NC0025909_Wasteload Allocation_19961217

NPDES DOCUHEN'1` SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0025909
Rutherfordton WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
,
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Correspondence
Speculative Limits
Instream Assessment (67b)
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
December 17, 1996
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the rezrerse side

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0025909
PERMI'1'1EE NAME:
FACILITY NAME:
Town of Rutherfordton
Rutherfordton Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Modification
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 3.0 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 90 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 10 %
Comments:
Town of Rutherfordton requests a flow increase from 1.0 MGD to 3.0
MGD and a relocation of the discharge point several hundred feet
downstream on Cleghorn Creek where it joins Stonecutter Creek. This
request is due to an expansion of a local textile industry.
RECEIVING STREAM: Cleghorn Creek
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-08-02
Reference USGS Quad: F 11 SW
(please attach)
County: Rutherford
Regional Office: Asheville Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 11/30/93 Treatment Plant Class: IIj7
Classification changes within three miles:
Class C down to the Broad River, remains a "C" until the Broad hits
the Green River where it becomes a WS-III, ± 5 miles
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:(
Jeff Myhra
ciAtf
Date: 10/10/96
Date:
nil (L.eh — Date: /
Modeler
Date Rec.
#
Sk&0
\o, (oI9(0
S5k(0
Drainage Area (mil ) 7,c3 Avg. Streamflow (cfs): /Z •
7Q10 (cfs) /, 8(0 Winter 7Q 10 (cfs) Z. $g 30Q2 (cfs) z
Toxicity Limits: IWC 7/ % Acu
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters ,Do/ n, er..e,4
Upstream Y Location R
Downstream
Y
Location 300itc
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOD5 (mg/1)
30
3 0
NH3-N (mg/1)
z
D.O. (mg/I)
TSS (mg/1)
:-
F. Col. (/100 ml)
,z<:
pH (SU)
AS/La/ C.1%z(w,ds,
Z8 uj/,_
28 iy(t.
//��
l,arJ.M u((,e
.0,4/cy M*X
d,8
- %,a,,, c(E CGt
76
Comments:
TW

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Town of Rutherfordton WWTP
NC0025909
90% Domestic / 10% Industrial
Existing
Modification
Cleghorn Creek
C
030802
Rutherford
Asheville
Myhra
10/10/96
F11SW
Request # 6
Stream Characteristic:
USGS #
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
1990 Low Flow
Report
7.8
1.86
2.88
12
4.02
71
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Facility requesting expansion to 3 MGD, and relocating discharge point to site on Cleghorn Creek
below confluence of Stonecutter Creek. Expansion flow to accommodate new textile plant @ 1.5
MGD and anticipated population growth. New limits of 30/2/5 and 30/4/5 will protect instream
Atii.,
DO. Limits and monitoring requirements for metals and other toxicants include limits for Cd and
Cn, monitoring for Cu, Ni, Pb, An and Hg.
„. Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments/from Reviewers:
4, fOf 4-IM0a toR. �olz c A1o��5 cue- ioziudus' fy 1iiA/ u,r/� bC` cltseiiitaL3rkcl
Recommended by:
Reviewed by
Instream Assess ent:#1,K-
egional i or:
Permits gineering:
Date: 11/21/96
Date: , 1 GI
Date: l z-//o/yiv
Date:
RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY:

2
Existing Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (14/1):
TP
TN (mg/1):
Recommended Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (14/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
1.0
30
monitor
2
90
200
6-9
monitor
Qrtrly
monitoring
Qrtrly
monitoring
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
3.0 3.0
30 30
2
5
30
200
6-9
28
Qrtrly
4
5
30
200
6-9
28
Qrtrly
monitoring monitoring
Qrtrly Qrtrly
monitoring monitoring
Limits Changes Due To:
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
Instream data
New regulations/standards/procedures
New facility information
WQorEL
WQ
WQ
WQ
Parameter(s) Affected
NH3, Res. Cl
TSS
(explanation of any modifications to past modeling analysis including new flows, rates, field data,
interacting discharges)
(See page 4 for miscellaneous and special conditions, if applicable)

3
Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit:
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
Existing Limits
Cadmium (ug/1):
Nickel (ug/1):
Lead (ug/1):
Zinc (ug/1):
Cyanide (ug/1):
Recommended Limits
Cadmium (ug/l):
Copper (ug/1):
Nickel (ug/1):
Lead (ug/1):
Zinc (ug/l):
Cyanide (ug/1):
Mercury (ug/1):
Limits Changes Due To:
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
New pretreatment information
Failing toxicity test
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
TOXICS/METALS
Chronic Ceriodaphnia P/F Qrtrly
48%
71%
JAN APR JUL OCT
Daily Max.
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Daily Max.
2.8
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
Qrtrly monitoring
7.0
Qrtrly monitoring
WQ or EL
Parameter(s) Affected
Hg, Cu
Cd, Cn
X_ Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
OR
No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.

4
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: Just above outfall
Downstream Location: 300 ft. below outfall
Parameters: Temperature, DO, Fecal Coliform, Conductivity
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment
facilities? Yes No
If no, which parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach schematic, toxics spreadsheet, copy of model, or, if not modeled, then old
assumptions that were made, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

Facility Name _Rutherfordton WWTP Permit # _NC0025909_ Pipe #_001
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic Bioassay
Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality
is _71_% (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document). The permit holder shall
perform quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The first
test will be performed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during the months of _
JAN APR JUL OCT. Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES permitted final effluent
discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements performed in
association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity
sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring will
begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test requirement will
revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and
modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate
retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will constitute
noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 1.86 cfs
Permitted Flow _3.0 MGD 2ommended by: 32."
IWC _71 % ).
Basin & Sub -basin _BRD02 ze /4, l 1,'
Receiving Stream _Cleghorn Creek 2 y°County _Rutherford e11/25/96
QCL P/F Version 9191

RUTHERFORDTON WWTP JMN
CLEGHORN CREEK 11/5/96
030802
Facility is requesting renewal of existing NPDES permit with expansion from 1 MGD
to 3 MGD. Town has submitted two environmental assessments regarding the
expansion. Additional flow is needed for projected growth and a new textile industry,
Spring Ford Knitting Co. that has decided to move from Spindale to Rutherfordton.
Spring Ford plans to be operational by 1997 and has requested to discharge 1.5 MGD to
the Town's WWTP.
Existing limits are for 1 MGD, BOD5 = 30 mg/1, TSS = 90 mg/I (lagoon system), fecal
coliform=200m1/100m1. Monthly monitoring for lead and chlorine. Quarterly monitoring
for Cd, Ni, Cn, Zn, TP and TN.
Instream monitoring for temperature, DO, fecal coliform,and conductivity. Monthly
values are okay, some monthly downstream values were near the standard in August (5.1
mg/1) and September (5.2 mg/1), 1995. However, there some daily DO values reported in
'95 and '96 that were at or below 5 mg/i.
Date Site DO Qw Eff.BOD5 Eff. DO
7/25/95 Ups 4.0 mg/1 0.492 nr 3.5
Dwn 4.5 mg/1
8/1/95 Ups 5.0 mg/1 0.472 nr 3.00
Dwn 3.5 mg/1
8/9/95 Ups 5.5 mg/1 0.644 2.00 4.00
Dwn 4.5 mg/1
8/16/95 Ups 5.0 mg/I 0.448 nr 4.00
Dwn 5.0 mg/1
9/6/95 Ups 4.5 mg/1 0.500 7.00 4.00
Dwn 5.0 mg/1
9/27/95 Ups 4.5 mg/1 0.452 nr 4.00
Dwn 4.0 mg/1
6/19/96 Ups 4.5 mg/1 0.836 nr 3.00
Dwn 5.0 mg/1
6/26/96 Ups 4.9 mg/1 0.540 nr 2.00
Dwn 5.0 mg/1
7/17/96 Ups 6.6 mg/1 0.576 nr 3.50
Dwn 5.0 mg/1
7/24/96 Ups 5.0 mg/1 0.536 nr 3.50
Dwn 4.5 mg/1
Ups-100 ft above outfall
Dwn- 300 ft below outfall

RUTHERFORDTON WWTP JMN
page 2
May need to look at giving WWTP an effluent DO limit of 5 mg/I to help
raise the instream values, especially with the expansion to 3 MGD. if the
stream is showing standard violations at an average of 0.550 MGD during
these months.
Telecon w/ Melanie Bryson of Pretreatment: Said that Rutherfordton does not
have a pretreatment program at this time, she has been trying for over a year to get started
for them. She said the existing plant was in very bad condition. I asked about metals and
toxicants to be limited at the expansion flow of 3 MGD. She recommended quarterly
monitoring for mercury, since a lot of facilities in the mountains seemed to be discharging
it.
Checked the existing pretreatment permit for Spring Ford Knitting in Spindale, and they are
limited for Cu and Cn. Recommended that monitoring for Cu and Cn be included in the
Rutherfordton permit.
Toxicity Analysis: Ran two analyses at expansion flow of 3 MGD, 1) 1994-96 data
results --limits recommended for lead, cyanide, cadmium, nickel, with monitoring for zinc.
2) 1995-96 data results --limits for cyanide and cadmium, monitoring for zinc, and
dropping lead and nickel.
Recommendation:
Because of the addition of the Spring Ford Knitting to the Rutherfordton
plant, will recommend limits for Cyanide and Cadimum, continue quarterly
monitoring for lead, nickel, and zinc. Add quarterly monitoring for copper
and mercury, per recommendation of M. Bryson from pretreatment. The
new textile mill may discharge some of these parameters, and with no
existing pretreatment program, may need to continue to monitor all these
parameters.

Rutherfordton WWTP
Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (UG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (ug/l)
Fecal Llmit
Ratio of 0.4 :1
Ammonia as NH3
(summer)
1.9 7Q10 (CFS)
3 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
4.65 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
70.99 IWC (%)
23.95 Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
Ammonia as NH3
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
200/100m1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (MG/L)
IWC (%)
Allowable Concentration (mg/I)
1.9
3
4.65
1.0
0.22
70.99
1.32
2.9
3
4.65
1.8
0.22
61.59
2.79
NC0025909
11/6/9 6

UPSTREAM
RUfHERFORDTON VW TP
DOWNSTREAM
MONTH Temp DO Saturation Fecal Conductivity Temp DO Saturation Fecal Conductivity
Sep-96
Aug-96
Jul-96
Jun-96
May-96
Apr-96
Oct-95
Sep-95
Aug-95
Jul-95
Jun-95
May-95
Apr-95 15 6.6
17
22
22
23
ND
17
14
17
22
20
18
19
6.7
6
6.1
5.6
ND
6.2
6.4
5.3
5.6
5.8
6.1
5.8
69%
69%
70%
65%
0%
64%
62%
55%
64%
64%
64%
63%
1627
3069
644
1814
ND
117
594
319
513
946
937
398
73
73
90
83
ND
78
85
105
106
93
95
100
18
21
22
23
ND
17
15
18
23
21
18
19
6.4
5.8
5.3
5.4
ND
5.9
6
5.2
5.1
5.8
5.9
5.3
68%
65%
61%
63%
0%
61%
60%
55%
59%
65%
62%
57%
1580
624
622
954
ND
189
884
61
571
598
1092
61
98
108
118
113
ND
98
110
110
117
118
115
112
65% 62 78
Notes ups-150 ft upstream of discharge
dwn-300 ft below outfall
15 6.5
64%
12
90
NC0025909 1 1/4/9 6

jags - IQ]
Facility Name ;Rutherfordton WWTP ': Parameter = PB
NPDES # INC0025909 ; Standard= 25 µg/I
Qw (MGD) '•• - _.._.._.. 3i
7010s (cts) •. 1.85! n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data
/WC (%) ; 71.54I 1 1 <2
Rec'ving Stream 'CLEGHORN CREEK 2 1 <2
Stream Class IC i 3 1 <2
_.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._. _.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._ 4 2.2
FINAL RESULTS 5 1 <2
PB ; 6 1 <2
Max. Pred Cw 3.3iug/I 114
7 1 <2
Allowable Cw 34.9Iug/I 8 1 <2
Max. Value 2.2! 9 1 <2
CN I / 10 1<2
Max. Pred Cw 26.4iug/l LirAV11 1 <2
AllowableCw 7.0Iug/I 12 1 <2
Max. Value 8 13 1 <2
CD 1�< 14 i <2
Max. Pred Cw 7.41i.0 I 15 1 <2
Allowable Cw 2.8•-ug/I 16 1 <2
Max. Value 1.91 17 1 <2
NI OQ 18
Max. Pred Cw 7lug/1 DP- 19
Allowable Cw 123.0lug/I 20
Max. Value 5; D 21
ZN I <t 22
Max. Pred Cw 546lugll 0O' 23
AllowableCw 69.91ug/1 r• 24
Max. Value 140; 25
I 26
TOXICANT ANALYSIS
RESULTS
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
Parameter =C_N _ _ _'arameter=
j
Standard = S 51 µg/l :<:: Standard =
n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS n
0.29104275 1 2.5 <5 Std Dev. 2.546005 1
1.070588235 2 2.5 <5 Mean 3.875 2
0.271853118 3 2.5 <5 C.V. 0.657034 3
4 2.5 <5 4
5 8 8 5
Mull Factor = -1.5; 6 2.5 <5 Mull Factor= i 3.3) 6
Max. Value 2.2 µgll 7 8 8 Max. Value 8 µg/I 7
Max. Pred Cw 3.3 µg/I 8 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 26.4 µg/I 8
Allowable Cw 34.95 pg/I 9 Allowable Cw 6.99 µg/I 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
11/4/96
PAGE

TOXICANT ANALYSIS
CD`arameter= NI ';;::::Parameters ZN
_.._.._.._..21µg/1 ' ' Standard = . _.._.._.._.881µg/I ti r Standard = ...._.._.s0bµgll
BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS ,;s:; :; n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS
1.9 1.9 Std Dev. 0.494975 :.'`
1 5 <10 Std Dev. 0.8838835 ;;.•, 1 46 46 Std Dev. 35.8411
0.5 <1 Mean 0.675 r ` 2 5 <10 Mean 4.6875 r r' 2 140 140 Mean 50.875
0.5 <1 C.V. 0.733296 ?? 3 5 <10 C.V. 0.1885618 3 41 41 C.V. 0.72415
0.5 <1 :: 4 5 <10 ^{'<? 4 28 28
0.5 <1 `}::: 5 5 <10 r 5 31 31
0.5 <1 Mul Factor= i 3.91 6 5 <10 MultFactor = (• -1.4i f::: 6 42 42 MultFactor = 3.9i
0.5 <1 Max. Value 1.9 WI :; 7 5 <10 Max. Value 5 µg/l ••rfr: 7 30 30 Max. Value 140 µg/l
r. g 8 2. 5 < 5 Max. Pred Cw 7 NAP:- 0.5 < 1 Max. Pred Cw 7.41 µg/l rf:::8 49 49 Max. Pred Cw 546 µg/l
Allowable Cw 2.80 pg/I iliii 9 Allowable Cw 123.01 µg/I r: 9 Allowable Cw 69.89 µg/1
ini �•:. .
10 . :::::•. 10
11 11
tir •ff .•::
12 f: 12
13 ::::: 13
:;:
14 �•:::.•: 14
15 15
::;•:::.
16 ;;;:r;: 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 rr: 20
21 %>`' 21
22 :.::.:. 22
fJ 23 : •: •-:': • i 23
tiff ;;:
24 :::r:. 24
25 25
26 26
11/4/96 PAGE :

usc.,s1,
Facility Name
NPDES #
Qw (MGD)
7010s (cls)
IWC (%)
Reeving Stream
Stream Class
iRutherfordton VVWTP i
iNC0025909 i
3i
i ' 1.85i
i 71.54!
iCLEGHORN CREEK 1
i_.._.............._________..;
TOXICANT ANALYSIS
Parameter = PB Parameter = CN iParameter =
Standard = 25 µg/I Standard = [ 5]11g/I Standard =
n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS n
1 1 <2 Std Dev. 7.366267603 1 2.5 <5 Std Dev. 1.997251 1
2 1 <2 Mean 3.285294118 2 2.5 <5 Mean 3.285714 2
3 1 <2 C.V. 2.242194257 3 2.5 <5 C.V. 0.607859 3
4 2.2 2.2 4 2.5<5 4
FINAL RESULTS '• 5 1 <2 5 8 8 3___ 5
PB i 6 1 <2 Mull Factor =l 4.81 6 2.5 <5 Mull Factor = ! 2.61 6
Max. Pred Cw 201.6iug/I ' fir( 7 1 <2 Max. Value 42 µg/I 7 8 8 Max. Value 8 µg/I 7
Allowable Cw 34.91ug/I U 8 1 <2 Max. Pred Cw 201.6 µg/I 8 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 20.8 µg/I 8
Max. Value 42! 9 1 <2 Allowable Cw 34.95 µg/I 9 2.5 <5 Allowable Cw 6.99 µg/I '`: 9
CN i 10 1 <2 10 2.5 <5 10
Max. Pred Cw 20.8lug/1 L«,t'i 11 1 <2 11 2.5 <5 11
Allowable Cw 7.0!ug/I 12 1 <2 12 2.5 <5 12
Max. Value 8! 13 1 <2 13 2.5 <5 13
CD i 14 1 <2 14 2.5 <5 14
Max. Pred Cw 11.4iug/I LA
16
15 1 <2 15 15
Allowable Cw 2.8•.ug/l 16 1 <2 16 16
Max. Value 3! 17 1 <2 17 17
NI i { 18 1 <2 18 18
Max. Pred Cw 126iug/I LArA 19 1 <2 19 19
Allowable Cw 123.0lug/I 20 1 <2 20 20
Max. Value 30; 21 1 <2 21 21
ZN i roi 22 1 <2 22 22
Max. Pred Cw 364tug/l r,AO " 23 4 4 23 23
Allowable Cw 69.9ug/I 24 4 4 24 24
Max. Value 140; 25 1 <2 25 25
i 26 4 2 26 26
Max. Pred Cw 0i;ug/1 27 1 <2 27 27
Allowable Cw #VALUE! ug/I 28 1 <2 28 28
Max. Value 0; 29 3.4 3.4 29 29
0 i 30 4 4 30 30
Max. Pred Cw O'•ug/I 31 4 4 31 31
Allowable Cw 0.0ug/l 32 1 6 1 6 32 32
Max. Value 0i 33 3.6 3.6 33 33
0 i 34 4.5 4.5 34 34
Max. Pred Cw 0lugll 35 35 35
11/4/96
PAGE'

CD
_.._.. 2i1.41
BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS
1.9 1.9 Std Dev. 0.740248
0.5 <1 Mean 0.778571
0.5 <1 C.V. 0.950777
0.5 <1
0.5<1
0.5 <1 Mutt Factor
0.5 <1 Max. Value 3 µg/I
0.5 <1 Max. Pred Cw 11.4 µg/I
0.5 <1 Allowable Cw 2.80 µg/I
0.5 <1
0.5 <1
0.5 <1
0.5 <1
3 3
TOXICANT ANALYSIS
':Parameter= NI Parameter = ZN
<: Standard= 881gg/I Standard = 50hµg/1
n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS n BDL=1/2DL Actual Data RESULTS
1 5 <10 Std Dev. 6.8062875 1 46 46 Std Dev. 31.5191
2 5 <10 Mean 6.9642857 2 140 140 Mean 50.7143
3 5 <10 C.V. 0.9773131 3 41 41 C.V. 0.6215
4 5 <10 4 28 28
5 5 <10 5 31 31
6 5 <1 0 Mutt Factor = 4.21 6 42 42 Mutt Factor =i 2.6i
7 5 <10 Max. Value 30 µg/I 7 30 30 Max. Value 140 µg/I
8 2.5 <5 Max. Pred Cw 126 µg/I <<> 8 49 49 Max. Pred Cw 364 µg/I
9 5 <1 0 Allowable Cw 123.01 µg/1 • 9 31 31 Allowable Cw 69.89 µg/I
10 5 <10 10 44 44
11 5 <10 11 31 31
12 5 <10 12 32 32
13 30 13 93 93
14 1 0 1 0 14 72 72
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 25
26 26
27 27
28 28
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 32
33 33
34 34
35 35
11/4/96 PAGE

Facility:
NPDES#:
Receiving Stream: Broad River
Comment(s):
gage number not available
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
3002 Low Flow Record Station:
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Qave per Report Equation:
s7Q10 per Report Equation:
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
3002 per Report Equation:
Drainage Area Ratio:
[ new DA/Daatgage ]
Weighted Ratio:
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
HA10
must be < 400 sq. miles
259.00 sq. miles
1.5 cfs/miles squared
389 cfs
63.92 cfs
92.24 cfs
133.64 cfs
Continue
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Weighted Qave per Report Equation:
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted 3002 per Report Equation:
259.00 miles squared
1.5 cfs/miles squared
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
no input from above
no input from above

Facility: Rutherfordton wwtp
NPDES#: nc0025909
Receiving Stream: cleghorn creek
Comment(s):
gage number not available
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
30Q2 Low Flow Record Station:
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Qave per Report Equation:
s7Q10 per Report Equation:
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
30Q2 per Report Equation:
Drainage Area Ratio:
[ new DA/Daatgage ]
Weighted Ratio:
Over -ride inappropriate Site (y ):
HA10
must be < 400 sq. miles
7.80 sq. miles
1.5 cfs/miles squared
12 cfs
1.86 cfs
2.88 cfs
4.02 cfs
Continue
#DIV/0l
#DIV/0l
#DIV/01
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Weighted Qave per Report Equation:
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation:
7.80 miles squared
1.5 cfs/miles squared
#DIV/0l
no input from above
no input from above
no input from above

Facility:
NPDES#:
Receiving Stream: Charles Creek
Comment(s):
gage number not available
Low Flow Record Station Number:
Hydrologic Area Number:
Drainage Area Low Flow Record Station:
Qave Low Flow Record Station:
s7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
w7Q10 Low Flow Record Station:
30Q2 Low Flow Record Station:
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Qave per Report Equation:
s7Q10 per Report Equation:
w7Q10 per Report Equation:
30Q2 per Report Equation:
Drainage Area Ratio:
[ new DA/Daatgage ]
Weighted Ratio:
Over -ride Inappropriate Site (y ):
HA10
must be < 400 sq. miles
3.01 sq. miles
1.5 cfs/miles squared
5 cfs
0.71 cfs
1.12 cfs
1.55 cfs
Continue
#DIV/0!
#DIV10!
#DIV/0!
Drainage Area New Site:
MAR New Site:
Weighted Qave per Report Equation:
Weighted s7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted w7Q10 per Report Equation:
Weighted 30Q2 per Report Equation:
3.01 miles squared
1.5 cfs/miles squared
#DIV/o1
no input from above
no input from above
no input from above

Riged‘rd-411
ap WWTP Model Input
S1R1
S1 R2
SR
SR
SR
SR
SR
SR
Length
1.6
2.5
0.1
0.5
Qw
3
-
-
-
CBOD
60
-
-
-
NBOD
9
-
-
-
DO
5
-
-
-
CBOD (wnt)
60
-
-
-
NBOD (wnt)
18
-
-
-
DO (wnt)
5
-
-
-
s7Q10
1.86
-
-
-
w7Q10
2.88
-
-
-
QA
12
-
-
-
slope
16
16
16
4.2
s7Q10 RO
0.24
0.3
0
0
w7Q10 RO
0.36
0.45
0
0
QA RO
1.31
1 .8 8
0
0
urarv,J
^�
CA4,10 0
8/6Ad toy
Trib s7Q10
-
0.42
0.71
64
Trib w7Q10
-
0.67
1.12
92
Trib QA
-
2.7
5
389

SUMMER
Discharger
Receiving Stream
MODEL RESULTS
RUTHERFORDTON WWTP
CLEGHORN CREEK
The End D.O. is 7.42 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 4.81 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 1 . 35 mg/1 .
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.70 0.00 1
Reach 1 60.00 9.00 5.00 3.00000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : RUTHERFORDTON WWTP
Receiving Stream : CLEGHORN CREEK
Summer 7Q10 : 1.86
Design Temperature: 25.0
Subbasi n : 030802
Stream Class: C
Winter 7Q10 : 2.86
!LENGTH' SLOPEI VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd I Ka I Ka 1 KN I KN 1 KNR 1 KNR I SOD I SOD
' mile I ft/mil fps I ft 'design{ @20° 'design@20° 'design' @20° {design' @20° 'design) @20°
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 1.601 16.001 0.470 1 0.98 10.44 1 0.35 115.08 113.531 0.44 10.30 10.44 10.00 10.00 10.00
Reach 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 2.501 16.001 0.455 11.06 10.42 10.33 114,62 113.111 0.44 1 0.30 10.44 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.101 16.001 0.449 1 1.14 1 0.40 1 0.32 114.41 112.921 0.44 1 0.30 1 0.44 1 0.00 1 0.00 10.00
Reach 3 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.501 4.201 0.568 1 2.92 1 0.28 1 0.23 1 2.34 I 2.101 0.44 1 0.30 { 0.44 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 4 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I
{ Flow I CBOD I NBOD i D.O. 1
{ cfs I mg/1 I mg/1 I mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste I 4.650 160.000 I 9.000 I 5.000
Headwaters{ 1.860 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
Tributary I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff I 0.240 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000
Tributary I 0.420
* Runoff I 0.300
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste I 0.000
Tributary I 0.710
* Runoff I 0.000
0.000
2.000
2.000
0.000
2.000
2.000
0.000
1.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
1.000
0.000
7.440
7.440
0.000
7.440
7.440
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 164.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mil e

•
SUMMER
Seg #
1 •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Seg #
Reach # I Seg Mi
1 0.00
1 0.10
1 0.20
1 0.30
1 0.40
1 0.50
1 0.60
1 0.70
1 0.80
1 0.90
1 1.00
1 1.10
1 1.20
1 1.30
1 1.40
1 1.50
1 1.60
2 1.60
2 2.10
2 2.60
2 3.10
2 3.60
2 4.10
3 4.10
3 4.11
3 4.12
3 4.13
3 4.14
3 4.15
3 4.16
3 4.17
3 4.18
3 4.19
3 4.20
4 4.20
4 4.25
4 4.30
4 4.35
4 4.40
4 4.45
4 4.50
4 4.55
4 4.60
4 4.65
4 4.70
Reach # I Seg Mi
D.O.
5.70
5.90
6.07
6.21
6.33
6.43
6.52
6.59
6.65
6.70
6.74
6.78
6.81
6.84
6.87
6.89
6.91
6.94
7.06
7.13
7.19
7.24
7.29
7.30
7.30
7.31
7.31
7.31
7.31
7.31
7.31
7.32
7.32
7.32
7.43
7.43
7.43
7.42
7.42
7.42
7.42
7.42
7.42
7.42
7.42
D.O.
CBOD I NBOD
43.43 6.71
43.03 6.66
42.64 6.60
42.25 6.54
41.87 6.48
41.49 6.42
41.11 6.37
40.74 6.31
40.37 6.26
40.01 6.20
39.65 6.15
39.29 6.10
38.94 6.04
38.59 5.99
38.24 5.94
37.90 5.89
37.56 5.84
35.52 5.56
33.89 5.31
32.35 5.07
30.89 4.85
29.50 4.64
28.20 4.43
26.08 4.16
26.06 4.15
26.05 4.15
26.03 4.15
26.02 4.15
26.00 4.14
25.99 4.14
25.98 4.14
25.96 4.14
25.95 4.13
25.93 4.13
4.89 1.38
4.88 1.37
4.87 1.37
4.86 1.37
4.86 1.36
4.85 1.36
4.84 1.36
4.83 1.35
4.83 1.35
4.82 1.35
4.81 1.35
CBOD I NBOD
Flow I
6.51
6.53
6.56
6.58
6.61
6.63
6.65
6.68
6.70
6.73
6.75
6.77
6.80
6.82
6.85
6.87
6.89
7.31
7.46
7.61
7.76
7.91
8.06
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
8.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
72.77
Flow I

WINTER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : RUTHERFORDTON WWTP
Receiving Stream : CLEGHORN CREEK
The End D.O. is 9.37 mg/1.
The End CBOD is 4.25 mg/1.
The End NBOD is 1.68 mg/1.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach it (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 6.63 0.00 1
Reach 1 60.00 18.00 5.00 3.00000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000
Reach 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger : RUTHERFORDTON WWTP
Receiving Stream : CLEGHORN CREEK
Summer 7Q10 : 1.86
Design Temperature: 14.0
Subbasin : 030802
Stream Class: C
Winter 7Q10 : 2.86
!LENGTH SLOPEI VELOCITY I DEPTH' Kd I Kd I Ka I Ka I KN I KN I KNR I KNR I SOD I SOD
mile I ft/mil fps I ft 'design' @20° 'design l @20° 'design l 020° 'design' @20° 'design l @20°
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 1.601 16.001 0.526 10.99 1 0.21 1 0.36 113.30 115.161 0.19 1 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 2.501 16.001 0.526 1 1.09 1 0.26 1 0.35 113.29 115.151 0.19 1 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.101 16.001 0.532 1 1.11 1 0.26 1 0.34 1 9.10 1 11.061 0.19 1 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 0.501 4.201 0.131 1 3.05 1 0.18 1 0.23 1 2.39 I 2.121 0.19 1 0.30 1 0.19 1 0.00 1 0.00 1 0.00
Reach 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD I D.O. I
cfs I mg/1 I mg/1 I mg/1 1
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste I 4.650 160.000 118.000 I 5.000
Headwaters) 2.860 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Tributary I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
* Runoff I 0.360 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary I 0.670 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
* Runoff I 0.450 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 3
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary I 1.120 I 2.000 I 1.000 i 9.280
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 4
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 192.000 I 2.000
* Runoff I 0.000 I 2.000
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile
0.000
1.000
1.000
0.000
9.280
9.280

WINTER
Reach # I Seg Mi
1 0.00
1 0.10
1 0.20
1 0.30
1 0.40
1 0.50
1 0.60
1 0.70
1 0.80
1 0.90
1 1.00
1 1.10
1 1.20
1 1.30
1 1.40
1 1.50
1 1.60
2 1.60
2 2.10
2 2.60
2 3.10
2 3.60
2 4.10
3 4.10
3 4.11
3 4.12
3 4.13
3 4.14
3 4.15
3 4.16
3 4.17
3 4.18
3 4.19
3 4.20
4 4.20
4 4.25
4 4.30
4 4.35
4 4.40
4 4.45
4 4.50
4 4.55
4 4.60
4 4.65
4 4.70
Reach # 1 Seg Mi
D.O. I CBOD
6.63 37.91
7.03 37.62
7.38 37.33
7.67 37.05
7.93 36.77
8.14 36.49
8.33 36.21
8.49 35.94
8.62 35.67
8.74 35.40
8.84 35.14
8.93 34.87
9.00 34.61
9.07 34.36
9.13 34.10
9.17 33.85
9.22 33.60
9.22 31 . 19
9.41 29.99
9.52 28.86
9.57 27.79
9.61 26.78
9.64 25.82
9.61 23.39
9.61 23.39
9.61 23.38
9.61 23.37
9.61 23.37
9.60 23.36
9.60 23.35
9.60 23.34
9.60 23.34
9.60 23.33
9.60 23.32
9.31 4.28
9.32 4.27
9.33 4.27
9.33 4.27
9.34 4.26
9.34 4.26
9.35 4.26
9.35 4.26
9.36 4.25
9.36 4.25
9.37 4.25
D.O. 1 CBOD
NBOD
11.53
11.45
11.38
11.30
11.23
11.16
11.08
11.01
10.94
10.87
10.81
10.74
10.67
10.60
10.54
10.47
10.41
9.69
9.36
9.06
8.77
8.50
8.23
7.50
7.50
7.49
7.49
7.49
7.49
7.49
7.49
7.48
7.48
7.48
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.69
1.68
1.68
1.68
1.68
1.68
NBOD
Flow 1
7.51
7.55
7.58
7.62
7.65
7.69
7.73
7.76
7.80
7.83
7.87
7.91
7.94
7.98
8.01
8.05
8.09
8.76
8.98
9.21
9.43
9.66
9.88
11.00
11.00
1 1 .00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
103.00
Flow 1

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No
IF YES, SOC NUMBER
TO: PERMITS AND ENGINEERING UNIT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ATTENTION: Jeffrey T. Myhra
DATE: October 29, 1996
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
COUNTY Rutherford
PERMIT NUMBER NC0025909
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and Address: Town of Rutherfordton
Mailing: 110 North Washington Street
Rutherfordton, North Carolina 28139
2. Date of Investigation: October 23, 1996
3. Report Prepared By: Roger C. Edwards
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Mr. Paul Rhodes
704-287-2141
5. Directions to Site: Hwy.. US 74 to Hwy. 221 north to intersection of
US 221 and SR 2201. Travel through intersection approximately 500
yards turn right onto unmarked dirt/gravel road and follow to WWTP.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 35° 20' 32" Longitude: 81° 57' 22" existing
Latitude: 35° 20' 28" Longitude: 81° 57' 38" proposed
Attach a USGS map extract and indicate treatment facility site and
discharge point on map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No. U.S.G.S. Quad Name Rutherfordton South
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application?
X Yes No If No, explain:
Page 1

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): gentle sloping to
flat, adjacent to flood plain
9. Location of nearest dwelling: >500 feet
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Cleghorn and
Stonecutter Creeks
a. Classification: "C"
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Broad 030802
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream
uses: small sandy bottom stream used for wildlife habitat and
agriculture.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted MGD (Ultimate
Design Capacity) 3.0 MGD
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the Wastewater
Treatment facility? 1.0 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current
design capacity 0.618 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous
Authorizations to Construct issued in the previous two years:
N/A
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially
constructed wastewater treatment facilities: Present: Bar
screen, grit removal, series lagoons, disinfection, discharge.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment
facilities: Bar screen, grit removal, flow equalization,
activated sludge biological treatment, clarifiers, tertiary
filters, sludge digester with sludge processed at Town of
Forest City for final disposal.
g-
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: Spring Ford Knitting
is a textile dyeing and finishing facility. Based on history
of textile waste the discharge can contain zinc, nickel, lead,
cadmium, cyanide, and chloride. Any or all of these chemicals
could have a toxic impact on the receiving stream.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): At this time the Town of
Rutherfordton does NOT have a pretreatment program.
in development approved
should be required X not needed
Page 2

4.-107zit-A
ture of Report Pre er
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommend this permit be issued as soon as possible. The wastewater
treatment facility design is just beginning and the engineers has
scheduled a meeting with the Regional Office. Hopefully, communications
will be open in the design of this facility. The rating sheet attached
is based on conversations with the design engineers and is subject to
change as the facility is designed. An updated rating sheet will be sent
when the treatment facility is near completion.
IS . a p p
Water Quality Regional Sup-. is•r
Date
Page 5

;,,
R