain an easement for
installation of a gravity sewer line; these have been assumed to be attainable.
2.0 Cost
2.1 Capital Cost
The estimated capital costs shown on Table 3 include costs associated with a 4,000 linear
feet of gravity 8-inch sewer pipe installation, the site work needed along the creek, and an
estimate for acquiring the necessary easements.
6
MIDSOLM BFRYEBRDGIFRYEBRDG.DOC

2.2 Operating Cost
jThe estimated operating costs included on Table 3 are for maintaining the existing
treatment system and the new gravity sewer line.
E. Existing Discharge (Alternative 5)
1.0 Feasibility
The existing NPDES effluent permit monthly limits are 30 mg/1 BOD5 and 30 mg/1 TSS.
There are presently no permit limits for NH3-N and DO.
Since the receiving stream is a 7Q10=0 surface water, Mid South is required by permit to
eexamine the cost of constructing facility upgrades to meet new limits of 5 mg/L BOD5, 2
mg/L NH3-N, 6 mg/L minimum DO, and 17 ug/L chlorine.
It is technically feasible to construct upgrades to the package plant for the additional
treatment required to meet the proposed limits. These upgrades would consist of
increasing the size of the aeration basin to approximately 32,000 gallons (in order to
decrease the BOD mass loading rates to 1 lb BOD/d/1,000 CF of aeration, this will also
increase hydraulic detention at 0.027 MGD flow from 24 hours to 30 hours), installation
' of a deep bed sand filter, installation of fine bubble diffusers within a new post-aeration
basin, and addition of a tablet dechlorinator. Although mono-medium deep bed sand
filters are typically used to increase TSS removal, a beneficial BOD reduction is
' observed.
7 MIDSOUn RFRYEBRDG\FRYEBRDG.DOC -

1 2.0 Cost
2.1 Capital Cost
A breakdown of the estimated capital costs to upgrade the package plant are shown in
Table 4. The costs include the installation of a tertiary sand filter with backwash holding-
tank, additional aeration basin capacity, a tablet dechlorinator, a post-aeration basin with
fine bubble diffusers, and upgrades to the existing clarifier and return sludge piping. For
cost estimating purposes, Triangle has selected a life expectancy of 20 years.
2.2 Operating Cost
The estimated operating costs for the treatment plant are shown in Table 4. The operating
costs include the power usage, operator labor, monitoring requirements, regular
maintenance, and solids disposal.
III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Capital Cost, Operating Cost, and the Present Worth for the discharge alternatives
Triangle believes to be technically feasible are summarized in Table 5. The Present
Worth has been computed based on a 20-year term at an interest rate of 8%. Conclusions
for each technically feasible alternative are presented below:
8 MIDS01J_MFRYEBRDQFRYEBRDG.DOC

' ALTERNATE 1: CONNECTION TO SEWERAGE SYSTEM
' A pump station with redundant power source and 7,000 linear foot 4-inch PVC force
main would need to be installed to convey wastewater to the City outfall sewer. The
cost of this alternative is very high in proportion to the volume of wastewater, and
further consideration for this alternative is not recommended.
• The discharge of the Frye Bridge domestic waste to the City POTW may be the
preferred alternative at a future date if further development of the area results in
gravity sewer being installed in closer proximity to the package plant. Bobby Huff of
the City of Winston-Salem Public Utilities Planning Department said that there are no
future plans to install a public sewer line in this area; however, if a public sewer line
were to be installed, the cost for connection to the POTW may no longer be
prohibitive.
ALTERNATE 2: SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL
The land area adjacent to the existing package plant has been considered unsuitable for a
subsurface disposal system. Therefore, subsurface disposal is not recommended.
ALTERNATE 3: LAND APPLICATION (SPRAY IRRIGATION)
A spray irrigation system has been considered as a non-discharge alternative. However,
the cost of this alternative is extremely high in proportion to the volume of wastewater,
and further consideration for this alternative is not recommended.
9
MIDSOUTHTRYEBRDGIFRYFBRDG.DOC

i .
ALTERNATE 4: RELOCATING THE DISCHARGE
The discharge could feasibly be relocated 4,000 feet downstream of the existing point of
discharge into the same receiving water where the 7Q 10 may be greater than zero.
Triangle cannot quantify any significant benefit to water quality from this additional
construction. Further, the construction of the gravity lines inherent to this alternative may
be somewhat detrimental to water quality due to a reduction in the effluent recharge rate
and temporary siltation from installation of the sewer lines. The cost of this alternative is
very high in proportion to the volume of wastewater. Therefore, this alternative is not
recommended.
ALTERNATE 5: EXISTING DISCHARGE
• According to the economic analysis presented in this report, continuing the current
discharge is the most cost-effective alternative. However, the cost of constructing
plant upgrades to the Frye Bridge WWTP to meet the limits proposed in Section E,
Part III of the current NPDES permit, is considered very high in proportion to the
volume of wastewater discharged. It will be very difficult to impose a rate increase
on Frye Bridge customers in order to finance the upgrade. It is anticipated that the
Public Utility Commission will not approve this rate increase.
i
• Based on the historical monitoring history, the current plant most likely has minimal
iimpact upon the water quality of the existing receiving water. Using 1997 average
effluent concentrations and an average daily flowrate of 8,600 GPD (see Table 6),
imass loadings of 0.6 lb BOD/day and 0.7 lb NH3-N/day have been calculated. In
addition, the in-stream monitoring data indicate no significant decreases in DO in the
receiving stream.
10
MIDSOUTI FFRYE6RDG\1-_LYEO RDG.DOC

' IV. SUMMARY
tA summary of the Present Worth Cost Estimates and Capital Cost and Annual Operating
Cost Components is included as Table 5 herein. The 20-year present worth of continuing
to operate the present plant and performing upgrades is estimated to be S381,131. The
tnext most financially feasible alternative is connecting to the public sewer system, with
estimated present worth of$469,134, approximately 23% greater than continuing the
present discharge. Therefore, the most economically sound discharge alternative is
continuation of the present discharge.
In Triangle's professional opinion, passing the capital costs of a major plant upgrade onto
athe Frye Bridge customers to meet 5 mg/L BOD and 2 mg/L NH3-N limits is
unreasonable, especially when the cost per gallon treated is considered. It should also be
noted that the nearby Muddy Creek POTW has an effluent BOD limit of 25 mg/L, no
winter NH3-N limit, and a summer NH3-N limit of 14 mg/L. The POTW discharges to
aMuddy Creek and Frye Bridge W WTP discharges to an unnamed tributary of Muddy
Creek. It is less than one and one-half miles from the discharge of the Frye Bridge
' treatment plant to Muddy Creek. This means that the majority of the BOD in the Frye
Bridge plant effluent is exerted in Muddy Creek, not in the tributary.
Assuming the POTW is at one half of its 21 MGD capacity, the mass loading of this plant
effluent into Muddy Creek would be more than one thousand times greater than that of
the Frye Bridge W WTP (at its current average flowrate and permit limits). Since no ill
effects on the receiving stream are apparent in the historical in-stream DO monitoring
data, continuing the current discharge under the existing permit limits is considered
environmentally and economically sound. Therefore, Triangle recommends that the new
' NPDES permit be issued with the same permit limits as the existing permit.
1
' MIDSOUT]RFRYEBRDG\FRYEBRDG.DOC

WELCOME QUADRANGLE
NORTH CAROLINA
I?5 MINUTE SERIES (1.OPOORAPHIC)
boo- � �• � - - .�;I / 1� _-- � •),��iT�� � �`p \�',� �' _l -._
�Na���k�n• t. <\ _ � J/,�� ' ri � �� \ i'1 ao ' 1 f� 1 1 � /i�
%• � lip( ��•I/> j '��`" -'`;���-1`�1�;`i� �l�l�; �_ ` = _ ��,� �¢-�\,. - � �', T ��; ,>
/ �
r.
r✓N � r! ' J��! ) It�li \ K'J u\ A J� s..pQ., i�\ / — c Jam.
lop
E � °
SCALE 1:240W
0 1 MILE
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET >,I
.5 0 1 KILOMETER
S !
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET \/
}
��� ar//>` _r..',Tt Ali�•.,.=. <) -� � /l � � . :/> l � I '� 1�\: �' .
PROJECT: PROJ F IOLRE:
=LE SITE LUCA7101V MAP 1o26 -OZZO
ATRT11
NJIRONMENTN-
INc. F12YE PR/t�GE WW7f� DRW"g'"O
P.O.1 ,I W
Ralcgt,N.C. 2'l629
(919)V1 5115 Fo SYTH COUNTY SCALE: (� ��/��
(WO)849-5115 AJ cJHo/Y/y -
(919)]90 73 fu

' •' TABLE 1
SEWER CONNECTION
Capital Cost I II
I
(ITEM QTY JUNITS IUNITCOST LINECOST
14" Force Main Installed 7,OOOIFT 141 98,000
Road Crossings 3 EA 6,000J 18,000
Piping & Mechanical 1 LS 7,OOOI 7,000
Pump Station 1 LS I 36,OOOI 36,000
Costs for other utility location 1 LS 5,0001 5,000
' (Erosion and Sed control 1 LS 1,050I 1,050
Cost of R-O-W agreements 20,0001 20,000
Contingency (10%) 1 15,900 15,900
Sub-Total 1 200,950
Connection Fees 1 LS 5,OOOJ 5,000
Design Engineering 1 ILS 25,119 25,119
Sub-Total 231,069
Operating Costl
IITEM QTY JUNITS (UNIT COST ILINE COST
Power 1ILS 1,5001 1,500
Maintenance I 1ILS 5,OOO1 5,000
eISewer Use Fee I 1UNIT .1.23/100CF 16,200
I Su b-Tota I 22,700
Q I
Present Value
I I
Interest rate 8%
Present value of$20,000 pumps and controls in 7, 14 years $15,194
Present value of 20 years of operating cost $222 872
(Capital Cost $231 069
;TOTAL $469,134
I I I

rTABLE 2
` LAND APPLICATION
rCapital Cost I I I
ITEM CITY UNITS I UNIT COST I LINE COST
r Site work/pond construction 1 LS 85,000 85,000
jlrrigation System/Force Main 1 LS I 20,0001 20,000
Irrig Pump Station/Chlorinator 1 LS 25,0001 25,000
_ 1Piping/Mechanical/sprinklers I 1 LS 1 15,0001 15,000
r IXfer Pump Sta. to Holding Pond 1 ILS 20,000 20,000
(Electric/ Instrumentation 1 ILS 1 24,0001 24,000
Clean-up/Closeout 1 ILS 1 4,000J 4,000
Bonds, Insurance & Permits 1 ILS ; 11,0001 _ _ 11,000
Freight& Taxes 1 ILS j 15,0001 15,000
r (Design Engineering 11LS i 30,0001 30,000
Purchase Land 161LS 14,0001 224,000
Contingency (10%) 11 1 47,3001 47,300
r (SUB-TOTAL ! 520,300
I I I
Operating Cost
r (ITEM I QTY I UNITSI UNIT COSTJ LINE COST
Power 1 LS 2,0001 2,000
IMaintenance 11LS 11,000 11,000
(Operating Labor 1 1 ILS 15,0001 15,000
rMonitoring I 11LS 10,0001 10,000
I S U B-TOTAL 38,000
r � I
I I
� I
Present Value
I
r — ilnterest rate I 10%
r Present value of 20 years of operating cost $ 323,515
Capital Cost $ 520,300
(TOTAL $ 843,815
r
1
r
r
r

TABLE 3
y RELOCATION OF DISCHARGE
Capital Cost
� I I
e JITEM I QTY I UNITSI UNIT COST I LINE COST
8" Sewer Piping Installed I 4000 LF 1 241 96,000
i R-O-W Acquisitions* 1ILS 1 35,0001 35,000
!Road Crossings 1 81LS 1 8,0001 64,000
1Contingency (10%) 1 1 1 1 19,500
IDesignEngineering 1 1ILS 1 32,1751 32,175
SUB-TOTAL 1 1 246,675
I I --I
includes estimate for cost of land(for 10 ft easement)and fees for surveying,appraisals,legal,
' real estate agent,and deed transfer
Operating Cost 1
,ITEM QTY UNITS UNIT COST LINE COST
Power 11LS 1 9001 900
8 !Operator Labor 11LS 1 10,0001 10,000
Monitoring 1 ILS 1 7,5001 7,500
!Maintenance 1ILS 1 7,0001 7,000
e :Sludge Disposal 6 EAJ 2001 1,200
:Chlorine 1 1ILS 1 1,0001 1,000
'SUB-TOTAL I I 1 27,600
aPresent Value
;Interest rate 8%
Present value of 20 years of operating cost $270,981
!Capital Cost 1 $246,675
TOTAL 1 $517,656
a

TABLE 4
y CURRENT DISCHARGE
Capital Cost
eI ITEM JQTY I UNITS J UNIT COST LINE COST
�tabletdechlorinator 1 1ILS 10001 $1,000
deep bed mono sand filter w/bw 1 1 ILS 1 400001 $40,000
surge tank/sand filter bw hold tank 1 ILS 1 50001 $5,000
additional aer basin volume 1 1 ILS 1 105001 $10,500
clarifier/sludge return piping upgrade 11LS 215001 $21,500
new piping/alterations/handrails/steps 1 11LS 40001 $4,000
' post aer tankw/fine bubble diffusers 11LS 1 45001 $4,500
Site work 11LS 1 35001 $3,500
Contingency (10%) 1 1 $8,650
Idesign fee/ATC/constr admin fee I 1 ILS 1 16,9001 $16,900
Sub Total $115,550
1
Operating Cost
I i I
ITEM QTY j UNITS;UNIT COSTI LINE COST
Power 1ILS 5001 500
Operator Labor 1 1 ILS 10,0001 10,000
Monitoring 1 1 jLS 7,5001 7,500
1 Maintenance 1 LS ; 5,5001 5,500
ISludge Disposal I 6 EA 3001 1,800
Chlorin 1 11LS 1,0001 1,000
Dechlor tablets 1 11LS 1 7501 750
SUB-TOTAL 27,050
Present Value
1 I I 1
Interest rate 1 8%
IPresent value of 20 years of operating cost $265,581
Capital Cost 1 $115,550
ITOTAL 1 $381,131
1

TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
' ALTERNATIVES CAPITAL COST ANNUAL OPERATING PRESENT WORTH
' COST
Alt#1 -Sewerage System $231,069 $22,100 $469,134
Alt#3 - Spray Irrigation $520,300 $38,000 $843,815
Alt#4 -Relocation of Discharge $246,675 $27,600 $517,656
Alt#5-Current Discharge with Plant Upgrades $115,550 $27,050 $381,131
$900,000
$800,000
L x z wi
$700,000
A Y f r3 { 3'i':�, ''7, '% 3
-'
s
$500,000 tz A.R.fa
$400,000 A
$300,000 ., ,'x �
e $200,000r�
bA
n
$100,000
Zb-
Alt#1 - Alt#3 - Alt#4 - Alt#5 -
' Sewerage Spray Relocation Current
System Irrigation of Discharge
Discharge with Plant Upjr..des
0 CAPITAL COST OANNUAL OPERATING COST a PRESENT WORTH

TABLE 6
MONITORING HISTORY
FLOW BOD NH3-N TSS DO Res Cl
(MGD) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (ug/L)
Oct-97 0.0090 15.9 1.24 16.1 5.90 764
Sep-97 0.0086 30.8 16.50 24.1 7.20 2,275
Aug-97 0.0072 2.0 6.48 6.3 6.40 2,244
Jul-97 0.0106 2.3 0.75 11.0 7.17 2,491
Jun-97 0.0100 8.0 7.95 17.8 7.10 2,000
May-97 0.0130 10.71 7.91 15.4 8.50 1,683
Apr-97 0.0080 4.3 1.44 11.3 8.30 751
Mar-97 0.0090 4.8 0.51 30.3 8.70 1,396
Feb-97 0.0054 3.0 0.70 9.9 10.10 1,788
Jan-97 0.0006 5.6 0.65 8.5 9.41 1,278
' Dec-97 0.0114 10.3 0.70 5.4 6.20 564
Nov-97 0.0102 6.3 2.90 9.5 6.20 538
Average 0.0086 8.7 3.98 13.8 7.60 1,481
exist permit limits 0.0270 30.00 NL 30.00 NIL NIL
permit limits 0.0270 5.00 2.00 30.00 6.00 17
1