NC0020737_Permit (Issuance)_20100706

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNIN`: COVER !;CIEET
Permit:
NC0020737
Pilot Creek WWTP
NPDES
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Report
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
July 6, 2010
This document iea printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the resrerse side

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Govemor Director Secretary
Mr. Dennis R. Wells, Water Resources Director
City of Kings Mountain
P.O. Box 429
Kings Mountain, North Carolina 28086
•
Dear Mr. Wells:
July 6, 2010
Subject: NPDES Permit Issuance
Permit No. NC0020737
Pilot Creek WWTP
Cleveland County
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the
requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between
North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated October 17, 2007 (or as subsequently
amended.)
The final permit authorizes the City of Kings Mountain to discharge municipal wastewater from the
Pilot Creek WWTP to Buffalo Creek, a class C water in the Broad River Basin. The final permit includes
discharge limitations/or monitoring for flow, total suspended solids (TSS), BOD5, total residual chlorine, total
cadmium, total cyanide, mercury, chloride, total copper, total zinc, arsenic and fecal conform.
Buffalo Creek is listed as an impaired stream on North Carolina's 303 (d) list. Currently, the stream
does not meet all water quality standards. Although the Division believes turbidity is the main cause of
degradation to Buffalo Creek, we will continue to monitor compliance at your facility. If noncompliance with
your permit's effluent limits is shown to be a direct cause of stream degradation, the Division will consider
mitigative measures.
The following procedure has been recently implemented by DWQ: Total residual chlorine (TRC)
compliance level changed to 50 ug/1 Effective March 1, 2008, the Division received EPA approval to allow a
50 ug/1 TRC compliance level. This change is due to analytical difficulties with TRC measurements.
Facilities will still be required to report actual results on their monthly discharge monitoring report (DMR)
submittals, but for compliance purposes, all TRC values below 50 ug/1 will be treated as zero. A footnote
regarding this change has been added to the effluent limitations page in the draft permit.
The Division has the following responses to written comments received on June 2, 2009 from the City
of Kings Mountain.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] \ Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
NOnT�1C1TO11T11
. Xaturaiij

Letter to Mr. Dennis Wells
Page 2 .
• The cadmium limit has been changed to a monthly average limit of 6.1 ug/1 and a daily
maximum limit of 15 ug/1 in the final permit based on the results of the reasonable potential
analysis and for protection of aquatic life against long term exposure. After implementation, if
the facility submits 12 months of cadmium data with all values below detection, the Division
will reevaluate the data and consider removing the cadmium limit, upon the City's written
request.
• Monitoring for total mercury has been removed from the permit but will remain in the
pretreatment Long Term Monitoring Plan to be monitored quarterly.
• The Division's decision on the 24 hour exemption condition will be addressed and forwarded to
the City in separate correspondence.
After additional review during the draft permit period, the following items will be included in the
final permit.
• Since the public notice of the draft permit in April 2009, additional effluent data for total
arsenic has been analyzed for review. The results of this review indicate that a monthly
average limit of 184 ug/1 and a daily maximum limit of 340 ug/1 for total arsenic limit must be
added to the final permit. Since September 2008, there have been five hits of arsenic that were
greater than 184 ug/l, with the highest values of 614 ug/1 and 420 ug/1 in September and
October 2008, respectively. The Division has determined that the addition of arsenic limit
must be included in this permit for protection of water quality in Buffalo Creek.
• The facility has had several toxicity test failures and notices of violation forwarded to the City.
Based on the toxicity testing results and the City's failure to address to correspondence from
DWQ's Aquatic Toxicology Unit, effluent limits for total copper and total zinc will have to be
placed in the permit. Total copper monthly average and daily maximum limits of 56.7 ug/1 will
added to the permit. In addition, a total zinc monthly average limit of 497.2 ug/1 and a daily
maximum limit of 581.0 ug/1 will also be placed in the final permit. The City should contact
the Division's Aquatic Toxicology Unit to further discuss actions that can be taken to determine
the causative factors in the continuing toxicity failures.
The following modifications included in the draft permit of 4/22/2009 will remain in the final permit.
• Monitoring for total chromium and total nickel has been deleted from the permit based on the
results of a reasonable potential analysis that indicated there was no potential to exceed the
instream water quality standards or action levels. These parameters will continue to be
monitored in the pretreatment Long Term Monitoring plan.
• A monthly average effluent limit of 15 ug/1 and a daily maximum limit of 22 ug/1 for cyanide
will be added to the permit based on the results of the reasonable potential analysis. The
analysis indicated the potential to exceed the water quality standard instream.
• The City's request for continuation of the modification from 85% removal for TSS has been
evaluated. The previous modification was for 70% TSS removal. Based on the average TSS
removal for the past three years, the volume of industrial wastewater into the treatment plant,
and the determination that the Pilot Creek WWTP does not have excessive inflow and
infiltration contributing to the situation, it is recommended that TSS percent removal be
changed to 80%. The percent removal condition of BOD5 will remain 85%.
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 a demand is made, this permit
shall be final and binding.

Letter to Mr. Dennis Wells
Page 3
Please take notice that this permit is not transferable. The Division may require modification
revocation and reissuance of the permit. This permit does not affect the legal requirements 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 permits may be
required.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Jacquelyn Nowell at
telephone number [phone] or email [e-mail].
SS. crely,
een H. Sullins
•
Attachments
cc: Kim Moss, ORC/City of Kings Mountain, P.O. Box 429 City of Kings Mountain, NC 28086
EPA Region IV
Mooresville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section
Aquatic Toxicology Unit/ESS
PERCS/Attn: Monti Hassan (ecopy)
NPDES File/NC0020737
Central Files

Permit NC0020737
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,
City of Kings Mountain
•
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Pilot Creek WWTP
Off U.S. Highway 74 Bypass
West of Kings Mountain
Cleveland County
to receiving waters designated as Buffalo Creek in the Broad River Basin
in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions
set forth in Parts I, II, III and IV hereof.
This permit shall become effective August 1, 2010.
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on August 31, 2013.
Signed this day July 6, 2010.
Co en H. Sullins, Director
y Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission •

Permit NC00207374
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge, are hereby
revoked. [The exclusive authority to operate this facility arises under this permit. The authority to
operate the facility under previously issued permits bearing this number is no longer effective.] The
conditions, requirements, terms and provisions of this permit authorizing discharge under the NPDES
govern discharges from this facility.
The City of Kings Mountain is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate a 6.0 MGD wastewater treatment plant consisting of:
• dual screw pumps
• bar screen
• parshall flume with recorder
• flow diversion
• three (3) aeration basins with diffused air
• three (3) secondary clarifiers.
• three (3) chlorine contact basins
• effluent measuring devices for each chlorine contact basin and a
totalizer/recorder for the combined effluent
• dechlorination unit
• two (2) aerobic digesters
• two (2) sludge drying beds and
• belt press for dewatering waste sludge
The facility is located at the Pilot Creek WWTP, off U.S. Highway 74 Bypass, west
of Kings Mountain in Cleveland County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached
map into Buffalo Creek, which is a classified C water in the Broad River Basin.

Pilot Creek WWTP - NC0020737
USGS Quad Name: Waco
Receiving Stream: Buffalo Creek
Stream Class: C
Subbadin: Broad - 030805
Lat.: 35°15'35"
Long.: 81°27'26"
City of Kings Mountain

Permit NC0020737
• A. (l.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
• During the period beginning on the effective date of this permit 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
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location1
Flow
6.0 MGD
i
Daily
Instantaneous
Influent or Effluent
BOD5, 202C (April 1- October 31)2
28.0 mg/L
42.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent, Influent
BOD5, 202C (November 1-March
31)2
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent, Influent
Total Suspended Solids3
30.0 mg/L
45.0 mg/L
`
Daily
Composite
Effluent, Influent
NH3 as N (April 1- October 31)
2.6 mg/L
7.8 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N (November 1-March 31)
8.9 mg/L
,
26.7 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved 0xygen4
_
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
200 / 100 ml
400 / 100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorines
28 µg/L
Daily
Grab
Effluent
pH
Between 6.0 - 9.0 Standard Units
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature (2C)
•
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2 + NO3 + TKN)
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity6
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Total Arsenic
184 ug/L
3404/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cadmium
6.1 µg/L
15 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Cyanide
15 µg/L
22 µg/L
- Weekly .
Grab
Effluent
Chloride •
2/Month
Composite
Effluent
Total Copper
56.7 µg/L
56.7 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc
497.2 µg/L
581 µg/L
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
See note 7
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Temperature (0C)
See note 7
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Priority Pollutant Scan
See condition A.(3) of this
ermit
Conductivity
See note 7
Grab
Upstream,
Downstream
Notes:
1. .Sample locations: Upstream - Upstream 100 yards above outfall; Downstream - Downstream at NCSR
1103.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 concentration shall not exceed 15% of the respective influent
value (85% removal). •
3. The monthly average effluent Total Suspended Solids concentration shall not exceed 20% of the
respective influent value (80% removal) . This waiver from the 85% removal requirement applies only
for the term of the permit. Continuation of this waiver must be requested upon renewal.
4. The daily average dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 5. 0 mg/L.
5. The Division shall consider all effluent total residual chlorine values reported below 50 µg/1 to be in
compliance with the permit. However, the Permittee shall continue to record and submit all values
reported by a North Carolina certified laboratory (including field certified), even if these values fall
below 50 µg/1.
6. Whole Effluent Toxicity shall be measured by the Chronic Toxicity (P/F) test using Ceriodaphnia dubia
at 33%. Testing shall be conducted in January, April, July and October (see Part A. (2.)). Toxicant
sampling shall coincide with toxicity testing.
7. Instream samples shall be collected three times per week during the months of June -September and
once per week during the remaining months of the year.
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit NC0020737,
A. (2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QUARTERLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 33%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, quarterly monitoring using test procedures
outlined in the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February
1998, or subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during the months of
January, April, July and October. Effluent sampling for this'testing shall be, performed at the NFD,ES
permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
If the test procedure performed as the first test of any single quarter results in a failure or ChV
below the permit limit, then multiple -concentration testing shall be performed at a minimum, in each of
the two following months as described in "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test
Procedure" (Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions.
The chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of
the highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest
concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of
"detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are
specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -
February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed. If reporting pass/fail
results using the parameter code TGP3B, DWQ Form •AT-1 (original) is sent to the below address. If
reporting Chronic Value results using the parameter code THP3B, DWQ Form AT-3 (original) is to be sent
to the following address:
Attention: North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Section
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Section no later
than 30 days after the end of the reporting period for which the report is made.
Test data shall be complete, accurate, include all supporting chemical/physical measurements
and all concentration/response data, and be certified by laboratory supervisor and ORC or approved
designate signature. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity sample must be measured and
reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should there be no discharge of flow from the facility during a month in which toxicity monitoring
is required, the Permittee will complete the information located at the top of the aquatic -toxicity (AT) test
form indicating the facility name, permit number, pipe number, county, and the month/year of the report
with the notation of "No Flow" in the comment area of the form. The report shall be submitted to the
Environmental Sciences Section at the address cited above.
Should the Permittee fail to monitor during a month in which toxicity monitoring is required,
monitoring will be required during the following month.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened
and modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
If the Permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently then required by this permit, the results
of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation & reporting of the data submitted on the DMR &
all AT Forms submitted.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control
organism survival, minimum control organism reproduction, and appropriate environmental controls,
shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate follow-up testing to be completed no later than
the last day of the month following the month of the initial monitoring.

Permit NC0020737
A. (3.) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
` The Permittee shall perform an annual Effluent Pollutant Scan for all parameters listed in the attached table (in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). Samples shall represent seasonal variations. Unless otherwise indicated,
metals shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Chlorine (total residual, TRC)
Dissolved oxygen
Nitrate/Nitrite
Kjeldahl nitrogen
• Oil and grease
Phosphorus
Total dissolved solids
Hardness
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Total phenolic compounds
Volatile organic compounds:
Acrolein
Ac rylonitrite
Benzene
Bromoform
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorobenzene
Chlorodibromomethane
Chloroethane
2-chbroethytvinyl ether
Chtoroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1,1-dichloroethane
1,2-dichloroethane
Trans-1,2-dichtoroethylene
1,1-d ich loroethyle ne
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
1,2-dichloropropane Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
1,3-dichloropropylene 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Ethylbenzene
Methyl bromide
Methyl chloride
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
Butyl benzyl phthalate
2-chtoronaphthalene
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Toluene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1,1,1-trichloroethane 1,2-dichtorobenzene
1,1,2-trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Vinyl chloride
Acid -extractable compounds:
P-chloro-m-cresol
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,4-dimethylphenol
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
2,4-dinitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
4-nitrophenol
Pentachtorophenol
Phenol
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Base -neutral compounds:
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
3,4 benzoftuoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perytene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
1,3-dichlorobenzene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
3,3-dichtorobenzidine
Diethyl phthalate
Methyl phthalate
2,4-dinitrototuene
2,6-dinitrototuene
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Ftuoranthene
Ftuorene
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyc lo-pentadiene
Hexachloroethane
tndeno(12,3-cd)pyrene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Nitrobenzene
N•nitrosodi-n-propylamine
N•nitrosodimethylamine
N-nitrosodiphenytamine
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
Test results shall be reported to the Division in DWQ Form- A MR-PPA1 or in a form approved by
the Director within 90 days of sampling. The report shall be submitted to the following address:
Division of Water Quality, Surface Water Protection Section, Central Files, 1617 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617.

ADDENDUM TO FACTSHEET/ NC0020737
5/12/2009 jinn
Rational for allowing Kings Mountain a variance to 85% removal. EPA regulation 40 CFR 133.103(d) allows
relief from the 85% removal if: 1) the % removal cannot be met due to less concentrated wastewater:2) if to
meet the 85%, the facility would have to meet significantly more stringent limitation than would otherwise be
achieved. 3) if the less concentrated influent ww is not the result of excessive I/I. Inflow is nonexcessive if the
total flow to the POTW is less than 275 gallons per capita per day.
Calculations for gallons per capita per day:
Average Qw for 2008 - 2.259 MGD = 2,259,000 GPD
Industrial flow to the plant - 1,075,000 - Spectrum Dyed
7,200 - Kings Mt. Int.
27,000 — Ent. Dist.
42,000 — Eaton Corp.
29,000 — Mayflower
1,181,200 GPD - Total flow
Domestic flow = avg. flow — industrial flow
= 2,259,000 GPD - 1,181,200 GPD= 1,078,800 GPD
Population served by WWTP = 13,500
Gallons per capita per day = 1,078,800 GPD = 79.9 GPD/person
13,500 persons
79.9 GPD/person < 275 Inflow is non -excessive
Modifications to permit since 4/22/2009 draft permit
• Effluent limits for copper and zinc will be added to the permit. Correspondence from Aquatic
Toxicity Unit (April 28, 2009) notified Kings Mountain that due to two consecutive months of tox test
failures, the facility had the option of accepting effluent copper and zinc limits or accepting other
options to determine the source of the toxicity problems. Kings Mountain did not respond to AQ TOX
in the given time frame and AQ TOX recommended to NPDES that copper and zinc limits be placed in
the final permit. Kings Mountain has failed another tox test since the April 28th letter. Based on the
AQ TOX recommendation and continued noncompliance with tox test, a copper mo. avg and da.
max. limit of 56.7 ug/1 and a zinc mo. avg. limit of 497.2 and a da. max. of 581 ug/1 will be placed
in the final permit for Kings Mountain.
• During an inspection for the facility's request for exemption from 24 hour staffing, MRO staff reviewed
effluent arsenic data and reported that extremely high values were being discharged from the facility.
The RPA analysis done for the draft included data through August 2008, and the extremely high arsenic
values began in September 2008. An updated RPA was done including additional effluent data and the
results showed RP to exceed the allowable concentration for arsenic. Based on the revised RPA and
the problems at the facility, an arsenic mo. avg. limit of 184 ug/I and a da. max limit of 340 ug/1
was added to the permit.
• The request for continuation of the exemption from the 24 hour staffing requirement has been
denied or rescinded. A recent staff visit (June 18th, 2009) and inspection concluded that there
are several deficiencies at the facility and that a waiver from the 24 hour staffing by certified
operators requirement is not recommended. There are maintenance issues, permit compliance
problems with metals and toxicity testing, and a marginal staff which contributed to the
Division's decision to deny the exemption. In addition, because of the status of Buffalo Creek as
Fact. Sheet
NPDES NC00207.37 Renewal
Page 6

.♦
an impaired stream, it is recommended that a major discharger to the stream maintain all
reliability measures. The facility will be sent separate correspondence regarding the denial
and must begin 24 hour staffing effective August 1, 2011. (this is one year from the effective
date of this renewed permit.)
• Effluent monitoring for mercury which was added to permit will be deleted and facility will monitor
mercury quarterly in the LTMP.
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact J kie Nowell at [phone].
NAM
DATE: 005lb
Fact Shirt
NPDES NC'0020 7 37 Renewal
Page 7

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0020737
Fac' 'tv Information
Applicant/Facility Name:
City of Kings Mountain/Pilot Creek WWTP
Applicant Address:
P.O. Box 429; Kings Mountain, North Carolina 28086
Facility Address:
Off US Route 74; Kings Mountain, North .Carolina 28086
Permitted Flow
6.0 MGD
Type of Waste:
Domestic and industrial with pretreatment program
Facility/Permit Status:
Class IV /Active; Renewal
County:
Cleveland County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
303(d) Listed?
Subbasin:
Buffalo Creek
Yes*
Regional Office:
State Grid / USGS
Quad:
Permit Writer:
Mooresville (MRO)
F13SW
Jackie Nowell
03-08-05
Date:
April 8, 2009
Drainage Area (mi2):
116
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
19
Winter 7Q 10 (cfs)
42
30Q2 (cfs)
Average Flow (cfs):
IWC (%):
54
162
33%
Lat. 35° 15' 35" N Long. 81° 27' 26" W
BACKGROUND
The Pilot Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is a 6.0 MGD treatment facility serving
13,500 residents of Kings Mountain. The facility discharges municipal wastewater (domestic
and industrial) and has a full pretreatment program with two (2) non -categorical Significant
Industrial Users and five Categorical Industrial Users. DWQ's PERCs Unit will continue to
implement the pretreatment program in the coming permit term.
The Permittee applied for renewal by submitting EPA Form 2A on March 4, 2008. The previous
permit was effective on May 1, 2004, expired on August 31, 2008 and has been administratively
extended.
An annual priority pollutant scan requirement will remain in the permit to ensure that
the permittee complies with the requirement in the municipal permit application.
The Town's treatment system consists of: dual screw pumps, a mechanical bar screens,
Parshall flume with recorder, three aeration basins, three secondary clarifiers, chlorine contact
basins, dechlorination facilities, aerobic digesters, 2 sludge drying beds, and a belt press..
PERMIT LIMITATIONS
Existing limits for the Kings Mountain -Pilot Creek WWTP are as follows:
Summer BOD5= 28 mg/1 (mo. avg.): 42.0 mg/1 (wk. avg.)
Winter BOD5= 30 mg/1 (mo. avg.): 45.0 mg/1 (wk. avg.)
Summer NH3 = 2.6 mg/1 (mo. avg.): 7.8 mg/1 (wk. avg.)
Winter NH3 = 8.9 mg/1 (mo. avg.): 26.7 mg/1 (wk. avg.)
DO = 5 mg/1
TSS = 30 mg/1
Fecal Coliform = 200/100 ml
TRC=28ug/1
pH = 6-9 S.U.
Chronic Toxicity test = 33%
Cadmium= 6.1 ug/1 (wk. avg.); 15 ug/1 (da. max.)
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0020737 Renewal
Page 1

Monitoring for chloride, copper, zinc, chromium, cyanide, nickel
Quarterly monitoring for Total Nitrogen and total phosphorus
Oxygen consuming limits (BOD5, NH3, DO) and conventional limits (fecal coliform, TRC, TSS)
will be renewed at this time.
Limits and monitoring requirements for cyanide, metals, and chloride were evaluated during
this renewal and evaluations included in the Reasonable Potential Analysis section.
The following items were requested to be renewed with this permit renewal: 1) a waiver
regarding 85% removal of Total Suspended Solids; 2) a continued exemption from 24
hour staffing. These items will be evaluated during this renewal.
RECEIVING STREAM INFORMATION
This facility discharges to the Buffalo Creek (sub -basin 03-08-05), which is in the Broad River
Basin. The segment of the Buffalo Creek where Pilot Creek WWTP discharges is impaired on
the 2008 North Carolina Integrated Report with the parameter of interest being turbidity and
a TMDL is needed. •
TOXICITY TESTING
Current Requirement: Chronic Ceriodaphnia Quarterly P/F © 33%
Testing during the months of January, April, July and October.
The City has had some problems passing its whole effluent toxicity tests in 2004, 2005, and
2006. A toxicity reduction evaluation was performed in Jan. 2006 and it was determined that
high levels of zinc was causing the toxicity problems. However since October 2006, nearly all
toxicity tests have been passed: one failed tox test in January 2009.
DWQ recommends that the quarterly chronic Ceriodaphnia toxicity tests @ 33% be
continued in the renewed permit.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY
Overall, the City has been in compliance with most permitted limits since the last
issuance. However there were limits violations for cadmium, TSS, and pH in 2004 and 2005,
along with monitoring frequency violations for several parameters in 2004 and 2008. (See also
toxicity testing above.) Most recently there were cadmium violations reoccurring in September,
October, and November 2008.
Compliance evaluation inspections (CEI) for the facility in 2006 and 2007 rated the
facility as noncompliant because of the collection of time based composite samples, the effluent
was tea colored and the generator did not power the aerators and sludge return pumps. The
2008 CEI did not rate the facility, however it was noted that the facility had a variance
regarding 24 hour staffing by a certified operator. "A condition of the variance is that the RAS,
and the aeration system was to be monitored by telemetry. The inspection found the diffused
air system and RAS pumps 1 & 3 are not connected to a telemetry system. Telemetry is
connected to standby power (which cannot operate the diffused air system), high water at screw
pumps, chlorine leak detention, sulfur dioxide leak detection and the security system.
The Mooresville Region Office staff report recommends the denial of the variance for 24
hour staffing. It was also noted that in October 2005 there was a spill of 3.2 MGD of
wastewater into Potts Creek. The spill occurred at 3:00 am Sunday and it was not noticed until
6:30 pm on Monday.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0020737 Renewal
Paget

INSTREAM MONITORING
Upstream site: Above effluent discharge
Downstream site: NCSR 1103
A review of temperature, DO, pH and conductivity data showed that most of the time water
quality standards were met for temperature and DO. Over the past 3 years there have been
several instances of low pH values both upstream and downstream of the Kings Mountain
discharge. From 2006 through 2008, downstream conductivity values were consistently 4 -5
times higher than the upstream conductivity values.
Recommend that instream monitoring remain in the permit to evaluate the effect of the
discharge on the receiving stream.
REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS (RPA) RESULTS
Reasonable potential analyses were conducted for cyanide and metals based on sampled data
in discharge monitoring reports (DMRs) from January 2006 through December 2008. The
DMRs contained permitted data as well as LTMP data. See attached RPA analyses.
• Arsenic, chromium, lead, and nickel demonstrated no reasonable potential to exceed
state water quality standards or acute criteria. Most data were at detectable levels No
effluent limits or monitoring will be required with the permit, but the City will have to
continue to monitor these parameters through the Pretreatment Program's Long Term
Monitoring Plan.
• Mercury - There were only three data values used in the analysis which resulted in a
high multiplication factor used to calculate the maximum predicted value. Based on
this, the maximum predicted value indicated a reasonable potential to exceed the
chronic allowable concentration. BPJ recommends that no limit be given, but that twice
per month monitoring be added to the permit. After 12 months of monitoring,
particularly if all values are below detection, the facility can request a reevaluation of
the monitoring requirement for mercury.
• Chloride - Maximum predicted value demonstrated a reasonable potential to exceed the
chronic allowable concentrations. However, this is an action level standard. It is
recommended that 2/month monitoring be in the permit.
•
• Copper and Zinc - Maximum predicted values for both parameters demonstrated a
reasonable potential to exceed both the chronic and acute allowable concentrations.
However, these are both Action Level standards and should be reviewed in conjunction
with toxicity testing. It is recommended that 2/month monitoring be continued for
copper and zinc.
• Cadmium and cyanide - Maximum predicted values for both parameters demonstrated
a reasonable potential to exceed the chronic allowable concentrations only. Based on
these results, weekly average limits for both parameters will be placed in the permit.
• Beryllium, bromoform, chloroform, chlorodibromomethane, and
dichlorobromomethane - Minimal data obtained from the 2006, 2007, and 2008
priority pollutant analyses (PPA). There was no reasonable potential shown to exceed
the water quality standards or federal criteria. No limits or monitoring recommended.
Parameters should continue to be monitored in the annual PPA.
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0020737 Renewal
Page 3

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
• Chromium and nickel monitoring will be deleted from the permit. No
reasonable potential to exceed the water quality standard shown. Quarterly
monitoring for chromium and nickel will continue in the pretreatment LTMP.
• The daily maximum limit for cadmium will be deleted from the permit
based on results of the RPA. There was reasonable potential to exceed the
chronic allowable butno potential to exceed the acute allowable
concentration, therefore the daily maximum limit can be removed. The
weekly average limit for cadmium of 6.1 ug/1 will remain.
• Mercury monitoring will be added to the permit. Reasonable potential to
exceed the water quality standard shown, based on minimal data values and
a high multiplication factor. Recommend twice per month monitoring in
the permit instead of limit.
• A cyanide limit of 15 ug/1 (weekly average) will be added to the permit
based on the results of the reasonable potential analyses. There was no
reasonable potential shown to exceed the acute allowable concentration
therefore no daily maximum limit is needed.
• The request for a variance from the 24 hour staffing for the facility will
be denied. Facility is not in compliance, telemetry equipment is not
properly connected to all equipment and a previous spill was undetected
for 15 hours.
• The request for variance from 85% removal for TSS will be renewed with
a modification. The previous variance was for 70% removal, it appears
that the facility is achieving about 80% removal with another major
industrial user having closed down. Based on the average TSS removal
for the past three years, recommend that TSS % removal be changed to
80%.
Attachments: RPA analysis
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: April 22, 2009
Permit Scheduled to Issue (tentative): June 15, 2009.
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact J . � s e Nowell at [phone].
NAME:
A,
DATE:
Fact Sheet
NPDES NC0020737 Renewal
Page 4

((24A3to Mir H!73L7:.v13
C/
fa ?MLf+nrf.etAWOS: 19 (ch(0 r 110 ize
oic\04)
t,/Q !(cft)n cA414)
ft)t"
Verr
_ELL_PF=loaftF/c
p)!tf zwc ptihr
70 /0 iet CA 32.% -3;0 t-/
JQ.ro I5R 37.2/ 2-68
64(edlnrift,
(aGwi-t)
56.7 u �� �o�►�� crDa,1,l�
SfrtcPa'aL4k�ciiroil!cWGt1 are sG.fJ, set_
acuk -fb S6.7 udy 4,, IJ/j Maw
� 4c4+
L1617.2
/kk WQS'K .F
Z1714)16e X 2..L5
aace,
1
5Yil

Action Level Calculation
Monitoring Report Month:
Date Evaluated:
Prepared by:
Metal
Copper
Zinc
Facili
ty
Kings Mtn. - Pilot Crk WWTP
Facility
Kings Mtn. - Pilot Crk WWTP NC0020737
Jan-09
April 21, 2009
Vanessa Manuel
'Chronic Al:
7
50
Acute AL
1/2 FAV Chronic CF Acute CF Kpo alpha
7.3 0.96 0.96 1.04E+06-0.7436
67 0.986 0.978 1.25E+06-0.7038
Toxicity
NC0020737
NOTES:
20727cuznrpa42009.xls
Permit No.
WQCdis(chrnc) WQCdis(ac)
6.72 7.008
49.3 65.526
Cu instrn
Permit No. Test Type Flow (MGD) 7Q10s IWC Subbasin TSS(15th ptcntl) Cu fD=cD/cT Zn fD=cD/cT (chronic
32.86 BRD05 8 3.61E-01 3.02E-01 19
Chronic
6
19
(If blank, no RP to exceed the recalculated Action Level)
t)01
RP exists for Copper and Zinc. Compared to chronic allowable since permit has chronic tox requirement.
ifs

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Kings Mountain WWTP
NC0020737
Time Period 1/2006 -10/2008
Qw (MGD) 6
7Q10S (cfs) 19
7Q10W (cfs) 42
30Q2 (cfs) 54
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 162
Rec'ving Stream Buffalo Creek
WWTP Class IV
/WC (%) @ 7Q1OS 32.862
@ 7Q1OW 18.129
@ 30Q2 14.692
@ QA 5.4291
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw = 6 MGD
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS/
Chronic
Vt.FAVI
Acute
n # Det. Mar PredCW
AlowableCw
Beryllium
C
6.5
ug/L
4 0 0.5
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute:
Chronic:
N/A
120
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring required in permit.
Bromoform
C
140
0.001
uglL
3 1 181.6
Note: n<12 '
Limited data set
Acute:
_
Chronic:
0
_ _ _
2,579
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring required in permit.
Chlorodibromomethane
C
13
0
ug/L
3 1 211.8
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute:
Chronic:
0
239
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring required in permit.
Chloroform
C
170
0.001
uglL
3 2 6.6
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute:
Chronic:
0
3,131
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring required in permit.
Dichlorobromomethane
C
17
0.001
1E-04
ug/L
3 1 29.3
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute:
Chronic:
0
__
313
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring required in permit.
Cadmium
NC
2
15
ug/L
195 22 21.8
Acute:
Chronic:
15
6
RP to exceed the chronic allowable. Recommend limit
in permit.
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
Freshwater Discharge
20737rpa112009v2.xls, rpa
9/30/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
2
Beryllium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Mar-20083 1 0.5 Std Dev. 0.0000
2 Aug-2007 } 4y 1 0.5 Mean 0.5000
3 t „ 1 0.5 C.V. 0.0000
4 Dec-2005 SE 1 0.5 n 4
5
6 Mult Factor = 1.0000
7 Max. Value 0.5 ug/L
8 y?- Max. Pred Cw 0.5 ug/L
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20737rpa112009.xls, data
-1 - 4/7/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
3
4
Bromoform
Chlorodibromomethane
•
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1
Mar-2008
' a
11 11.0
Std Dev.
5.3929
1
Mar-2008
17,.
12 12.0 Std Dev.
5.9652
2
Aug-2007
J
2 1.0
Mean
4.8333
2
Aug-2007
2 1.0 Mean
5.1667
3
Dec-2005
5.0 2.5
C.V.
1.1158
3
Dec-2005
5.0 2.5 C.V.
1.1546
4
n
3
4
tr.
n
3
5
51%
6
Mult Factor =
16.5100
6
0
Mult Factor =
17.6500
7
Max. Value
11.0 ug/L
7
Max. Value
12.0 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
181.6 ug/L
8
Max. Pred Cw
211.8 ug/L
9
�"
9
10
10
'':
11
11
12
12
P
13
13
;:.
14
14
15
15
16
ai
16
17
17
18
`
18
Uzi,
20737rpaII2009.xls, data
- 2 - 4/7/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
5
6
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10Ara
11
122
13
14-
15
16
17
18
Date Data
Mar-2008r
Aug-2007 d
Dec-2005 N<L
r
;
!���
!�}
_
`' `
.1
tz.4
t,�,s
BDL=1/2DL
3.6 3.6
3.6 3.6
5.0 2.5
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
0.6351
3.2333
0.1964
3
1.8400
3.6 ug/L
6.6 ug/L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Date
Mar-2008
Aug-2007
Dec-2005
Data
r
c.
BDL=1/2DL
4.5 4.5
2 1.0
5.0 2.5
Results
Std Dev.
Mean
C.V.
n
Mult Factor =
Max Value
Max Pred Cw
1.7559
2.6667
0.6585
3
6.5200
4.5 ug/L
29.3 ug/L
20737rpa112009.xls, data
- 3 - 4/7/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
11
Cadmium
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Aug-2008 2 2.0 Std Dev. 1.7390
2 2 2.0 Mean 1.4821
3 4 4.0 C.V. 1.1734
4 Dec-2007 2 2.0 n 195
5 4 4.0
6 5 5.0 Mult Factor = 1.3600
7 Nov-2007 6 6.0 Max. Value 16.0 ug/L
8 3 3.0 Max. Pred Cw 21.8 ug/L
9 <- 2 1.0
10 < 2 1.0
11 < 2 1.0
12 < 2 1.0
13 < 2 1.0
14 < 2 1.0
15 < 2 1.0
16 < 2 1.0
17 < 2 1.0
18 < 2 1.0
19 < 2 1.0
20 < 2 1.0
21 < 2 1.0
22 < 2 1.0
23 < 2 1.0
24 < 2 1.0
25 < 2 1.0
26 < 2 1.0
27 < 2 1.0
28 < 2 1.0
29 < 2 1.0
30 < 2 1.0
31 < 2 1.0
32 < 2 1.0
33 < 2 1.0
34 < 2 1.0
35 < 2 1.0
36 < 2 1.0
37 < 2 1.0
38 < 2 1.0
39 < 2 1.0
40 < 2 1.0
41 < 2 1.0
42 < 2 1.0
43 < 2 1.0
44 < 2 1.0
45 < 2 1.0
46 < 2 1.0
47 < 2 1.0
48 < 2 1.0
49 <'+ 2 1.0
50 < 2 1.0
51 < 2 1.0
52 < 2 1.0
53 < 2 1.0
54 < 2 1.0
55 <; 2 1.0
56 < 2 1.0
57 < 2 1.0
58 < 2 1.0
59 < 2 1.0
60 < 2 1.0
61 < 2 1.0
62 < 2 1.0
63 < 2 1.0
64 <. 2 1.0
65 < 2 1.0
66 < 2 1.0
67 < 2 1.0
68 < 2 1.0
69 < 2 1.0
20737rpa112009v2.xls, data
- 1 - 9/30/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
70 2 1.0
71 2 1.0
72 2 1.0
73 2 1.0
74 2 1.0
75 2 1.0
76 2 1.0
77 2 1.0
78 2 1.0
79 2 1.0
80 2 1.0
81 < i 2 1.0
82 i<. 2 1.0
83 k 2 1.0
84 2 1.0
85 2 1.0
86 2 1.0
87 2 1.0
88 2 1.0
89 2 1.0
90 2 1.0
91 2 1.0
92 2 1.0
93 < 2 1.0
94 2 1.0
95 2 1.0
96 2 1.0
97 =fl 2 1.0
98 2 1.0
99 2 1.0
100 2 1.0
101 2 1.0
102 2 1.0
103 2 1.0
104 2 1.0
105 2 1.0
106 2 1.0
107 2 1.0
108 = 2 1.0
109 2 1.0
110 2 1.0
111 2 1.0
112 2 1.0
113 - 2 1.0
114 2 1.0
115 2 1.0
116 2 1.0
117 2 1.0
118 2 1.0
119 2 1.0
120 2 1.0
121 2 1.0
122 2 1.0
123 2 1.0
124 ' 2 1.0
125 2 1.0
126 2 1.0
127 . . 2 1.0
128 E' 2 1.0
129 2 1.0
130 2 1.0
131 2 1.0
132 2 1.0
133 y. 2 1.0
134 < 2 1.0
135 <: 2 1.0
136 2,< 2 1.0
137 2 1.0
138 ,.< 2 1.0
139 < 2 1.0
140 =;< 2 1.0
141 2 1.0
142 ':< 2 1.0
143 s< 2 1.0
-2-
20737rpa112009v2.xls, data
9/30/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
144 Kj 2 1.0
145 K1 2 1.0
146 <I 2 1.0
147 < 2 1.0
148 <', 2 1.0
149 < 2 1.0
150 < 2 1.0
151 < 2 1.0
152 < 2 1.0
153 < 2 1.0
154 <! 2 1.0
155 <I 2 1.0
156 e) 2 1.0
157 '< 2 1.0
158 < 2 1.0
159 < 2 1.0
160 < 2 1.0
161 <. 2 1.0
162 .<' 2 1.0
163 < 2 1.0
164 < 2 1.0
165 < 2 1.0
166 <; 2 1.0
167 < 2 1.0
168 <, 2 1.0
169 < 2 1.0
170 < 2 1.0
171 < 2 1.0
172 <' 2 1.0
173 <' 2 1.0
174 <'i 2 1.0
175 <,' 2 1.0
176 <; 2 1.0
177 <, 2 1.0
178 Sep-2008 <' 2 1.0
179 < 2 1.0
180 <% 2 1.0
181 < 2 1.0
182 4 4.0
183 5 5.0
184 16 16.0
185 11 11.0
186 Oct-2008 7 7.0
187 4 4.0
188 5 5.0
189 10 10.0
190 6 6.0
191 5 5.0
192 5 5.0
193 3 3.0
194 3 3.0
195 4 4.0
196
197
198
-3-
20737rpa112009v2.xis, data
9/30/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Kings Mountain -Pilot Creek WWTP
NC0020737
Time Period 2006-2008
Qw (MGD) 6
7Q f OS (cfs) 19
7Q10W (cfs) 42
30Q2 (cfs) 54
Avg. Stream Flow, QA (cfs) 162
Rec'ving Stream Buffalo Creek
WWTP Class IV
IWC (%) @ 7Q10S 32.862
@ 7Q1OW 18.129
@ 30Q2 14.692
@ QA 5.4291
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw = 6 MGD
PARAMETER
TYP
E
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
PQL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC WQS/
Chronic
FAV/
Acute
n M Det. Max Prod Cw
Allowahle Cw
Arsenic
C
10
ug/L
198 87 1013.1
Acute: N/A
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 184
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
Recommend limit in the permit.
Bromoform
C
140.0
ug/L
3 1 181.E
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute: N/A
______________________________-----
Chronic: 2.579
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring in the permit. Monitor in annual PPA
Chromium
NC
50
1,022
ug/L
43 32 73.6
Acute: 1.022
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic or acute
allowable conc. No monitoring in the permit.
Chronic: 152
Monitor quarterly in LTMP
Copper
NC
7
AL
7.3
ug/L
135 135 66.1
Acute: 7
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 21
NC Action Level standard. Although reasonable potential
_sho_wn, no limit recomm_end_ed._R_eco_m_mend continue_ to
monitor 2/month in the permit.
Cyanide
NC
5
N
22
10
ug/L
51 43 I 21.9
Acute: 22
_ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 15
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Reasonable potential shown to exceed the chronic allowabl
Recommend limit in the permit.
Chloride
NC
230
mg/L
40 40 705.1
Acute: N/A
Chronic: 700
NC Action Level standard. Although reasonable potential
shown, no limit recommended. Recommend continueto
_
monitor 2/month in the permit.
Lead
NC
25
N
33.8
ug/L
39 26 22.1
Acute: 34
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic or acute
allowable conc. No monitoring in the perrnit.
_ _ _ _
Chronic: 76
Monitor quarterly in LTMP
Mercury
NC
12.000
0.2000
ngll
3 3 172.4800
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute: N/A
_ _ ___ ___
Chronic: 37
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Due to lack of data, reasonable potential shown to exceed
chronic allowable. Recommend no limit but 2/mo monitoring
Nickel
NC
88
261
ug/L
80 80 87.1
Acute: 261
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic or acute
allowable conc. No monitoring in the perrnit.
Chronic: 268
Monitor quarterly in LTMP
Chlorodibromomethane
C
13
N
c
ug/L
3 1 211.8
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute: N/A
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 239
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
No monitoring in the permit. Monitor in annual PPA
Chloroform
C
170.0
0.001
ug/L
3 2 6.6
Note: n<12
Limited data set
Acute: 0
_-- — — —
Chronic: 3.131
_ t. — i
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
conc. No monitoring in the permit. Monitor in annual PPA.
Dichlorobromomethane
C
17.00
AL
0.001
ug/L
3 1 29.3
Note: n<12 i
Limited data set
Acute: 0
_ — — _ —
Chronic: 313
_
No reasonable potential shown to exceed chronic allowable
conc. No monitoring in the permit. Monitor in annual PPA.
Zinc
NC
50
AL
67
ug/L
162 162 1,536.0
Acute: 67
Chronic: 152
NC Action Level standard. Although reasonable potential
shown, no limit recomm_end_ed. Recommend continue to
monitor 2/month in the permit.
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
"Freshwater Discharge
20737rpa2008rev72009.xls, rpa
10/1/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
1
2
Arsenic
Bromoform
Date
1 Aug-2008
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Data
14.0
11.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
13.0
29.0
33.0
38.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
6.0
6.0
10.0
22.0
14.0
12.0
5.0
7.0
10.0
6.0
5.0
11.0
7.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
11.0
9.0
7.0
7.0
13.0
5.0
36.0
30.0
17.0
15.0
13.0
10.0
19.0
11.0
5.0
14.0
27.0
36.0
21.0
11.0
12.0
28.0
22.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
5.0
9.0
5.0
9.0
9.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
BDL=1/2DL
14.0
11.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
13.0
29.0
33.0
38.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
6.0
6.0
10.0
22.0
14.0
12.0
5.0
7.0
10.0
6.0
5.0
11.0
7.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
7.0
11.0
9.0
7.0
7.0
13.0
5.0
36.0
30.0
17.0
15.0
13.0
10.0
19.0
11.0
2.5
14.0
27.0
36.0
21.0
11.0
12.0
28.0
22.0
2.5
2.5
7.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
5.0
7.0
2.5
9.0
5.0
9.0
9.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
Results
Std Dev. 66.7237
Mean 22.4217
C.V. 2.9759
n 198
Mult Factor = 1.6500
Max. Value 614.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw 1013.1 ug/L
Date
1 Mar-2008
2 Aug-2007
3 Dec-2005
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5D
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Data
BDL=112DL Results
11 11.0 Std Dev. 5.3929
2 1.0 Mean 4.8333
5 2.5 C.V. 1.1158
n 3
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
16.5100
11.0 ug/
181.6 ug/
L
L
20737rpa2008rev72009.xls, data
- 1 - 10/1/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
70 Dec-2007 r' -i 6.0 6.0
71 29.0 29.0
72 25.0 25.0
73 15.0 15.0
74 8.0 8.0
75 7.0 7.0
76 7.0 7.0
77 7.0 7.0
78 <', 5.0 2.5
79 <, 5.0 2.5
80 <, 5.0 2.5
81 Nov-2007 15.0 15.0
82 31.0 31.0
83 23.0 23.0
84 15.0 15.0
85 7.0 7.0
86 10.0 10.0
87 < 5.0 2.5
88 < 5.0 2.5
89 < 5.0 2.5
90 <. 5.0 2.5
91 < 5.0 2.5
92 < 5.0 2.5
93 < 5.0 2.5
94 < 5.0 2.5
95 < 5.0 2.5
96 < 5.0 2.5
97 < 5.0 2.5
98 < 5.0 2.5
99 < 5.0 2.5
100 •<I 5.0 2.5
101 < 5.0 2.5
102 ' <' 5.0 2.5
103 < 5.0 2.5
104 < 5.0 2.5
105 < 5.0 2.5
106 < 5.0 2.5
107 < 5.0 2.5
108 <, 5.0 2.5
109 <' 5.0 2.5
110 < 5.0 2.5
111 < 5.0 2.5
112 < 5.0 2.5
113 <, 5.0 2.5
114 < 5.0 2.5
115 < 5.0 2.5
116 < 5.0 2.5
117 <' 5.0 2.5
118 < 5.0 2.5
119 < 5.0 2.5
120 < 5.0 2.5
121 < 5.0 2.5
122 < 5.0 2.5
123 < 5.0 2.5
124 < 5.0 2.5
125 < 5.0 2.5
126 < 5.0 2.5
127 <. 5.0 2.5
128 < 5.0 2.5
129 < 5.0 2.5
130 < 5.0 2.5
131 < 5.0 2.5
132 < 5.0 2.5
133 < 5.0 2.5
134 < 5.0 2.5
135 < 5.0 2.5
136 < 5.0 2.5
137 < 5.0 2.5
138 < 5.0 2.5
139 < 5.0 2.5
140 < 5.0 2.5
141 < 5.0 2.5
142 < 5.0 2.5
143 < 5.0 2.5
- 2 -
20737rpa2008rev72009.xls, data
10/1/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
144 < 5.0 2.5
145 <" 5.0 2.5
146 C5.0 2.5
147 -<'; 5.0 2.5
148 < 5.0 2.5
149 < 5.0 2.5
150 5.0 2.5
151 < 5.0 2.5
152 < 5.0 2.5
153 =<': 5.0 2.5
154 <I 5.0 2.5
155 < 5.0 2.5
156 K" 5.0 2.5
157 c 5.0 2.5
158 <. 5.0 2.5
159 <; 5.0 2.5
160 < 5.0 2.5
161 < 5.0 2.5
162 ?'G„ 5.0 2.5
163 <' 5.0 2.5
164 < 5.0 2.5
165{< 5.0 2.5
166 <: 5.0 2.5
167 <` 5.0 2.5
168 <' 5.0 2.5
169 < 5.0 2.5
170 <' 5.0 2.5
171 < 5.0 2.5
172 < 5.0 2.5
173 < 5.0 2.5
174 =:<,I 5.0 2.5
175 <` 5.0 2.5
176 `<j 5.0 2.5
177 < 5.0 2.5
178 <? 5.0 2.5
179 <! 5.0 2.5
180 c 5.0 2.5
181 Sep-2008 32.0 32.0
182 31.0 31.0
183 37.0 37.0
184 40.0 40.0
185 152.0 152.0
186 188.0 188.0
187 614.0 614.0
188 358.0 358.0
189 Oct-2008 '�`? -i 221.0 221.0
190 135.0 135.0
191 '""? 121.0 121.0
192 420.0 420.0
193 175.0 175.0
194 ' 169.0 169.0
195 169.0 169.0
196 139.0 139.0
197 101.0 101.0
198 117.0 117.0
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
-3-
20737rpa2008rev72009.xls, data
1011 /2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
4
5
Chromium
Copper
Date
Data
BDL=1/20L
Results
Date Data
BDL=1/2DL
Results
1
Aug-2008
5
5.0
Std Dev.
6.5073
1
Aug-2008
23
23.0
Std Dev.
8.9057
2
7
7.0
Mean
8.9186
2
31
31.0
Mean
32.4963
3
t,tr
6
6.0
C.V.
0.7296
3
;
24
24.0
C.V.
0.2741
4
V!
7
7.0
n
43
4
26
26.0
n
135
5
5
2.5
5
24
24.0
6
1.1
5
2.5
Mult Factor =
1.9900
6
21
21.0
Mutt Factor =
1.1400
7
¢
5
2.5
Max. Value
37.0 ug/L
7
22
22.0
Max. Value
58.0 ug/L
8
,,
5
2.5
Max. Pred Cw
73.6 ug/L
8
50
50.0
Max. Pred Cw
66.1 ug/L
9
5
2.5
9
21
21.0
10
ri
5
2.5
10
25
. 25.0
11
5
2.5
11
X '
22
22.0
12
CIA
5
2.5
12
12
12.0
13
9.0
9.0
13
IV
17
17.0
14
to
5
2.5
14
13
13.0
15
��"
'
5
2.5
15
I�:
15
15.0
16
5
2.5
16
12
12.0
17
, ,
6.0
6.0
17
.
35
35.0
18
--
`
6.0
6.0
18
13
13.0
19
7.0
7.0
19
`s
24
24.0
20
Dec-2007
",e.+
11.0
11.0
20
? Il
26
26.0
21
22
is '
7.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
21
22
A
Ar
v
21
20
21.0
20.0
23
f
6.0
6.0
23
1:4,!
16
16.0
24
s
13.0
13.0
24
C .i at•.
46
46.0
25
r
9.0
9.0
25
% t
33
33.0
26
9.0
9.0
26
'"
28
28.0
27
��. .
12.0
12.0
27
26
26.0
28
8.0
8.0
28
} , <
28
28.0
29
r
10.0
10.0
29
4,6(4.
28
28.0
30
11.0
11.0
30
ic-26
26.0
31
13.0
13.0
31
29
29.0
32
R.
14.0
14.0
32
=
23
23.0
33
12.0
12.0
33
Dec-2007
'
30
30.0
34
. <, ?
37.0
37.0
34
r
40
40.0
35
16.0
16.0
35
j
23
23.0
36
18.0
18.0
36
ii
21
21.0
37
.
15.0
15.0
37
:awn
29
29.0
38
��
8.0
8.0
38;;
27
27.0
39
.?
9.0
9.0
39
0 k
19
19.0
40
16.0
16.0
40
1.44
21
21.0
41
11.0
11.0
41
.17
42
42.0
.
42
21.0
21.0
42
``
39
39.0
43
,ti�
11.0
11.0
43
11
Y
32
32.0
44
44
42
42.0
45
45
r -c
46
46.0
46
g
46
z_
32
32.0
47
s'
C1'
47
48
V.,
'l
36
27
36.048
27.0
49
49
37
37.0
50
}-_
50
1
42
42.0
51
52
51
52t,�,
1�1
si
40
35
40.0
35.0
53
53
€ ,
40
40.0
54
::
54
tl1
42
42.0
55
55
: `l}
36
36.0
56
>
56
U
33
33.0
57
�
57
39
39.0
58
58
`
51
51.0
59
fili
59
37
37.0
60
y'
at
60
s;;,
7.
38
38.0
61
g.
61
33
33.0
62
62
r3'.
30
30.0
63
`
63
Y
36
36.0
64
64
37
37.0
65;,,
65
u
36
36.0
66
ro,
-,•!
66
�;,�,
41
41.0
67
67`.
37
37.0
68?
68
�;
31
31.0
-4-
20737rpa2008.xls, data
4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
5.0 2.5
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
20737rpa2008.xls, data
- 3 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
6
7
Cyanide
Chloride
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
1 Aug-2008 3 5.0 Std Dev.
24 5.0 Mean
3 ` 3 5.0 C.V.
4 < 2 5.0 n
5 `.,,a 5 5.0
_
6 � + 6 5.0 Mutt Factor =
7 6 5.0 Max Value
8 +'c: 2 5.0 Max Pred Cw
9 �'a 4 5.000
10 r 2 5.000
11 ', 6 5.000
12 !t 2 5.000
3
13 4 5.000
14 ,` 2 5.0
15 icy 2 5.0
16 5 5.0
17 4 5.0
18 Dec-2007 n 8 5.0
19 t` 4 5.0
20 _<e 2 5.0
21 E 8 5.0
22 4 5.0
23 ' ,,.1f 3 5.0
l4:Y,i
24 ,'I; 3 5.0
25 ° :'f 5 5.0
26 ;°: 6 5.0
27 12 12.0
28 4 5.0
29 L1 2 5.0
30 7 5.0
31 7 5.0
32 4 5.0
33 Yur 7 5.0
34 {c1 2 5.0
35 `"ai 2 5.0
36 < 2 5.0
37 4 5.0
38 '5 5.0
39 'Y 3 5.0
1:i
40 ��� 7 5.0
41 6 5.0
42 Sep-2008 3. 5.0
43 16. 16.0
44 'k3 4. 5.0
45 1 4 2. 5.0
46 V 3. 5.0
47 1.
48 2. 5.0
49
50
v. .
51 ! y 2. 5.0
52 ( 2. 5.0
53 t'4
54
55
56 rsa�,
57
58
59 Jan-2009
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
2. 5.0
3. 5.0
1.8091
5.3529
0.3380
51
1.3700
16.0 ug/L
21.9 ug/L
Date
Aug-2008
,y.
� Y
Dec-2007
Data BDL=I/2DL
173.1
312.4
214.2
285.6
303.5
232.1
263.1
306.9
2632
289
281
279
263
297
387
392
346
306
322
277
407
289
250
358
477
354
387
333
348
372
534
118
330
457
443
420
299
470
387
Results
173.1 Std Dev. 84.3041
312.4 Mean 327.2375
214.2 C.V. 0.2576
285.6 n 40
303.5
232.1 Mutt Factor =
263.1 Max. Value
306.9 Max. Pred Cw
263.1
263.1
289.4
280.6
279.2
263.1
297.2
387.3
392.4
345.7
305.5
322.3
277.0
406.6
288.9
249.9
357.7
476.9
354.0
387.0
333.0
348.0
372.4
534.2
117.9
330.1
457.3
443.2
419.6
299.0
470.0
387.0
1.3200
534.2 mg/l
705.1 mg/L
20737rpa2008.xls, data
- 7 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
8
9
Lead
Mercury
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Aug-2008 < 2 1.0 Std Dev. 2.2562
2 <.; 2 1.0 Mean 2.7436
3 ; < 2 1.0 C.V. 0.8224
4 < 2 1.0 n 39
5 2 1.0
6 2 2.0 MuIt Factor = 2.2100
7 %' 2 1.0 Max. Value 10.0 ug/L
8 t`e 2 2.0 Max. Pred Cw 22.1 ug/L
9 <: 2 1.0
10 2 2.0
11 < 2 1.0
12 < 2 1.0
13 < 2 1.0
14 3 3.0
15 2 2.0
16 < 2 1.0
17 Dec-2007 < 2 1.0
18 < 2 1.0
19 2 2.0
20 3 3.0
21 7 7.0
22 ;• 3 3.0
23 ~' 8 8.0
24 3 3.0
25 4,1 3 3.0
26 =Y: 3 3.0
27 2 2.0
28 3 3.0
29 3 3.0
30 6 6.0
31 9 9.0
32 3 3.0
33 2 2.0
34 2 2.0
35 3 3.0
36 10 10.0
37 2 2.0
38 3 3.0
39 3 3.0
40
41
42
43
44
45 °''•
46 €.
47
i.-
49
49
50<
51
52
53
54
55 r•
56
57,
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65 ui
66
67
68 's
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Feb-2008 10.3 10.3 Std Dev. 9.0017
2 Apr-2008 22 22.0 Mean 12.2000
3 Jul-2008 4.3 4.3 C.V. 0.7378
4 n 3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Mult Factor = 7.8400
Max. Value 22.0 ng/1
Max. Pred Cw 172.5 ng/I
20737rpa2008.xIs, data
- 10 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
11
12
Nickel
Chlorodibromomethane
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Aug-2008 34 34.0 Std Dev. 13.1703
2 47 47.0 Mean 32.0125
3 33 33.0 C.V. 0.4114
4 31 31.0 n 80
5 ' 36 36.0
6 32 32.0 Mult Factor = 1.3400
7 i 25 25.0 Max. Value 65.0 ug/L
8 36 36.0 Max. Pred Cw 87.1 ug/L
9 18 18.0
10 ;K'': 20 20.0
11 12 12.0
12 "'i 13 13.0
13 n 15 15.0
14 15 15.0
15 16 16.0
16 21 21.0
17 19 19.0
18 19 19.0
19 19 19.0
20 17 17.0
21 i 18 18.0
22 16 16.0
23 15 15.0
24 14 14.0
25 °y'o- 14 14.0
26 58 58.0
27 38 38.0
28 25 25.0
29 24 24.0
30 21 21.0
31 20 20.0
32 Dec-2007 37 37.0
33 27 27.0
34 20 20.0
35 24 24.0
36 23 23.0
37 A 42 42.0
38 48 48.0
39 39 39.0
40 33 33.0
41 39 39.0
42 49 49.0
43 58 58.0
44 47 47.0
45 47 47.0
46 42 42.0
47 47 47.0
48 29 29.0
49 23 23.0
50 27 27.0
51 23 23.0
52 65 65.0
53 ` 57 57.0
54 50 50.0
55 44 44.0
56 27 27.0
57 29 29.0
58 30 30.0
59 31 31.0
60 29 29.0
61 27 27.0
62 35 35.0
63 35 35.0
64 30 30.0
65 32 32.0
66 21 21.0
67 26 26.0
68 53 53.0
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Mar-2008 12 12.0 Std Dev. 7.7782
2 Aug-2007 < 2 1.0 Mean 6.5000
3 C.V. 1.1966
4 n 2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Mult Factor = 30.0100
Max. Value 12.0 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw 360.1 ug/L
20737rpa2008.xls, data
- 13 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
56 56.0
43 43.0
30 30.0
44 44.0
37 37.0
29 29.0
30 30.0
27 27.0
21 21.0
57 57.0
60 60.0
41 41.0
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
- 14 -
20737rpa2008.xls, data
4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
13
14
Chloroform
Dichlorobromomethane
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
Aug-2007 3.6 3.6 Std Dev. 0.0000
Mar-2008 3.6 3.6 Mean 3.6000
C.V. 0.0000
n 2
Mult Factor =
Max. Value
Max. Pred Cw
1.0000
3.6 ug/L
3.6 ug/L
Date Data BDL=1/2DL Results
1 Mar-2008 4.5 4.5 Std Dev. 2.4749
2 Aug-2007 < 2 1.0 Mean 2.7500
3 C.V. 0.9000
4 n 2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
Mult Factor= 16.1000
Max. Value 4.5 ug/L
Max. Pred Cw 72.5 ug/L
20737rpa2008.xls, data
- 16 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 ;-
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
20737rpa2008.xis, data
- 15 - 4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
15
Zinc
Date
1 Aug-2008
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59 Dec-2007
60
61
62
63
64
65 ;
66 '
Data
�•jA
:4
`5-1
OztA
574
67
68
BDL=1/2DL Results
74 74.0 Std Dev. 106.1191
73 73.0 Mean 162.1667
89 89.0 C.V. 0.6544
162 162.0 n 162
174 174.0
117 117.0 Mult Factor = 1.2800
136 136.0 Max. Value 1200.0 ug/L
133 133.0 Max. Pred Cw 1536.0 ug/L
134 134.0
119 119.0
136 136.0
107 107.0
99 99.0
79 79.0
105 105.0
105 105.0
87 87.0
77 77.0
149 149.0
112 112.0
109 109.0
91 91.0
238 238.0
81 81.0
127 127.0
103 103.0
112 112.0
138 138.0
105 105.0
136 136.0
146 146.0
193 193.0
171 171.0
179 179.0
135 135.0
72 72.0
75 75.0
68 68.0
73 73.0
99 99.0
86 86.0
80 80.0
92 92.0
113 113.0
75 75.0
80 80.0
106 106.0
124 124.0
95 95.0
89 89.0
148 148.0
141 141.0
122 122.0
118 118.0
130 130.0
119 119.0
134 134.0
119 119.0
161 161.0
142 142.0
95 95.0
91 91.0
137 137.0
123 123.0
109 109.0
123 123.0
221 221.0
165 165.0
-19-
20737rpa2008.xls, data
4/3/2009

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
69 137 137.0
70 170 170.0
71 130 130.0
72 102 102.0
73 120 120.0
74 102 102.0
75 123 123.0
76 302 302.0
77 247 247.0
784 245 245.0
79 246 246.0
80 238 238.0
81 173 173.0
82 177 177.0
83 186 186.0
84 264 264.0
85 377 377.0
86 297 297.0
87 296 296.0
88 249 249.0
89 243 243.0
90 202 202.0
91 283 283.0
92 262 262.0
93 126 126.0
94 88 88.0
95 100 100.0
96 87 87.0
97 472 472.0
98 346 346.0
99 353 353.0
100 318 318.0
101 275 275.0
102 242 242.0
103 117 117.0
104 126 126.0
105 158 158.0
106 138 138.0
107 139 139.0
108 121 121.0
109 130 130.0
110 117 117.0
111 196 196.0
112 220 220.0
113 208 208.0
114 250 250.0
115 246 246.0
116 185 185.0
117 1200 1200.0
118 134 134.0
119 230 230.0
120 153 153.0
121 150 150.0
122 132 132.0
123 115 115.0
124 99 99.0
125 90 90.0
126 82 82.0
127 120 120.0
128 77 77.0
129 160 160.0
130 154.0 154.0
131 153.0 153.0
132 154.0 154.0
133 112.0 112.0
134 131.0 131.0
135 165.0 165.0
136 179.0 179.0
137 187.0 187.0
138 166.0 166.0
139 212.0 212.0
140 179.0 179.0
141 162.0 162.0
- 20 -
20737rpa2008.xls, data
4/3/2009

. Nowell, Jackie
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 4:03 PM
To: Nowell, Jackie
Subject: Fw: 20737fina12009.doc
Jackie:
haven't heard back from you re this. thought you were going to discuss
with Tom. let me know where you are with this. thanks.
Marshall
Forwarded by Marshall Hyatt/R4/USEPA/US on 08/18/2009 04:01 PM
Marshall
Hyatt/R4/USEPA/U
S
07/27/2009 09:07
AM
"Nowell, Jackie"
<-iackie.nowe11t ncdenr.gov>
To
cc
Subject
Re: 20737fina12009.doc(Document
link: Marshall Hyatt)
thanks for sending the'proposed permit before finalizing. My only
comment is for arsenic, cyanide, cadmium, copper, and zinc, the permit contains weekly
average limits only. However, 40 CFR Part 122.45(d)(2) requires that all POTW permits
contain both monthly average and weekly average permit. I realize NC doesn't have acute
criteria for all of
these parameters, but the regulation still applies. You could either
add a monthly average value equal to the weekly average value, or you
could add a daily maximum, which would be more stringent. I made a
similar comment on a recent POTW permit drafted by Sergei. Call me if you want to discuss
further.
1

Nowell, Jackie
To: Hyatt.Marshall [e-mail]
Cc: Belnick, Tom
Subject: RE: comments on NC0020737, Kings Mountain Pilot Creek VVVVTP
Attachments: addinfoNC0020737.doc
Hello Marshall,
Re: your comments, attached is some additional info on my calculations for non -excessive I/I
for Kings Mountain's plant. This method was last used by me for the Old Fort WWTP renewal
when they asked for continuation of a TSS % removal variance back in 2001. This helped show
that their I/I was nonexcessive and that variance was continued.
As far as the toxicity letter, Cindy Moore and I discussed that before sending the permit to
notice, and she recommended I proceed with noticing it. She assumed that the City would take
option b) and do the work to show that the copper and zinc limits are not needed (Most
municipalities choose that option instead of automatically taking the limits.) They would
have nine months to do this work and we would not delay finalizing the permit until the work
is complete. We would reopen the permit later and add Cu & Zn limits if the TIE shows that
they are causative of toxicity.
If they should choose to accept the limits on May 28th, I could place the Cu and Zn limits in
this permit since it has not been finalized. I would notify Kings Mountain that these limits
would be added to the permit. Since the permit would then have more stringent limits than in
the draft, we would not have to renotice the permit. That said, I'm thinking that Kings
Mountain will not accept Cu and Zn limits at this time and the permit will be reissued with
the recommended draft limitations and monitoring only for Cu & Zn.
Let me know if any additional questions
Jackie
Original Message
From: Hyatt.Marshal4epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Hyatt.Marshall(epamail.epa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 1:34 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: comments on NCO020737, Kings Mountain Pilot Creek WWTP
Jackie:
call me if you want to discuss further. Please email me your response
when you can.
Marshall
1. Re the TSS % removal waiver to 80%, the cover letter seems to have
addressed all the regulatory requirements of 40 CFR Part 133.1O3(d). If
it's not too much trouble, how did you determine that the facility does
not have excessive I/I?
2. After receiving your draft permit, I got a copy of an April 28
1

Check Message
A 16 2009 16:13
Repeat transmission.
912024562461
Error on scan at page 2

letter from Cindy Moore to the facility indicating that the facility
must decide whether to accept numeric limits for Zn and Cu or choose
alternative courses of action to justify no limits for them by May 28.
How do you intend to proceed with this draft permit based on that
letter?

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Selenium
Date Data BDL=112DL Results
1 d U/ L 2l'... 2.7 2.7 Std Dev. 1.9207
2 3.6 3.6 Mean 4.6111
3 5. 5.0 C.V. 0.4165
4 5. 5.0 n 54
5 5.7 5.7
6 9.3 9.3 Mutt Factor = 1.4500
7 2.5 2.5 Max. Value 12.1 ug/L
8 3.3 3.3 Max. Pred Cw 17.5 ug/L
9 3.2 3.2
10 3.8 3.6
11 4.4 4.4
12 2.5 2.5
13 4.9 4.9
14 5.4 5.4
15 4.3 4.3
16 6. 6.0
17 kaj 9. 9.0
18 Jun-2007 12.1 12.1
19 4.5 4.5
20 I 5.2 5.2
21 3.5 3.5
22 3.9 3.9
23 + 4.8 4.8
24 6.1 6.1
25 4.8 4.8
26 4.1 4.1
27 5.7 5.7
28 3.3 3.3
29 5.7 5.7
30 7.3 7.3
31 2.7 2.7
32 3.1 3.1
33 3.2 3.2
34 3.5 3.5
35 4.5 4.5
36 5.2 5.2
37 5.3 5.3
38 4.2 4.2
39 3. 3.0
40 3.7 3.7
41 3.8 3.8
42 6.1 6.1
43 9.1 9.1
44 4.4 4.4
45 5.9 5.9
46 2.9 2.9
47 4.8 4.8
48 4.1 4.1
49 2.4 2.4
50 2.9 2.9
51 2.8 2.8
52 4.5 4.5
53 2.6 2.6
54 2.9 2.9
55
56
57
58
59
60
199
200
- 2 -
4979rpa2009semod.xls, data
2/27/2009

Memo
To:
From: Rob Krebs
By: John Les!
Date: 6/19/2009
Kings Mountain Pilot Creek VWVfP NC0020737
Re:
e Regional Office
John Lesley, MRO, conducted a Compliance Evaluation Inspection of the subject facility on June 18,
2009. Below are the findings of the inspection:
1. One of the influent screw lift pumps is out of service, leaving only one screw lift pump operable.
A gasoline powered six-inch portable pump is currently being used as a backup influent pump
during periods of high flow or in the event of the remaining screw pump failing. The backup
pump bypasses the bar screen.
2. The facility is monitored by two telemetry systems. The systems notify a person on call after
equipment failure has occurred or if a high water alarm is activated. The systems offer no
remote operational control. The ORC could not demonstrate how the Cimtec system worked
on-line via the Internet. The ORC indicated that the Cimtec system sent text message by cell
phone. The Verbatim system is a dialer call up system that gives a prerecorded code
designation for an equipment failure.
3. Standby power is insufficient to operate the entire WWTP site. The generator will run one of two
influent screw pumps (only one screw pump is currently in service), one blower for diffused air
operation on each of the three aeration basins (six blowers were in operation on day of this
inspection), RAS pumps, the chlorine feed equipment, SO2 feed equipment, the clarifiers (see
next comment), and the operators' office/lab.
4. None of the clarifiers have skimming capability. The skimming devices on #3 and #4 have been
removed, clarifier # 1 is not equipped with a skimming device, and clarifier #2 is out of service.
5. The RAS pump was leaking badly.
6. A large amount of scum composed of a mat of paper, plastic, grease, etc. has greatly impacted
the chlorine contact chambers and diminished the effluent quality. The effluent discharge was
gray and very turbid.
7. A copy of the facility's Risk Management Plan was not available for inspection.
8. The facility is only marginally staffed. One Grade 4 ORC, one Grade 3 back up ORC, a Grade 2
lab tech, a Grade 2 operator, one Grade 1 operator, and one Grade 1 in training.
1

9. The Aquatic Toxicology Unit has indicated that copper and zinc limits will be recommended for
the facility. MRO also recommends the addition of the copper and zinc limits. A 2006 Toxicity
Identification Evaluation concluded that zinc was a toxicant in the discharge. The facility
reported zinc concentrations above the recommended 497.2 ug/I limit on five occasions in
February and March 2009.
10. Long term monitoring plan data from October -December 2008 indicates that arsenic in
concentrations as high as 420 ug/I were present -in the wastewater discharge from the facility.
The reasonable potential analysis data only includes data through August 2008 and indicates
levels of arsenic over 184 ug/I would lead to chronic impacts on the receiving stream. Evonik
Energy Services is a SIU that cleans air scrubbers for coal fired power plants, which would be a
likely new source of arsenic and selenium (selenium is not included in the LTMP).
11. The facility has requested a waiver from the 24/7operation requirement in 15A NCAC2H.0124.
Because of the above noted significant maintenance issues, the age of the infrastructure (40 +
years) of the WVVfP, a poor compliance record — several cadmium and toxicity limit violations in
the past 12-month period, and a marginal staff, this office recommends denial of the request.
• Page 2

RECEIVED
JUN - 2 200'
THE CITY OF KINGS MOUNTAIN
NORTH CAROLINA DENR - WATER QUAL
P.O. BOX 429-KINGS MOUNTAIN, NORTH CAROLINA, 28086
DENNIS WELLS, WATER RESOURCES DIRECTOR
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
E-mail [e-mail]
May 28, 2009
NCDEHR/Surface Water Protection Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Att: Jacquelyn M. Nowell
SUBJECT: Reply to the Draft NPDES Permit No. NC0020737
Dear Ms. Nowell:
POINT SOURCE BRANC
We have received the draft copy NPDES Permit No. NC0020737 for Pilot Creek
Wastewater Treatment Facility.
We are submitting our comments for the new modifications outlined in our Draft
NPDES Permit. Below is the following request:
CADMIUM: We would like to request that the Monitoring Frequency for Cadmium be
reduced to twice a month (2/month) with no limit. However, if the data
should show to have a potential long term exposure, then at this time the
permit could be modified to include limits.
om the 24 Hour Staffing
MERCURY: We would like to request that the Monitoring Frequency for Mercury be
reduced to quarterly instead of twice a month (2/month). This parameter
is presently being monitored through our Pretreatment Program and our
Effluent Priority Pollutant Scan. After monitoring this parameter in the
past, it was removed from our previous permit.
STAFFING: We hereby request for an exemption fr
The Historical City

STAFFING: We hereby request for an exemption from the 24 Hour Staffing
Rule 15A NCAC 2H . 0124 (4) at the Pilot Creek WWTP.
We are submitting information which we believe will demonstrate the
adequacy of our Telemetry Systems. We have spent thousands of dollars
updating our equipment to monitor all areas required in this rule.
We have two (2) Telemetry Systems in place, one being a Verbatim
Dial -A -Log system and, the other is a Cimtec device. The newer of the two
is the Cimtec device, which allows the operators to access all monitoring
points through its web site. The Verbatim System can be accessed by
calling its dedicated phone line to hear the monitoring status.
The city has supplied cell phones or pagers to the Supervisor/ORC, which is
on call 24/7 and, the stand-by certified operator on call. These phones or
pagers are used to receive messages from both telemetry systems in case a
monitoring point was to fail. The Verbatim System sends a voice response
and, the Cimtec sends a text message that would identify the status.
Guidelines for the issuance of a waiver for the 24 hour staffing rule when utilizing a
Telemetry Monitoring System:
1) Areas to be monitored by Telemetry monitoring system at the Pilot Creek WWTP
A. Total WWTP Power Failure: YES
B. Bar Screen status: N/A (Manual Bar Screen)
C. Aeration equipment Operational status: YES (Blowers)
D. High Water Level Alarm: YES
E. Trickling Filter Distribution Arm Operational Status: N/A
F. RBC Drive Unit Operational status: N/A
G. Secondary Clarifier Sludge Collection System Operational status: YES
H. Return Activated Sludge (RAS) Flow -Alarm set points on low flow: YES
I. Head Loss or High water level of Filters: N/A
J. Disinfection System Operational status: YES
K. Dechlorination System Operational status: YES
L. Plant Flow — Alarm set points at minimum/maximum Flows: YES
M. ADD — ON, Stand — By Generator status: YES
N. ADD — ON, Security Alarm status: YES
2) Requirement: A certified operator may be required to be on site during periods of
High Flows (Based on maximum Plant Flow Alarm) due to
excessive Inflow.
Comment: At any time a High Water Level Alarm is activated, a certified operator
responds and remains on site until the condition clears or until another
operator relieves them.

3) Requirement:
Comment:
The WWTP must have dual or standby power supply which shall be
equipped with an automatic transfer switch.
The Pilot Creek WWTP has a Stand -By Generator that is equipped
with an automatic transfer switch. The Generator provides stand-by
power during a power outage.
4) Requirement: Mechanical equipment failures, power failures, alarm conditions, etc.
must be relayed to a designated operator, who will respond
immediately to the problem area. A designated certified operator shall
be on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The system shall provide
to the Regional and Central Offices the notification procedure and a
notification schedule of how contacts will be made when problems are
reported and shall notify the Offices of any changes in the schedule.
Comment:
All alarms are relayed to cell phones and pagers. The alarms are
displayed as Text messages and Voice announcements. The facilities
Supervisor/ORC is on call 24 hours, 7 days a week. The alarm
messages will be sent to the ORC, Kim T. Moss, on call (Stand -By)
certified operators, Collection ORC and the on call Collection and
Pump maintenance (Stand -By) operators. The Voice announcements 1
will also be relayed to all facility operators home phone.
5) Requirement: Failure of the automatic monitoring system to detect a
Malfunction. The failure of the monitoring system in
reporting a malfunction, or failure of an operator in responding
to a problem must be documented and reported to the appropriate
Regional Office within 24 hours of the next working day. Any of
the above failures will require the WWTP to initiate 24 hour
staffing until such malfunctions have been corrected to the
Division's satisfaction.
Comment: We understand and accept this requirement.
6) Requirement: The WWTP must provide the Director a schedule for testing the
Telemetry monitoring system. Documentation must be kept of
each testing event. Failure of a monitoring device or failure to
respond to a problem will not be a mitigating factor in any
enforcement action.
Comment: The schedule for the systems to be tested is twice a month.

We have taken every action possible to correct any previous NOV's at our
facility. The facility is staffed with very knowledgeable operators that keep the plant
well operated and maintained.
The previous facility Inspections have been rated compliant, some which had
comments made by the Inspector, which we immediately took actions to correct. Overall,
I feel that we have made every effort in correcting any problems that have occurred.
The 3 Million Gallon spill in 2005 within our collection system was the first in
over 15 years which was caused by enormous amount of rainfall in a short time span.
After this incident we made some new adjustments to our Telemetry System which will
detect the facility's Influent Low water Level <300,000 gallons.
Therefore, having submitted this information, we would like to request that all of
our comments aforementioned in this letter be considered before issuing the Final Permit.
If you should need further information, please feel free to contact me at
704.734.4525.
Respectfully Submitted,
Dennis R. Wells
Water Resource Director

THE STAR
Public Notice from NCDENRIDWQ
I, Aron Goss, Advertising Director,
at THE Public Notice from NCDENR/DWQSTAR, a newspapePENR,r
published in Shelby, N. C., do
solemnly swear that the advertisement t P11N
hereto annexed appeared in the
SHELBY STAR, one
successive weeks/days beginning
April 24, 2009
/Y,
Advertising Director
Name of Account:
NCDENR/DWQ/NPDES
Order Number: 54431251
Ad Number: 54460304
Sworn to, and subscribed before me this
24 th day of April 2009.
My Commission Expires
1,3
Public Notice
North Carolina Environ-
mental Management
Commission/NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a
NPDES Wastewater Per-
mit
The North Carolina Envi-
ronmental Management
Commission proposes to
issue a NPDES waste-
water discharge permit to
the person(s) listed below..
Written comments regard-
ing the proposed permit
will be accepted until 30
days after the publish date
of this notice. The Director
of the NC Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) may hold a
public hearing should there
be a significant degree of
public interest. Please mail
comments and/or informa-.
tion requests to DWQ at
the above address. Inter-
ested persons may visit the
DWQ at 512 N. Salisbury
Street, Raleigh, NC to re-
view information on file.
Additional information on
NPDES permits and this
notice may be found on our
w e b s i t e.
2G09
www.ncwaterquality.org, or
by calling [phone].
The City of KingS Mountain
has applied for renewal of
permit NC0020737 for its
WWTP in Cleveland
County. This permitted fa-
cility discharges treated
municipal wastewater to
Buffalo Creek, Broad River
Basin. This discharge may
affect future allocations in
the watershed.
April 24, 2009 1tc
OFFICIAL SEAL
Nab/ Pubic - North Cushy
CLEVELAND COUNTY
REBECCA R. RENKO DYCUS
My Commission Expires September 04, 2013

470f0,1-6444,„
zo, 7
1
/
17/Y
n
///16)uS Cc/ uto,4
(( fe-
/7
-)4
t)t) C'
ct °
41/
14/v Scrd
Y,3
Aig
44)
ze-o
7
eA-7/
7
#7,0,7 /t((ki 6z,i)
1/c /42$ c/A,y, (A-)
/zo? / (
zd°7 ij
t
/
1-/z,00 7

PERMIT NUMBER: NC0020737
• FACILITY NAME: City of Kings Mountain - Pilot Creek WWTP
CITY: Kings Mountain
COUNTY: Cleveland
50050
mgd
Flow, in
conduit or thru
treatment plant
50060
ug/1
Chlorine, Total
Residual
TGP3B
pass/fail
P/F STATRE 7Day
Chr Ceriodaphnia
6
1 - 08
2.191677
5.619048
1
6
2-08
2.278172
4.190476
6
3-08
2.145774
7.15
6
5-07
2.359258
5.272727
6
6-07
2.1078
7.52381
6
7-07
1.969194
6.5
1
6
8-07
1.995613
7.043478
6
9-07
1.9631
5.315789
6
10-07
2.205903
3.956522
1
6
11 - 07
1.926367
2.157895
6
12-07
1.916484
5.578947
PERIOD ENDING MONTH: 4 - 2008 DMR 12 Month Calculated
PAGE 7 OF 7
REGION: Mooresville

/v?r p A-6-)
ix
ti
/o /Zzr J d
1 0-?) "
144-1; 6
7/tit;
eili0 .0 V
/74/L1LC-7

Town of Spencer Mountain
Spencer Mountain WWTP
County: Gaston Stream Class: WS-V
Receiving Stream: South Fork Catawba River Sub -Basin: 030836
Latitude: 35° 18' 25" Grid/Ouad: F14SE
Longitude: 80° 06' 35"
Facility
Location
not to scale
T\TORTH
NPDES Permit No. NC0020966

/ry s All 351 v-4,[ 4v1` 31' 6, /2 y/LL'J'd
LJ
17D Vi /1
.�- B�UG
zi4Gl,- S
J
2,0-v 7 7i e Jim
I�I
#266
Ro
FP
wnT
-44:
7
A7,,e
f (t) l)/
ZJbb
1/21700)(0
`i.1- (0)au-
ArvrAl
,//4 CA 1 / c/7,5 (/
GvcG1%j 41 L(TY `
/z°2)5—
3z--,�t
/(e- 7L4
,'(kg-4
0 �I c/

I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O.
1 1 0.00 7.16
1 1 0.01 7.16
1 1 0.02 7.16
1 1 0.03 7.16
1 1 0.04 7.16
1 1 0.05 7.16
1 1 6.06 7.16
1 1 0\.07 7.15
1 1 0.08 7.15
1 1 0.09 7.15
1 1 0.10 7.15
1 1 0.11 7.15
1 1 0.12 7.15
1 1 0.13 7.15
1 1 0.14 7.14
1 1 0.15 7.14
1 1 0.16 7.14
1 1 0.17 7.14
1 1 0.18 7.14'
1 1 0.19 7.14
1 1 0.20 7.14
1 1 0.21 7.14
1 1 0.22 7.13
1 1 0.23 7.13
1 1 0.24 7.13
1 1 0.25 7.13
1 1 0.26 7.13
1 1 0.27 7.13
1 1 0.28 7.13
1 1 0.29 7.13
1 1 0.30 7.12
1 1 0.31 7.12
1 1 0.32 7.12
1 1 0.33 7.12
1 1 0.34 7.12
1 1 0.35 7.12
1 1 0.36 7.12
1 1 0.37 7.12
1 1 0.38 7.12
1 1 0.39 7.11
1 1 0.40 7.11
1 1 0.41 7.11
1 1 0.42 7.11
1 1 0.43 7.11
1 1 0.44 7.11
1 1 0.45 7.11
1 1 0.46 7.11
1 1 0.47 7.11
1 2 0.47 7.11
1 2 0.57 7.12
1 2 0.67 7.13
1 2 0.77 7.14
1 2 0.87 7.15
1 2 0.97 7.16
1 2 1.07 7.17
1 2 1.17 7.18
CBOD
12.72
12.71
12.70
12.69
12.68
12.68
12.67
12.66
12.65
12.64
12.63
12.62
12.61
12.61
12.60
12.59;
12.58
12..57
12.56
12.55
2.54
12.54
12.53
12.52
12.51
12,..50
12.49
12.48
12.48
12.47
12.46,
12.45
12.44
12.43
12.42
12.42
12.41
12.40
12.39
12.38
12.37
12.36
12.36
12.35
12.34
12.33
12.32
12.31
12.31
12.23
12.16
12.08
12.00
11.92
11.85
11.77
WINTER
LCREEK WWTP DISCH TO LITTLE R
(10/2/6), INCREM CHANGES
NBOD I Flow
5.76 9.89
5.76 9.89
5.76 9.89
5.75 9.90
5.75 9.90
5.74 9.90
5.74 9.90
5.73 9.91
5.73 9.91
5.72 9.91
5.72 9.91
5.71 9.92
5.71 9.92
5.70 9.92
5.70 9.92
5.70 9.93
5.69 9.93
5.69 9.93
5.68 9.93
5.68 9.94
5.67 9.94
5.67 9.94
5.66 9.94
5.66 9.95
5.65 9.95
5.65 9.95
5.65 9.95
5.64 9.96
5.64 9.96
5.63 9.96
5.63 9.96
5.62 9.97
5.62 9.97
5.61 9.97
5.61 9.97
5.60 9.98
5.60 9.98
5.60 9.98
5.59 9.98
5.59 9.99
5.58 9.99
5.58 9.99
5.57 9.99
5.57 10.00
5.56 10.00
5.56 10.00
5.56 10.00
5.55 10.01
5.55 10.01
5.51 10.03
5.47 10.06
5.43 10.08
5.39 10.11
5.35 10.13
5.32 10.16
5.28 10.18

•
3
237 4q2
0l� cc/ 0 `',,u 54
7 Z e .1y1—
7
2 vo f� C7
g'/
At6R-u-J
0 0,
/67j0
/5
79fi ^ < -275
py; zo-o,
Lav
,1/� it ffi 2-0 4-/ I/3/z��
rI
r
„utiatriLt
cdcv
-1
fifar
` r, -I
oo/o 4-(/4 e'tj
G4:
10 i�
tinAjf, Skhiclvi
sS
v — �
�y' f� Gam' ' �
/kJ . .LAG
vt
10/
edij '1)/1*).
tV

0- //Liu
i. 131t fp, I) l< 11 1/ L(.°
/it i.j /
Vi :71 )1 •
gfiiitt s
00 0 ?a_�
0,67s
/0 fi
,/eicJjd
/491/64[o0B G"c%
6r °v 4 [i
/ Y vie
cj/ .0,10
Le-)
//
,64/,„../r-, 3,,vj ._-,)\(:1°
/0/o M&

Ambient Monitoring System Station Summaries
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Basinwide Assessment Report
Location: BUFFALO CRK AT NC 198 NR GROVER
Station #: AA8 (A8600000) Subbasin: BRD05
Latitude: 35.17076 Longitude: -81.51679 Stream class: C
Agency: NCAMBNT NC stream index: 9-53-(5)
Time period: 01/14/2002 to 12/14/2006
# # Results not meeting EL Percentiles
result ND EL # % %Conf Min loth 25th 50th 75th 90th Max
Field
D.O. (mg/L) 58 0 <4 0 0 5.7 7.2 8.3 9.5 11.3 12.5 13
58 0 <5 0 0 5.7 7.2 8.3 9.5 11.3 12.5 13
pH (SU) 58 0 <6 2 3.4 5.9 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3 7.4 8
58 0 >9 0 0 5.9 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3 7.4 8
Spec. conductance 58 0 N/A 59 84 100 132 193 355 1305
(umhos/cm at 25°C)
Water Temperature (°C) 58 0 >29 0 0 2.4 5.8 9.7 16.3 21.4 25.1 26.6
Other
TSS (mg/L) 20 0 N/A 3 5.1 6 10 20.5 103.6 190
Turbidity (NTU) 58 0 >50 7 12.1 78 3.8 4.9 6.2 8.8 18 77 550
Metals (ug/L)
Aluminum, total (Al) 20 0 N/A 110 170 188 310 1075 4150 7800
Arsenic, total (As) 20 20 >10 0 0 5 5 5 10 10 10 10
Cadmium, total (Cd) 20 20 >2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Chromium, total (Cr) 20 20 >50 0 0 25 25 25 25 25 25 25
Copper, total (Cu) 20 3 >7 2 10 67.7 2 2 2 3 6 7 9
Iron, total (Fe) 20 0 >1000 7 35 100 570 653 705 880 1175 3820 7500
Lead, total (Pb) 20 20 >25 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Mercury, total (Hg) 20 20 >0.012 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Nickel, total (Ni) 20 20 >88 0 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Zinc, total (Zn) 20 11 >50 0 0 10 10 10 10 16 23 25
Fecal conform (#/100mL)
# results: Geomean # > 400: % > 400: %Conf:
55 197 11 20 58
Kev:
# result: number of observations
# ND: number of observations reported to be below detection level (non -detect)
EL: Evaluation Level; applicable numeric or narrative water quality standard or action level
Results not meeting EL: number and percentages of observations not meeting evaluation level
%Conf : States the percent statistical confidence that the actual percentage of exceedances is at least 10% (20% for Fecal Coliform)
Stations with Tess than 10 results for a given parameter were not evaluated for statistical confidence

Kings Mountain TSS % removal
(2006 through Jan. 2009)
Year Month Influent Effluent % removal reported % removal
2006 January 131 25 0.81 80.9 nr
February 135 29 0.79 78.5 nr
March 126 28 0.78 77.8 nr
April 139 26 0.81 81.3 nr
May 144 27.8 0.81 80.7 nr
June 134 25 0.81 81.3 nr
July 136 27 0.80 80.1
August 127 24 0.81 81.1
September 102 25.1 0.75 75.4
October 131 21.6 0.84 83:5
November 144 23.8 0.83 83.5
December 138 23.3 0.83 83.1
132.25 25.5 0.81 80.6 81.50
nr
Influent Effluent % removal reported % removal
2007 January 122 26.4 0.78 78.4
February 131 25.4 0.81 80.6
March 140 19.2 0.86 86.3 85
April 101 23.2 0.77 77.0 7
May 117 27.3 0.77 76.7 77
June 134 23 0.83 82.8 83
July 132 22.5 0.83 83.0 83
August 142 23.5 0.83 83.5 83
September 143 26 0.82 81.8 82
October 141 28.6 0.80 79.7 80
November 104 22.2 0.79 78.7 79
December 114 23 0.80 79.8 80
126.75 24.19 0.81 80.68 80.25
Influent Effluent % removal reported % removal
2008 January 99 24.1 0.76 75.7
February 94 19.1 0.80 79.7
March 77 10.7 0.86 86.1 86
April 65 5.7 0.91 91.2 91
May 117 11.4 0.90 90.3 90
June 103 9 0.91 91.3 91
July 121 12.4 0.90 89.8 90
August 132 15.8 0.88 88.0 88
September 120 12.5 0.90 89.6 90
October 123 11.3 0.91 90.8 91
November 135 11.6 0.91 91.4 91
December 121 7.9 0.93 93.5 94
108.92 12.63 0.88 88.10 88.17
2009 January
jmn
Influent Effluent % removal
136 8.3 0.94 93.9
reported % removal
94
<85%
I 79.5
80
1111 83
83
82
75
79
77
77
83
83
83
82
80
79
80
76
80
80.1
2006
2007
2008
2/26/2009

WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
MAR-05-2009
geranc.data.summaryads
2008-1
Page 1 of 4 pages
212712009, 214 PM
Revision: August 1999
Location:
generic.data.summary.xls
FLOW
Samoan=
Sample Date
1/4/2008
2/1/2008
3/7/2008
4/4/2008
5/2/2008
5/9/2008
6/6/2008
Spreadsheet
Instnutlehe:
1) Data
crewed only In
Heavy
Bordered cells.
Rest of
worksheet Is
protected,
password Is
2) For below
detector) data,
Column Averages =>
Location:
Kings Mountain International
Sample Date
1/112008
Spn+dsheet
Instructions:
1) Data
festered only U+
Heavy
Bordered cells.
Root of
workst eet Is
protected,
password Is
-r.
2/8/2008
3/14,2008
4/11/2008
512/2008
5/15/2008
620/2008'
Column Averages =>
2) For bdow
deteadon data,
enter "<' 1n Y
2.5
MGD
1.000
1.0000
w�
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.00000
FLOW
0.025
MGD
0.003
0.003
�03
0.0029
0.001
0.0017.
0.0016
0.0014
mimmION
0.00201
BOD
250 Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
72
97,
73
84
68
82
53
72
97
73
86
68
82
53
600.48
808.98
608.82
717.24
567.12
683.88
442.02
75.86 1 632.65 1
BOD
300 I Used in Calculated
ntg/L Calculation lbs/day
197
171
150
109
97
69
77
197
171
150
109
97
69
77
4.93
3.57
3.63
0.91
1.38
0.92
0.90
124.29 I 2.32 1
80
mg/1.
r
TSS
Used in Calculated
Calculation Iba/day
18
28
32
2r
23
31
19
18
28
32
29
23
31
19
150.12
233.52
266.88
241.86
191.82
258.54
158.46
25.71
214.46
TSS
110
mW1L
Used in calculated
Calculation lbs/day
31
13
39
24
9
17
12
31
13
39
24
9
17
12
0.78
0.27
0.94
0.20
0.13
0.23
0.14
1 20.71 1 0.38 1

C)
0
0
704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
m
a1
0
MAR-05-2009
generlc,data.eurnmary.xie
2008.1
Page 2 et 4 pages
2/27/2009, 2:14 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.xis
FLOW
Fawn
Sample Date
1/3/2008
2/7/2008
3/6/2008
4/4/2008
4/17/2008
5/6/2008
6/11/2008
spreadsheet
tnsbucllons:
4) Data
entered only In
'Heavy
Bordered eels.
Rest of
worksheet Is
protected.
password Is
T.
2) For below
detection deft.
& dery In "4"
0.02
MOD
0.0074
0.0067
0.0082
0.0058
0.0084
Column Averages => I 0.00664 I
Location: FLOW
EDC
0.02
Sample Date
MOD
1/3/20081
Wiest
4) Data
entered OalY In
Hem
Sordotod calls.
Reef of
0.002
2/6/2008
0.002
3/5/2008
0.002
4/2/2008
0.002
4/29/2008
0.002
5/7/2008
`02
6/5/2008
esssword Is
7
2) For below
detection date.
.tar.. toL=
0.002,
Column Avcravice =>
0.00200
BOO
250#
mg/L.
1992
3082
2553
2735
1791
1842
1919
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
1992
3082
2553
2735
1791
1842
1919
122.94
172.22
174.59
66.15
86.63
129.04
113.63
2273.43 I 123.60 j
BOD
300
4
4
4
4�
5
4
Used in Calculated
Calculation Ibs/day
2
2
2
2
5
2
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.08
0.03
0.03
I 2.43 1 0.04
TSS
110 Used in Calculated
mg/L. Calculation lbs/day
13 13 0.80
15 15 0.84
15 15 1.03
5 2.5 0.06
28 28 1.35
11 11 0.77
12 12 0.71
13.79 1 0.79 1
TSS
I 110 I
Used in Calculated
< mg/L Calculation lbs/day
0.16
9.4
3
5.3
9.4
1.5
5.3
0.03
0.09
3
5
3
1.5
2.5
1.5
0.03
0.04
0.03
3
1.5
0.03
3.31 ( 0.06 I

WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
MAR-05-2009
gentuic.d ata.summa ry.xla
2008.1
Page 3 of 4 pages
2127/2009, 2:14 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.xls
Location:
Mayflower
0.05
I MGD
Sample Data
113/2008
SPnodshed
0.02
` 2/7n0081
0.0240
3/5/2008af°d
c"b to
0 8
Heavy
4/212006,
0.0213
Bordered ce s
4/29/2008
Rost et
wo Scaheet is
protected.
0.0255
5/1/2008
0.0317
6/5/2008
Passwd Is
0.0265
2) For below
detection data.
e'•��
Column Averap =>
�Locatiott: 1
Buckeye
0.02340
Sample Dale
1/4/2008
2/1/2008
3/7/2008
4/4/2008
5/2/2008
5/2 2008
6/6/2008
Spreadsheet
instructions:
1) 0ata
entered only !n
Hnvy
Bordered cans,
Rest of
worksheet Is
yratacted.
password Is
Column Averages =>
2) For Maw
'detection Site.
ertsrYta"!'
FLOW
0.075
MGD
0.0069
0.0138
0.033
..�0.033
0.033
0.033
0.033
0.02653
300
mL
2
2
5
2
2
2
2
BOD
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
1
1
2.5
1
1
1
1
0.17
0.20
0.31
0.18
0.21
0.26
0.22
I 1.21 I 0.22 I
BOD
300
< mg/L
2
2
Used in Calculated
Calculation 1bs/day
1
1
0.06
0.12
r
5
2
2
2
2.5
1
1
1
0.69
0.28
0.28
0.28
2
1
0.28
1.21
0.28
TSS
110 I Used in Calculated
< ` m2Jl, Calculation Ibs/day
.<
5
2.5
0.42
<
5
2.5
0.50
<
5
2.5
0.31
<
5_
2.5
0.44
<
5
2.5
0.53
<�
5^
2.5
0.66
<
s
2.5
0.55
I 2.50 I 0.49 I
TSS
250 { Used in Calculated
mg/L Calculation lba/day
5
5
5
5
2.5
2.5
0.29
0.29
0.69
5
6
7
6
2.5
6
7
6
0.69
1.65
1.93
1.65
I 4.50 I 1.03 I

704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
MAR-05-2009
genertc.data.summary.xls
2008.1
Pegs 4 of 4 pages
227/2009. 2: i4 PM
Revision: August 1999
`Location:
Evonik
Sample Dale
1/25/2A08'
2/2712008
3/26/2008
4/29/2008
41?9/208
5/6/2008
6/27/2008
Spreadsheet
Instructions:
1) Data
entered **In
Heavy
Bordered cob.
Rest of
wodcsbset Is
protected.
password Is
Column Averages ?>
generic.data.summary.xls
( FLOW
0.05
L MGD
0.027
0.0330
0.034
0.034
r..sr
0.034
0.031
0.033
2) For below --
detection dab,
ggr �' In'...
0.03229
•
300
3641
1366
179
BDD
Used in Calculated
Calculation 1bs/day
3641
1366
179
819.88
375.95
50.76
37
49
45
37
49
45
10.49
13.89
11.63
4
2
0.55
I 759.86 1 183.31 I
TSS
110 Used in Calculated
mg4 Calculation lbs/day
29 29
163
50
15
21
3
163
50
15
21
1.5
6.53
44.86
14.18
4.25
5.95
0.39
9
9
2.48
41.21
11.23

O
O
a.
704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
O
MAR-05-2009
g eneric.data.su m ma ry.xds
2008-2
Page 1 of 4 pages
2/27/2009, 2:15 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.x[s
Location: (
FLOW
Spectrum
2.5
11 Sample Date 1
MGD
7/18/2008
spreadsheet
Instructions:1.0000
1) Data
entered only in
1.000
8/1/2008
8/21/2008
LOGO
'CLOSED -DOWN
Bordered
works Rest is
protected.
password is
detecron data.
enter "<" in °<"
CLOSED -DOWN
CLOSED -DOWN
CLOSED -DOWN
CLOSED -DOWN
CLOSED -DOWN
Column Averages =>
1.00000
Location: I
FLOW
Kings Mountain International
0.025
Sample Date j
MGD
7/18/2008
spteadsh t
0.0021
8/22/2008
Instructions:
.1) Data
0.0006
9/12/2008+
entered
n red only In
0.0021
10/10/2008
Bordered
0.0017
11/6/2008
cells. Rest ofi
worksheet is
0.004
11/21/2008
protected,
0.0023
12/12/2008
is
0.0023
2) For below
detection date,
enter °<" in "<"
• -
Column Averages =>
0.002161
BOD
250 I Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
92
64
92
64
767.28
533.76
78.00 I 650.52 I
BOD
300
mg/L
83
64
186
180
263
127
95
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
83'
64
186
180
263
127
95
1.45
0.32
3.26
2.55
8.77
2.44
1.82
I 142.57 1 2.95 1
TSS
4.
.
80 I Used in Calculated
mg/L Calculation lbs/day
100.08
12�
24
12
24
200.16
18.00 I 150.12
TSS
L
■
110 I Used in Calculated
mg/L Calculation lbs/day
12
14
10
6
5
13
15,
12
14
10
6
5
13
15
021
0.07
0.18
0.09
0.17
0.25
029
I 10.71 ( 0.18

r-
0
0
a,
704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
0
MAR-05-2009
gene ric.detasu m m a ryxis
2008-2
Page 2 of 4 pages
2/2712009. 2:15 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.xis
Location: 1
FLOW
Eaton
0.02
1
Sample Date 1
MGD
0.0079
7/2/2008
Spreadsheet
In Da�ra�
entered only in
Hea`y
Bordered
Cells. Rest of
w ram, s
prpassword is
8/7/2008
0.0081
9/4/2008
0.0087
10/2/2008
0.0093
11/6/2008
0.0082
11/6/2008
0.0082
2) For below
detection data,
enter "<" In "es
►
,
column, and
Column Averages =>
0.00840
Location: I
[ FLOW
I EDC
0.02
Sample Date (
MGD
7/2/2008
sprees adsheet
instructions:
1) Data
gyred only In
Heavy
Bordered
wortcsheet is cells. Rest of
protected,
pa "rd LS
0.002
8/6/2008
0.002
9/3/2008
` 0.002'
1.........•
10/1/2008
0.002
11/5/2008
0.002
�.�..�
11/5/2008
0.002
12/9/2008
0.002
2) For below
detection data.
enter "<" In "<"
Column Averages =>
0.00200
BOD
250# I Uscd in Calculated
< mg/L Calculation lbs/day
2176
1281
1503
1463
2359
2239
2176
1281
1503
1463
2359
2239
143.37
86.54
109.05
113.47
161.33
153.12
E 1836.83 I 127.81 I
BOD
f
300 Used in Calculated
mg/L Calculation lbs/day
4.8
4
4
4
5
4
4
4.8
2
2
2
2.5
2
2
0.08
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
2.47
0.04
TSS
110 Uscd in Calculated
mg/L Calculation lbs/day
5
12
8
5
10
15
2.5
12
8
2.5
10
15
0.16
0.81
0.58
0.19
0.68
1.03
833 1 0.58
TSS
110 I
Used in Calculated
< 1 mg/L Calculation lbs/day
1.431
r
86
30
3
3
5
3
3
86
30
1.5
1.5
2.5
1.5
1.5
0.50
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
I 17.79 1 0.30 I

m
0
0
704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
.44
0
4-1
MAR-05-2009
gsrreria.datasummaryxts
2008-2
Page 3 of 4 pages
2/27/2009, 2:15 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.xls
Location: 1
( FLOW
Mayflower
1
0.05
I
Sample Date
S ple
1
MOD
7/10/2008
SPreadsheet
Instructions:
0.0159
8/20/2008
0Data
Q o7
9/5/2008
entersonly In
0.0223
10/3/2008
yed
Bordered
0.0243
11/6/2008
COBS. Rest:
worStsheet
0� 3
11/7/2008
protected,
..��
0.0246
12/5/2008
?assword is
2".
0.0336
2) For below
detection data,
enter"<• In "<"
Column Averages =>
0.02210
Location:
FLOW
Buckeye
0.075
Sam . le Date
MOD
7/11/2008
SPreadstteet0.033
8/8/2001
.:.
0.033
8/13/2008
entered '
Heavy
0.033
9/5/2008
0.033
Bordered
9/15/2008
`
rIcsheet is
0.033
10/3/2008�
protected.
0.033
11/6/2008
P.Pswmd is
0.033
11/7/2008
0.033
12/52008
'
detection data,
enter ne in art
0.033
Column Averages >
0.03300
BOD
300
< mg/L
< 2
2
< 2
300
mg/L
5
5
2
2
2
2
5
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
1
2.5
2.5
1
1
0.13
0.15
0.19
0.51
0.34
0.21
0.28
I 1.43 J 0.26 1
2
2
2
BOD
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
1
1
2.5
2.5
1
0.28
0.28
0.69
0.69
0.28
0.28
0.28
l 1.43 1 0.39 I
TSS
110 Used in Calculated
< mg/L I Calculation lbs/day
5
0.1
2.5
0.05
0.33
0.01
5
5
5
0.1
2.5
2.5
2.5
0.05
2.5
I
164
0.46
0.51
0.34
0.0I
0.70
I 1.80 1 0.34 1
TSS
250
mg/L
22
25
27
20
17
9
9
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
22
25
27
20
17
9
9
6.05
6.88
7.43
5.50
4.68
2.48
2.48
18.43
5.07

0
0
a.
704 730 2152
WATER DEPT KINGS MOUNTAIN
.44
0
MAR-05-2009
generic.data.summary.rds
2008-2
Page 4 at 4 pages
2/27/2009, 2:15 PM
Revision: August 1999
generic.data.summary.xls
!Location: I
I FLOW
` Evonik
0.05
Sample Date 1
MGD
7/25/2008
Spreadsheet
0A33
`
1 8/27/2008
js Data
0.0330
9/24/2008
entered only in
Heavy
0.033
10/27/2008
Bordered
-...sw•�
0.036
11/6/2008
wits. Rest of
workstreat Is
0.036
11/6/2008'protected,
0.036
12/16/2008
,l'ItsswINd is
0.034
2) For below
detection date,
enter"<" in "<"
Column Averages ->
0.03443
BOD
300
< mg/1
145
37
59
Used in Calculated
Calculation Ibs/day
11
145
37
59
3.03
39.91
10.18
17.71
148
I7
4
148
17
2
44.44
5.10
0.57
59.86
17.28
TSS
110
< mg/L
12
23
14
9.3
15
23
3
Used in Calculated
Calculation lbs/day
12
23
14
9.3
15
23
1.5
3.30
6.33
3.85
2.79
4.50
6.91
0.43
13.97
4.02

SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes_No X
If Yes, SOC No.
To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Dina Sprinkle
Date: April 8, 2008
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Cleveland
Permit No. NC0020737
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION RECEIVED
1. Facility and Address: Pilot Creek WWTP
City of Kings Mountain
Post Office Box 429
Kings Mountain, NC 28086
2. Date of Investigation: April 2, 2008
APR 9 2008
DENR - WATER OUALI1Y
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
3. Report Prepared By: Samar Bou-Ghazale, Env. Engineer II
4. Persons Contacted and Telephone Number: Ms. Kim Moss, ORC; 704/739-7131
5. Directions to Site: From the intersection of Highway 216 (Piedmont Avenue) and US
Highway 74 in Kings Mountain, travel west on Highway 74 approximately 6.7 miles to
the junction with Potts Creek Road. The WWTP is located at the end of Potts Creek
Road.
6. Discharge Point(s). List for all discharge points:
Latitude: 35°15'35" Longitude: 81°27'26"
Attach a U.S.G.S. map extract and indicate treatment facility site and discharge point on
map.
U.S.G.S. Quad No.: F 13 SW U.S.G.S. Name: Waco, NC
7. Site size and expansion are consistent with application?
Yes_No_ If No, explain: N/A

8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Sloping towards Potts Creek at the rate
of 3 to 5%; the WWTP is not in a flood plain.
9. Location of nearest dwelling: None within 500 feet.
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Buffalo Creek.
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Broad; 030805
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The discharge
point is located at the junction of Muddy Fork and Buffalo Creek approximately
1.2 miles below Kings Mountain Reservoir. Downstream users are unknown.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater to be permitted: 6.0 MGD (Ultimate Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity of the wastewater treatment facility? 6.0
MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of the current facility (current design capacity)? 6.0
MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous Authorizations to
Construct issued in the previous two years: An Authorization to Construct was
issued on January 17, 2008 for the replacement of surface aerators in basin 1 with
15 floating fine bubble units and two 1,080 SCFM blowers; replacement of
surface aerators in basin 3 with 30 floating fine bubble units and two 2,070 SCFM
blowers; and replacement of surface aerators in basin 4 with 32 floating fine
bubble units and two 2,188 SCFM blowers. It should be noted that the above
changes have been implemented.
e. Please provide a description of existing or substantially constructed wastewater
treatment facilities: The existing WWT facility is a 6.00 MGD extended aeration
wastewater treatment plant consisting of dual screw pumps, mechanical bar
screen, parshall flume with recorder, flow diversion, three (3) aeration basins with
mechanical aerators and mixers, three (3) secondary clarifiers, three (3) chlorine
contact basins, effluent measuring device at each chlorine basin discharge and a
totalizer/recorder for the combined effluent, dechlorination unit (sulfur Dioxide),
two (2)aerobic digestors, two (2) sludge drying beds, and a belt press for
dewatering waste sludge.
f. Please provide a description of proposed wastewater treatment facilities: N/A
g.
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: CN, Cd, Cr, Pb, Ni and Hg.

2,
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
Residuals handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
Sludge is taken to the Cleveland County Landfill for final disposal.
3. Treatment plant classification (attach completed rating sheet): Class IV, see attached
rating sheet.
4. SIC Code(s): 4952
Wastewater Code(s)
Primary: 55, 01 Secondary: 58, 36
Main Treatment Unit Code: 05003
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved (municipals only)? N/A
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: N/A
3. Important SOC, JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: (please indicate): N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: Has the facility evaluated all of the non -discharge
options available. Please provide regional perspective for each option evaluated. N/A.
5. Air Quality and/or Groundwater concerns or hazardous materials utilized at this facility
that may impact water quality, air quality, or groundwater: No AQ or GW concerns nor
are hazardous materials utilized at this facility.
6. Other Special Items: Previously the City operated the WWTP with 4 aeration basins, 4
secondary clarifiers, and 4 chlorine contact basins. However, the City has removed from
operation one aeration basin, one secondary clarifier and one chlorine contact basin.
Also, note that the drying beds are decommissioned and are not being used. The City has
been using the drying beds to store equipments.
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The City of Kings Mountain is requesting permit renewal to discharge wastewater from

the Pilot Creek Wastewater Treatment plant.
The City is requesting solid removal of 70% instead of the required 85% due to low level
of solids entering the plant. It should be noted that 80% of the actual flow to the WWTP is
industrial. The request has been granted in the past renewal and we recommend that this request
be granted during this permit renewal. Also, the effluent BOD seems to be somewhat low
compared to the high TSS effluent. We will refer the City of Kings to the technical assistance
staff in Mooresville for help with this issue.
Also, the Town is requesting a waiver for the 24-hour manned operation requirements. f�L.
On 10/10/05 the City of Kings Mountain had a spill of approximately 3,200,000.00
gallons of wastewater into Potts Creek (incident # 200502662). This incident took place on a
Sunday around 3:00 AM and the discharge was not noticed until 6:30 PM of the following day.
This Office recommends that the waiver for the 24-hour manned operation be denied in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0124(4).
Pending review and approval by the P&E, it is recommended that the permit be renewed
upon resolution of the modification request.
Signature of Re ► • rt Preparer
Water Quality Regional Supervisor

THE CITY OF KINGS MOUNTAIN
NORTH CAROLINA
P.O. BOX 429-KINGS MOUNTAIN, NORTH CAROLINA, 28086 -Phone [phone] - FAX [phone]
DENNIS WELLS, WATER RESOURCES DIRECTOR
E-MAIL dennisw@cityolkmcom
March 3, 2008
State of North Carolina
DENR/DWQ/Point Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Attn: Mrs. Frances Candelaria
Re: NPDES Permit # NC 0020737
Dear Mrs. Frances Candelaria
The City of Kings Mountain does desire to renew the above referenced permit for
operation of our Pilot Creek WWTP.
This facility is a 6MGD Activated Sludge treatment unit. Solids handling information is
enclosed.
DEM records will show the plant is in compliance with all permit requirements.
We request that the solid removal rate remain at the current rate of 70% instead of the
85%. This is due to the low levels of solids that are entering into our plant.
Concerning the requirement for 24-hour manned operation of our wastewater treatment
plant, our plant is not now manned continuously by a certified operator. We do have what
we believe, and our past experience has proven adequate measures in place to protect
both the plant and the environment.
We hereby apply for a waiver of this rule and submit information which we believe will
demonstrate the adequacy of our system to prevent our having to add a minimum of four
persons to our staff to act as watchmen.
Thank you for your consideration in the above matters. If you need additional
information, please call (704-734-4525.
The Historical City

Sincerely,;
RL,„\e52ec,
Dennis R. Wells, Water Resources Director

Feb 29 08 03:OOp Kim T. Moss
VG?' L7/ LVUU J. J.
704 734 4528
00.0I IU]JO CI I CgIV JICUIII'IU 1 I FiL
p.1
I ML7C UL
environmETT,.
P.O. Box 16414, Greenville, SC 29606
February 29, 2008
Mrs. Frances Candelaria
NC DENR/DWQfPoint Source Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
[phone] , FAX [phone]
Craftsman Court, Greer, SC 29650
In Reference to City of Kings Mountain Permit Renewal Application: NC0020737
Dear Mrs. Candelaria:
Please note that only one of the total mercury analyses (by method EPA 1631) has been. reported.
That sample was taken on February 7, 2008. The mercury sampling was inadvertently left off the
original sampling schedule and therefore we are performing those analyses as quickly as possible
while still accounting for the seasonal variation that is required. I spoke with Charles H. Weaver
concerning this issue in early February who suggested sampling again in April and then July. That
is the schedule we will adhere to unless instructed otherwise. We will submit the missing data as
it is performed.
Please accept m.y apologies for this oversight. If there is any other information you need please call
me at 800-891-2325.
Enclosure(s)
Sincerely,
Kara Hrkach
Project Manager
�Test results presented in this report conform to ail requirements of
��+ I Ld l� NELAC. conducted under NET.AC Certification Number Ell7R19.
Florida Dept of Health

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F.INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges
complete part F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
industrial users that discharge to the
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of CIUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER
from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number
treatment works.
2
of each of the following types of
5
INFORMATION:
discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU
provide the information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages
as necessary.
Name: SPECTRUM DYED YARNS, INC.
Mailing Address: P.O. 609
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
YARN DYING FACILITY
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): DYED COTTON AND COTTON BLEND YARNS
Raw material(s): NATURAL YARN, DYES, YARN LUBICANTS. CHEMICALS
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1,000,000 gpd ( continuous
volume
following:
subcategory?
of process wastewater discharge into
or N intermittent)
the collection system in gallons per
discharged into the collection system
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily
in gallons per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous
75,000 gpd ( continuous
of non -process wastewater flow
or intermittent.
or d intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the
a. Local limits © Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and
❑ No
© No
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 19 of 22

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.,
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes E No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has It in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck 0 Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
the next five years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if
known. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (CIUs). Provide the number of each of the following types of industrial
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs. 2
b. Number of CIUs. 5
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU_ If more than one SIU discharges to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: KINGS MOUNTAIN INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Mailing Address: 1755 SOUTH BATTLEGROUND AVE
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
STEEL PLATE FINISHING AND PLATING OPERATIONS
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): STAINLESS STEEL PLATES
Raw material(s): BENTONILE, FERRIC CHLORIDE, SULFURIC ACID, PHOSPHORIC ACID, OXALIC ACID, SAND. STEEL SHOT,
POLYETHELEYNE, CHROMIC ACID, ALKALINE CHROMESTRIP, PINK INK
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per day (gpd)
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
6,000 gpd ( continuous or ,, intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume of non -process wastewater flow discharged into the collection system in gallons
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
1,200 gpd ( continuous or \ intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes ❑ No
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ® Yes ❑ No
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g., upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes ip No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRAICERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SlUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
2
of the following types of industrial
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU.
information requested for each SIU.
5
If more than one SIU discharges
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: ENTERTAINMENT DISTRIBUTION COMPANY
Mailing Address: P.O. BOX 400
GROVER. NC 28073
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
MANUFACTURING COMPACT DISC
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s).
Principal product(s): TAPE MASTERING,
Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
DISC MASTERING, ELECTROFORMING. REPLICATION PRINTING PACKING.
Raw material(s): POLYCARBONATE, UV INKS. LACQUER, NICKEL PELLETS, ALUMINUM.
system in gallons per day (gpd)
into the collection system in gallons
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
2,000 gpd ( continuous
of
process wastewater discharge into the collection
or N intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
25,000 gpd ( continuous
of non -process wastewater flow discharged
or \ intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards © Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
433 3695
❑ No
❑ No

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g., upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes D No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
0 Truck ❑ Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRAICERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
®Yes ❑No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical Sills.
b. Number of Gills.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
2
of the following types of industrial
5
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
Supply the following information for each SIU. If more than one SIU discharges
information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: EATON CORPORATION
Mailing Address: P.O. BOX 1728
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
MANUFACTURE HEAVY DUTY TRUCK TRANSMISSIONS, METAL CUTTING, TURNING, GRINDING, TREATING, WASHING AND PAINTING.
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): HEAVY DUTY TRUCK TRANSMISSIONS
Raw material(s): ALUMINUM CASTING, COOLANT, LUBRICATION, RUST PREVENTION, GREY IRON CASTING STEEL BILLETS AND
CASTING, CUTTING OIL, QUENCH OIL, SOAP.
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
25,000 gpd (,, continuous
of
process wastewater discharge into the collection
or intermittent)
system in gallons per day (gpd)
into the collection system in gallons
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
17.000 gpd (\ continuous
of non -process wastewater flow discharged
or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ® Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
433, 3714
0 No
❑ No

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g., upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes ® No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
0 Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) 0 No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLAIRCRAtor other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRAICERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
Ej Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical Sills.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU.
information requested for each SIU.
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
2
of the following types of industrial
5
If more than one SIU discharges
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: MAYFLOWER VEHICLE SYSTEMS
Mailing Address: P.O. BOX 789
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
FABRICATION ASSEMBLY AND PAINTING OF TRUCK CABS AND SLEEPER BOXES
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): SPOT WELDING, PRIMER COATING, PRIMER COAT PAINTING TOP COAT PAINT
Raw material(s): STEEL BLANKS, STEEL PANELS. E-COAT PRIMER PAINT TOP COAT PAINT SEALER AND ADHESIVES.
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
20,000 gpd (' continuous
of process
0
0
wastewater discharge into the collection
or intermittent)
system in gallons per day (gpd)
into the collection system in gallons
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
9.000 gpd ( continuous
of non -process wastewater flow discharged
or \_ intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits © Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ® Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
433, 3713
No
No

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g.. upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
® Yes ❑ No If yes, describe each episode. CIVIL PENALTIES ASSESSED
JUNE 2006; HIGH LEVELS OF ZINC DISCHARGED FROM LACK OF PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE ON DISCHARGE LINES. CLEANED AND
HAULED OFF EXCESSIVE ZINC.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F,12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail ❑ Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATIONICORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) © No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous ❑ Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
2
of the following types of industrial
5
If more than one SIU discharges
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
Supply the following information for each SIU.
information requested for each SIU.
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: BUCKEYE ANODIZING & STAMPING COMPANY
Mailing Address: 110 KINGS ROAD
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
ANODIZING OF ALUMINUM, MANUFACTURE EXTINGUISHERS. PHOSPHATE STEEL PLATES AND STEEL CYLINDERS
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, ANODIZING OF ALUMINUM
CAUSTIC SODA. NALMET 8154.
Raw material(s): PHOSPHORIC ACID, SULFURIC ACID, CHROMIC ACID, NITRIC ACID NALCLEAR 8173,
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
75,000 gpd (' continuous
of
process wastewater discharge into the collection
or intermittent)
system in gallons per day (gpd)
into the collection system in gallons
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
30 000 gpd (\ continuous
of non -process wastewater flow discharged
or intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits ® Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards ® Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
433-3471-3499
❑ No
❑ No

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g., upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes IE No If yes, describe each episode.
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
0 Truck 0 Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass. specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATIONICORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
0 Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) ® No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION INFORMATION
PART F. INDUSTRIAL USER DISCHARGES AND RCRA/CERCLA WASTES
All treatment works receiving discharges from
F.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
significant industrial users or which receive RCRA,CERCLA, or other remedial wastes must complete part
works have, or is subject ot, an approved pretreatment program?
(SIUs) and Categorical Industrial Users (ClUs). Provide the number of each
2
of the following types of industrial
F.1. Pretreatment program. Does the treatment
0 Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users
users that discharge to the treatment works.
a. Number of non -categorical SIUs.
b. Number of ClUs.
SIGNIFICANT INDUSTRIAL USER INFORMATION:
Supply the following information for each SIU.
information requested for each SIU.
5
If more than one SIU discharges
to the treatment works, copy questions F.3 through F.8 and provide the
F.3. Significant Industrial User Information. Provide the name and address of each SIU discharging to the treatment works. Submit additional pages as
necessary.
Name: STEAG, LLC INC.
Mailing Address: 304 Linwood Drive
KINGS MOUNTAIN, NC 28086
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
CATALYST MODULE REGENERATION
F.5. Principal Product(s) and Raw Material(s). Describe all of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
Principal product(s): REGENERATED CATALYST MODULES FROM SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION
Raw material(s): ALKALIS, ACIDS, IMPREGNANTS, DETERGENTS..
system in gallons per day (gpd)
into the collection system in gallons
F.6. Row Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
21,000 gpd ( continuous
of
process wastewater discharge into the collection
or ‘ intermittent)
b. Non -process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average daily volume
per day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3.000 gpd ( continuous
of non -process wastewater flow discharged
or •. intermittent)
F.7. Pretreatment Standards. Indicate whether the SIU is subject to the following:
a. Local limits © Yes
b. Categorical pretreatment standards 0 Yes
If subject to categorical pretreatment standards, which category and subcategory?
433. 3713
❑ No
0 No

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Pilot Creek WWPCF, NC0020737
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Broad River
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or contributed to any problems (e.g., upsets,
interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
❑ Yes x❑ No If yes, describe each episode. CIVIL PENALTIES ASSESSED
RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE RECEIVED BY TRUCK, RAIL, OR DEDICATED PIPELINE:
F.9. RCRA Waste. Does the treatment works receive or has it in the past three years received RCRA hazardous waste by truck, rail or dedicated pipe?
❑ Yes ® No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all that apply):
❑ Truck ❑ Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount (volume or mass, specify units).
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount Units
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remediation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
0 Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) D No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in the next five
years).
F.14. Pollutants. List the hazardous constituents that are received (or are expected to be received). Include data on volume and concentration, if known. (Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
F.15. Waste Treatment.
a. Is this waste treated (or will be treated) prior to entering the treatment works?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the treatment (provide information about the removal efficiency):
b. Is the discharge (or will the discharge be) continuous or intermittent?
❑ Continuous 0 Intermittent If intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
END OF PART F.
REFER TO THE APPLICATION OVERVIEW (PAGE 1) TO DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS
OF FORM 2A YOU MUST COMPLETE