NC0039594_Permit (Issuance)_20100915

NPDES DOCIMENT SCANNING COVER SKEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0039594
Maiden WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuan ems' ,.
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Engineering Alternatives (EAA)
Correspondence
Owner Name Change
Instream Assessment (67b)
Speculative Limits
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Document Date:
September 15, 2010
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the re'srertce side

ATA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor • Director •
September` 15, 2010
Mr. Randy Smith
WWTP Superintendent
Town of Maiden
113 West Main Street
Maiden, NC 28650
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit
NPDES Permit NC0039594
Town of Maiden WWTP
Catawba County
Class III
Dear Mr. Smith:
•
Dee Freeman
Secretary
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 15, 2007 (or as
subsequently amended).
Summary of Changes in Renewal Permit from Existing Permit
1) Effluent ammonia as Nitrogen monitoring was amended to seasonal and new monthly average and
weekly average limits were added.
2) Effluent total cyanide weekly monitoring with daily maximum limit was amended to monthly
monitoring with no limit.
3) Effluent total copper monthly monitoring reduced to quarterly.
4) Effluent page TRC footnote was amended to remove compliance date and to add new compliance
narrative.
5) Effluent page parameter PCS codes were added.
6) Supplement to Permit Cover Sheet component list was revised.
7) Special Condition A. (2) narrative was revised.
8) Special Condition A. (3) mercury narrative amended to include Method 1631 E.
Technical correction from Draft Permit
The instream monitoring frequencies for temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity was
incorrectly defined as monthly in the draft permit. The monitoring frequency was corrected in the
final permit and is weekly.
Page 1 of 2
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
tntamRt• httn•/ / h2n data nr. / •
NorthCarolina
11 1 r I

Please note that the receiving stream is listed as an impaired waterbody on the North Carolina
303(d) Impaired Waters List. Addressing impaired waters is a high priority with the Division, and instream
data will continue to be evaluated. If there is noncompliance with the permitted effluent limits and stream
impairment can be attributed to your facility, then mitigative measures may be required.
If in the Permittee wishes to request a reduction in the 85% removal requirement for BOD and TSS
he must demonstrate compliance with the secondary BOD and TSS limits, and demonstrate no causal
effect from inflow and Infiltration. A major permit modification application would be required.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are
unacceptable to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days following receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings
(6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714). Unless such demand is made, this
decision shall be final and binding.
Please note that this permit is not transferable except after notice to the Division. The Division may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the permit. 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, the Coastal Area Management Act or any other federal or local
governmental. permits that may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Ron Berry at telephone number
[phone] or at email [e-mail].
Sincerely,
6,k
Teen H. Sullins
Attachments
Cc: Mooresville Regional Office/Surface Water Protection Section (email)
EPA Region IV/Marshall Hyatt (email)
Environmental Sciences Section/Aquatic Toxicology Unit/Susan Meadows (email)
Central Files
NPDES Unit
Page 2 of 2

Permit No. NC0039594
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,
Town of Maiden
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at
Town of Maiden WWTP
2090 W. Finger Street
Maiden, North Carolina
Catawba County
to receiving waters designated as Clark Creek in the Catawba River Basin in accordance with
effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, III, and IV
hereof.
The permit shall become effective October 1, 2010.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on July 31, 2015.
Signed this day September 15, 2010.
eft, Co1e�n H. Sullins, Director
fDivision of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

•
Permit No. NC0039594
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
All previous NPDES Permits issued to this facility, whether for operation or discharge are hereby
revoked. As of this permit issuance, any previously issued permit bearing this number is no longer
effective. Therefore, the exclusive authority to operate and discharge from this facility arises under
the permit conditions, requirements, terms, and provisions included herein.
Town of Maiden
is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 1.0 MGD wastewater treatment facility located at 2090 W. Finger
Street, Maiden, Catawba County, and consisting of the following components:
o Mechanical screening
o Influent flow meter
o Influent composite sampler
o Grit removal
o Influent collection sump
o Influent transfer pumps
o Two (2) 475,000 gallon SBR tanks with decant pumps and blowers
o One (1) 18,500 gallon equalization tank
o Post equalization transfer pumps
o Contact chamber with chlorination
o Dechlorination
o Effluent meter
o Effluent sampler circulation pump
o Effluent composite sampler
o Post equalization sludge transfer pumps
o Two (2) aerobic sludge digesters
o Sludge collection sump
o Sludge Toad out pumps
o Stand-by power
2. Discharge from said treatment works (via Outfall 001) into Clark Creek, a Class C water in the
Catawba River Basin, at the location specified on the attached map.

Latitude:
Longitude:
•
•
,r'-"" ter.... } , .��.�,-� '\
I) I
•
• . •••• • \
s; r.A71:447:VX
Discharge
NC0006190
t .X //ter J //\\ A c r-
4� ! I
:�\r• -
\k, • \ \ \ !'
\ '` M it
r" 1
Town of Maiden
WWTP Discharge
/ NC0039594
1 cl�
' 7 \--\
(NC0039594 Downstream - --'�- '-.,
(Off map bridge SR1282)-----P"
,ri..." r \N_,-z%,
1'
'f l /
r♦r
C C ititic ( C )
•
•
• • ••.
t •
•J4
•
.17
1•
s.
USGS Quad: E14SW Maiden, NC
Outfall Facility
35° 34' 30.3" N
81°.14'13.6"W
35° 34' 35" N
81°14'26"W
Stream Class: C
ubbasin: 03-08-35 HUC: 03050102
Receiving Stream: Clark Creek
North
Facility Location
Town of Maiden WWTP
Catawba County

•
Permit No. NC0039594
A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Beginning on the effective date of this permit and lasting until expiration, the Permittee is
authorized to discharge treated wastewater from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and
monitored by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS.
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
. , Daily
Max
Measurement
Frequency
.Sample ,
Type
, Sample
Location 1
Flow
Flow
(50500)
1.0 MGD
Continuous
Recording
I or E
Temperature, °C
(00010)
Daily
Grab
E
Temperature, °C
(00010)
Weekly
Grab
U, D
BOD, 5-day, 20°C 2
(C0310)
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
I and E
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 2
(C0530)
30.0 mg/I
45.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
I and E
_
Ammonia as Nitrogen (NH3- N)
(April 1- October 31)
(C0610)
7.0 mg/I
21.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
E
Ammonia as Nitrogen (NH3- N)
(November 1- March 31)
(C0610)
24.2 mg/I
35.0 mg/I
3/Week
Composite
•
E
Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) 3
(50060)
28 µg/I
3/Week
Grab
E
Fecal Coliform
(geometric mean)
(31616)
200/100
ml
400/100
ml
3/Week
Grab
E
_
pH
(00400)
Not Less than 6.0 S.U. nor greater
than 9.0 S.U.
3/Week
Grab
E
Dissolved Oxygen (DO), mg/I
(00300)
Weekly
Grab
U, D
Conductivity, µmhos/cm
(00094)
Weekly
Grab
U, D
Total Cyanide, µg/I 4
(00720)
Monthly
Grab
E
Total Silver, µg/I
(01077).
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Zinc, µg/I
(01092)
Monthly
Composite
E
_
Total Nitrogen (TN), mg/I
TN=(NO2-N+NO3-N)+TKN
(C0600)
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Phosphorus (TP), mg/I
(C0665)
_
Monthly
Composite
E
Total Copper, µg/I
(01042)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Chronic Toxicity 5
(TGP3B, THP3B)
Quarterly
Composite
E
Priority Pollutant Scan 6
(NC01)
Annual
Grab
E

Permit No. NC0039594
(Continued - A. (1) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS)
Footnotes:
1. Sample locations: E- Effluent, I- Influent, U- Upstream 100-feet above outfall, D- Downstream at
NCSR 1282.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and TSS concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the respective
influent value (85% removal).
3. The Division shall consider all effluent TRC values reported below 50 ug/I 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 ug/l.
4. The tivantitation level for cyanide shall be 10 ug/I. CN levels reported as less that 10 Ng/I shall be
considered zero for compliance purposes.
5. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) at 11%; January, April, July, and October; refer to Special Condition
A. (2).
6. See Special Condition A. (3).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.

Permit No. NC0039594 , •
A. (2) CHRONIC TOXICITY PERMIT LIMIT (QRTRLY)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality to
Ceriodapirnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 11 %.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, Quarter/ymonitoring 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 NPDES 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 chron is 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
I1 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: NC DENR / DWQ / 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 and in the data submitted on the DMR and AT Forms.
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 No. NC0039594
A. (3) EFFLUENT POLLUTANT SCAN
The permittee shall perform Effluent Pollutant Scans for all parameters listed in the attached table (in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 136). Samples shall be collected in different calendar years,
approximately annually, except to provide seasonal variation. Unless otherwise indicated, metals
shall be analyzed as "total recoverable."
Ammonia (as N)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethyiene
Bis (2-chloroethyl) ether
Chlorine, total residual (TRC)
1,1-dichloroethylene
Bis (2-chloroisopropyl) ether
Dissolved oxygen
1,2-dichloropropane
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Nitrate/Nitrite
1,3-dichloropropylene
4-bromophenyl phenyl ether
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Ethylbenzene
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oil and grease
Methyl bromide
2-chloronaphthalene
Phosphorus -
Methyl chloride
4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
Total dissolved solids
Methylene chloride
Chrysene
Hardness
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Antimony
Tetrachloroethylene
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Arsenic
Toluene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Beryllium
1,1,1-trichloroethane
1,2-dichlorobenzene
Cadmium
1,1,2-trichloroethane
1,3-dichlorobenzene
Chromium
Trichloroethylene
1,4-dichlorobenzene
Copper
Vinyl chloride .
3,3-dichlorobenzidine
Lead
Acid -extractable Compounds
Diethyl phthalate
Mercury (Method 1631E)
P-chloro-m-cresol
Dimethyl phthalate
Nickel
2-chlorophenol
2,4-dinitrotoluene
Selenium
2,4-dichlorophenol
2,6-dinitrotoluene
Silver
2,4-dimethylphenol
1,2-diphenylhydrazine
Thallium
4,6-dinitro-o-cresol
Fluoranthene
Zinc
2,4-dinitrophenol
Fluorene
Cyanide
2-nitrophenol
Hexachlorobenzene
Total phenolic compounds
4-nitrophenol
Hexachlorobutadiene
Volatile Organic Compounds
Pentachlorophenol
Hexachlorocyclo-pentadiene
Acrolein
Phenol
Hexachloroethane
Acrylonitrile
2,4,6-trichlorophenol
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Benzene
Base -neutral Compounds
Isophorone
Bromoform
Acenaphthene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride
Acenaphthylene
Nitrobenzene
Chlorobenzene
Anthracene
N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine
Chlorodibromomethane
Benzidine
N-nitrosodimethylamine
Chloroethane
Benzo(a)anthracene
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
2-chloroethylvinyl ether
Benzo(a)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Chloroform
3,4 benzofluoranthene
Pyrene
Dichlorobromomethane
Benzo(ghi)perylene
1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
1,1-dichloroethane
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
1,2-dichloroethane
Bis (2-chloroethoxy) methane
The Permittee shall report test results within 90 days of sample collection to the Division in DWQ Form- DMR-
PPA1 or other form approved by the Director (see NPDES Unit web site). The report shall be submitted to the
following address:
Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section / Central Files
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Submittal of,Priority Pollutant Analysis results with NPDES renewal applications will be required.

Berry, Ron
From: Hyatt.Marshall a©epamaii.epa.gov
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:54 AM
To: Berry, Ron
Subject: re NC0039594, Maiden WWTP
EPA has no comments on this draft permit.
Z

North Carolina ) ss
Mecklenburg County)
The Charlotte Observer Publishing Co.
Charlotte, NC
Affidavit of Publication
THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER
DINA SPRINKLE
NCDENR/DWQ/POINT SOURCE BRANCH
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699
REFERENCE: 30063432
6483319 npdes perform. fiber
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said
County and State, duly authorized to administer
oaths affirmations, etc., personally appeared,
being duly sworn or affirmed according to law,
doth depose and say that he/she is a
representative of The Charlotte Observer
Publishing Company, a corporation organized and
doing business under the laws of the State of
Delaware, and publishing a newspaper known as The
Charlotte Observer in the city of Charlotte,
County of Mecklenburg, and State of North Carolina
and that as such he/she is familiar with the
books, records, files, and business of said
Corporation and by reference to the files of said
publication, the attached advertisement was
inserted. The following is correctly copied from
the books and files of the aforesaid Corporation
and Publication.
PUBLISHED ON: 07/10
AD SPACE: 62 LINE
FILED ON: _ 07/15/10
NAME:
TITLE:
DATE:
In Testimony Whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal, the
day and year aforesaid.
Public Notice
North Carolina Environmental Management CommissionJ
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Notice of Intent to Issue a NPDES Wastewater Permit
The North Carolina Environmental Management Commission pro-
poses to issue a NPDES wastewater discharge permit to the per-
son(s) listed below.
Written comments regarding the proposed permit will be accept-
ed until 30 days after the publish date of this notice. The Director
of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWO) may hold a public hear-
ing should there be a significant degree of public interest. Please
mail comments and/or information requests to DWQ at the above
address. Interested persons may visit the DWO at 512 N.
Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC to review information on file.
Additional information on NPDES permits and this notice may be
found on our website; www.ncwaterquafity.org, or by calling (919)
807-6304.
The Town of Malden requested renewal of permit NC0039594 for
the Town of Maiden WWTP in Catawba County; this permitted dis-
charge is treated domestic/industrial wastewater to Clark Creek,
Catawba River Basin.
Performance Fibers requested renewal of permit NC0004944 for
its Salsbury facility In Rowan County; this permitted discharge is
treated domestic and industrial wastewater to North Second
Creek, Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin.
LP6483319
My Commission Expires May 17, 2011
Commission Expires: _/_/_

DENR/DWQ
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
NPDES No. NC0039594
Facility Information
Applicant/Facility
Name:
Town of Maiden WWTP
Applicant Address:
113 West Main Street; Maiden, NC 28650
Facility Address:
2090 West Finger Street; Maiden, NC 28650
Permitted Flow
1.0
Type of Waste:
99% Domestic and 1% Industrial
Facility/Permit Status:
Class III /Active; Renewal
County:
Catawba County
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Clark Creek
Stream Classification:
C
Subbasin:
03-08-35
Index No.
11-129-5-(0.3)b
Drainage Area (mi2):
66
HUC:
03050102
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
12
303(d) Listed?
Yes -biological
integrity
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
22
Regional Office:
Mooresville
3002 (cfs)
-
State Grid / USGS
Quad:
E14SW
Maiden, NC
Average Flow (cfs):
77
Permit Writer:
Ron Berry
IWC (%):
11.4%
Date:
7/1/10
BACKGROUND
The Town of Maiden operates a 1.0 MGD wastewater treatment facility that serves the
Maiden community, population estimated at 3,500, and currently one significant industrial
user, Getrag Corporation. Getraq is a manufacturer of metal casting components and
finishing, and discharges 3,600 gpd on an intermittent basis. The Town of Maiden has an
approved pretreatment program which is subject to 40 CFR 433 requirements. The
permitted facility discharges treated wastewater to Clark Creek, class C water in the
Catawba River Basin.
Untreated domestic and industrial waste is introduced to the plant headworks. The flow is
screened through a mechanical bar screen, passes through the influent meter flume, flows
through a grit removal system, and flows to a collection sump. The influent composite
sample is collected from a continuous circulating flow that originates downstream of the
influent meter.
An influent pump transfer wastewater from the sump to one of two 34,000 gallon SBR tanks
where aeration occurs followed by settling. The SBR is a batch process, one SBR is reacting,
settling, decanting, and wasting sludge waste while the other is filling. The decanted
wastewater is pumped to an 18,500 gallon post equalization basin which discharges to a
chlorination contact chamber followed by de -chlorination. Pumps are available to increase
the basin discharge if needed. An effluent composite sampler and effluent meter are
located immediately downstream from the de -chlorination process. The effluent meter is a
feed back control for the chlorination and de -chlorination processes.
The wasted sludge is directed to the aerobic digesters. There are two digesters one for
each SBR tank. As needed digester solid residuals are drained to a pit and pumped to a
truck for disposal off site at an approved compose processer.
HISTORY
The initial model prepared for this segment of Clark Creek used this facility 1.0 MGD
discharge and secondary treatment standards and other existing permitted dischargers
WLA. The predicted dissolved oxygen sag was above the water quality standard.
Consequently, no limits for dissolved oxygen or ammonia as nitrogen were required. But It
I t-

was stated in the model recommendations that the oxygen assimilation capacity of this
steam was at near maximum capacity.
On subsequent permit renewals no changes occurred. Other renewal commentaries discuss
not requiring ammonia as nitrogen limits as a result of (1) the permittee passing his toxicity
test and (2) the lack of an applicable standard. In 2000 a Total Cyanide Limit was added
along with monitoring for Total Silver and Total Copper as the results of the RPA.
A Wastewater Management Plan requirement in the 2000 NPDES permit was completed in
2001, and listed action items to be initiated by the Town of Maiden to monitor and reduce
i&I issues. in a 2005 EA Report it was stated that a recent i&i surveys showed
improvements.
In August 2002 the facility was given a directive to use EPA Method 1631, or other equal
EPA approved low level mercury test methods beginning September 2003. However, the
reported mercury measurements did not use the required test method until 2009.
In 2004 a speculative limits letter for potential expansion was issued contingent on an
existing discharger in the same stream segment eliminating his discharge in that segment
of the stream.
The facility completed a non -expansion major revamp in September 2008 installing SBR
treatment technology, converting the old system reactor tanks to aerobic sludge digesters,
and eliminating the drying beds. Chlorination followed by de -chlorination was the applied
disinfection scheme. Most notable impact to date of the revamp is a reduction in effluent
ammonia and total nitrogen, TRC compliance, and better control of effluent pH.
Some problems with the de -chlorination system resulted in a delay in optimizing its
operation. Two compliance date extensions for TRC were granted with the last approved
date, May 1, 2009, being met.
Prior to July 2008 industrial wastewater from Lincoln Industrial Park was being accepted and
the facility had numerous pH, BOD, TSS, and Fecal Coliform violations resulting in
enforcement fine of $24,045. After July 2008 three significant industrial sources in Lincoln
Industrial Park were permanently connected to another regional POTW, Lincolnton WWTP
facility, and limit violations ceased.
Several changes in the pretreatment program have occurred over the course of this permit
cycle, the last approved change in early 2010 was the approval of the facility STMP and
termination of the voluntary LTMP. Quarterly monitoring will be required once every 5
years. Next pretreatment data will be required in 2014/2015.
The biological impairment is linked to the general Clark Creek deterioration from years of
sediments, bank erosion, and other non -point source practices.
PERMITTING STRATEGY
Reasonable Potential Analysis (RPA):
The Division conducted EPA -recommended analyses to determine the reasonable potential
for toxicants to be discharged by this facility, based on DMR data (effluent and LTMP/STMP)
from January 2008 to January 2010 and from the 3 PPA submitted with the renewal
application. Evaluations were conducted for arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium,
copper, cyanide, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, total phenols, selenium, silver, and zinc.
Where applicable the new 1Q10 dilution was applied to the daisy limit WQS calculation.
Results suggest reasonable potentia/for the facility to discharge silver and zinc in excess of
WQS but these are action level parameters. Facility has passed toxicity test therefore, no
limits for silver or zinc are required. The copper monitoring frequency will be reduced to
quarterly. The cyanide limit will be removed and its monitoring frequency reduced to
monthly.

WI
Mercury values were reported under two formats. For consistency in the RPA the two
formats were reviewed separately. No potential to exceed the WQS limit was shown.
However, the permittee was alerted that the more sensitive test should always be used and
the actual ng/L value must be reported not "<200 mg/I". This reporting requirement will be
stated again in the cover letter and the Priority Pollutant Scan page amended to indicate
the 1631E method.
Data review:
DMRs were reviewed for the period of January 2008 to January 2010. This data represent
the treatment operation pre -construction upgrade and post -construction upgrade. DMR
data is summarized in Table l below:
Table I (Based on
rlr.� ► 1
F�3f i
(mg/L)
T»>
(mg/L)
.H3_ 1!
(mg/L)
Fecal 1 1
Coliform(MGD)
(#//100 ml)
p W
(SM.U.)
Temoeratur
(°C)
Average
0.295
30.65
22.86
6.69
71.2
6.41
16.50
Maximu
m
1.93
265
138.0
37.5
1040
7.9
25.1
Minimum
0.08
1.0
< 1
0.25
1
5.6
7.0
Percent Removal2: Based on BOD 72.0% - 99.0%, Based on TSS 71.2% - 98.7%
Note:
1. All maximum values occurred in old treatment configuration. No compliance
violations since August 2008.
2. The permittee continues to have problems meeting a minimum 85% removal. A
significant reduction in TSS and BOD from the lost of industrial sources is the
suspected cause. Contribution of 1&I unknown.
Ammonia Toxicity:
The NC Ammonia Toxicity Policy requires any domestic treatment facility with a permitted
flow 1.0 MGD or higher to be evacuated for seasonal ammonia as nitrogen limits. An !WC
was determined and based on the 35.0 mg/1 threshold, ammonia as nitrogen limits were
defined for this publicly owned facility. Base on the original model the receiving stream
ammonia based oxygen demand was less stringent and waste applicable. The effluent
page will be amended to incorporate seasonal monitoring with new limits. The existing
monitoring frequency will continue in this permit.
Whole Effluent Toxicity:
The permit requires quarterly chronic toxicity limited testing using ceriodaphnia dubia, at
11% effluent concentration. The facility has consistently passed its toxicity tests. Four
additional species, fathead minnow, chronic toxicity tests were submitted wkh the
renewal application and all exceed 22% concentration. Will continue quarterly chronic
toxicity limited testing in this permit.
Priority Pollutant Analysis (PPA):
The results of 3 PPA were submitted with the permit renewal application. No significant new
pollutants were noted. See RPA Analysis for further results. Historically the annual
permittee used the Priority Pollutant Scan as the data souse for PPA. Need to ;ake
permittee aware that 1631E is the required test method for mercury.
lnstream Data Impact:
There is a permitted 1.0 MGD industrial discharge through a submerged pipe, NPDES
permit NC0006190 (Delta Apparel, Inc.), approximately 300 feet upstream from the Town of
Maiden WWTP permitted 1.0 MGD discharge. The Town of Maiden WWTP treated
wastewater enters Clark Creek through an exposed pipe at the creek's bank. The upstream
sample location for the Town of Maiden WWTP is approximately 100 feet upstream of its
outfall, between the two dischargers. The downstream sample location for the Town of
Maiden WWTP is_ approximately 5.6 milesdownstream of its outfall. For reference the
NC0006190 downstream sample location is approximately 2.3 miles downstream.
,3ct `n�,--

For the Town of Maiden WWTP, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity are
measured routinely at the designated upstream and downstream locations in Clark Creek.
The January 2008 through January 2010 DMR data was reviewed to determine the impact.
O the n th .-1 t:..' typically h - times high a ...s
On uIe average uIC conductivity was Ly1,I..olly more tiro.. . u.iic� higher upstream versus
downstream. There was no significant temperature impact. The original model indicated no
dissolved oxygen assimilation issues and only required instream validation. The instream
DO data trend continues to supports the model. Will continue existing instream monitoring
program in this permit.
Impairment:
A narrative wiii be added to the cover letter alerting the permittee that any impairment
connected with his discharge is subject to mitigation.
Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Reauirementss
Flow, BOD, TSS, % Removal, Fecal Coliform, pH, TRC, Chronic Toxicity
These parameters limits, conditions, and monitoring requirements were consistent with
applicable federal and NC standards and will remain the same. The TRC footnote will be
amended to (1) remove the compliance date and (2) add the narrative for TRC
protocols.
The permittee requested a reduction in the 85% removal requirement. Operational
problems/compliance issues that occurred after the lost of industrial sources that
contributed significant amounts of TSS and BOD was given as the reason for the
reduction request. Upon preliminary review, discussions with EPA, and conditions stated
in 40 CFR 133.103(d) the request was denied. No evidence to support nonexcessive I&I
was available.
The permittee may make future request for % removal reduction as a major permit
modification. A narrative outlining the statute requirements to be considered for a %
removal reduction request will be provided in the cover letter.
NH3-N
To comply with the applicable policy the effluent page will be amended to provide
seasonal NH3-N monitoring with monthly average and weekly average limits for the
summer and winter.
Effluent Monitoring Requirements
Total Cyanide
Based on the RPA results, total cyanide monitoring frequency will be reduced to
monthly and the daily limit will be removed. Additional data will be available in the
annual Priority Pollutant Scan and future STMP.
Total Copper, Total Silver, Total Zinc
Based on NC action level policy with no failures of toxicity tests, total silver and total
zinc requirements will remain the same. Based on the RPA total copper monitoring
frequency will be reduced to quarterly to coincide with toxicity test. Additional data
will be available in the annual Priority Pollutant Scan and future STMP.
Total Nitrogen (TN) , Total Phosphorus (TP)
Current TN and TP monthly monitoring was consistent with the Catawba River Basin
nutrient guidance and will continue.
Temperature
Current temperature weekly monitoring was consistent with NC WWTP guidance and
will continue.
5

Priority Pollutant Scan
Current annual PPA scan was continued based on BPJ. The mercury test method 1631E
will be added to the scan table.
Instream Monitoring Requirements
Based on BPJ and NC guidance temperature, dissolved oxygen, and conductivity
monitoring frequency will remain the same and at the same locations.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
In keeping with rl .:irion policies tk,, following will be incorporated into the permit:
.i .Sw...ga.usy ...N. v.......v.. policies U.�.. .vuv......, .iu �... n.�.v.pv.u«.0 ..w a..�. Y�..unI.
• Effluent monitoring requirements for NH3-N will be amended to seasonal
monitoring requirements with new limits.
• Effluent limit for total cyanide will be removed and monitoring will be reduced to
monthly.
• Effluent monitoring for total copper will be reduced to quarterly.
• Effluent page TRC footnote will be amended to remove the compliance date and
to add the new compliance narrative.
• Special Condition A. (3) mercury narrative will be amended to add 1631E as the
measurement method.
• Special Condition A. (2) narrative VYIII be gllleliutu to add IflOst recent narrative.
• Supplemental to Permit Cover Page Sheet will be amended to match new
treatment process.
• PCS rnriPs will he added to effluent page parameters.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE
Draft Permit to Public Notice: July 7, 2010
Permit Scheduled to Issue: August 2010
NPDES DIVISION CONTACT
If you have questions regarding any of the above information or on the attached permit,
please contact Ron B rry at [phone] or email [e-mail].
i/r
N.
REGIONAL OFFICE COMMENTS
DATE:
L
DnATEc
:
NAME: DATE:
SUPERVISOR: DATE:
NPDES NC00395q.1
PLIge 5 oti S

REASONABLE POTENTIAL ANALYSIS
Mb,
Town of Maiden WWTP
NC0039594
Time Period 0
Ow (MGD) 1
7010S (cfs) 12
7Q10W (cis) 22
3002 (cfs) 0
Avg. Stream Flow. OA (cfs) 77
Reeving Stream Clark Creek
WWTP Class III
IWC (%) @ 7010S 11.439
@ 7010W 6.5817
@ 3002 NIA
@ OA 1.9733
Stream Class C
Outfall 001
Qw =1 MGD
Calculation of 1010 based on 7010
1010 = 0.843 (7Q10) oesr3
SUMMER 1010 = 9.9 (cfs)
SUMMER 1010 IWC % =13.49
WINTER 1010 = 18.1 (cfs)
WINTER 1010 IWC % = 7.87
PARAMETER
TYPE
(1)
STANDARDS &
CRITERIA (2)
POL
Units
REASONABLE POTENTIAL RESULTS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
NC IVQS / Y, FAV /
Chronic Acute
n II LK Arai Prod Cw Ailowebk Cw
Arsenic
C
10
uglL
10 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
2.5
set
Acute: NO WOS
_Chro_ni___50__
_A _oe_no_exc_ee_ WO________
Beryllium
C
6.5
uglL
3 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
0.5
set
Acute: NO WOS
_ _ ___ ___
Chronic: 329
_ _ _ ___ _ ___________._._,
RPA does rat exceed WO5
Cadmium
NC
2 15
uglL
10 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
1.0
set
Acute: 111
_ ._ 1___
_Chronic:
RPA does not exceed WOS
RPAdoes_ no_ e_eed_ W_OS________
Chromium
NC
50 1,022
uglL
10 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
2.5
I
set
Acute: 7.576
_ _ ___ ___
Chronic: 437
RPA does not exceed WOS
_ ___ ___ _ _____________._.
RPA does not exceed WOS
Copper
NC
7 AL 7.3
uglL
32 31
52.2
Acute: 54
_ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 61
ACTION LEVEL. PASSING TOXICITY TEST
R_PA does not exceed WOS _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ .
ACTION LEVEL. PASSING TOXICITY TEST
RPA does not exceed WOS
Cyanide
NC
5 N 22
10
ug/L
111 10
11.8
Acute: 163
_ _ ___ ___
Chronc: 44
RPA does not exceed WOS
_ _ _ ___ _ _______________.
RPA does not exceed WOS
Fluoride
NC
1,800
uglL
0 0
N/A
Acute: NO WOS
_ _ __ _ _
Chronic: 15.735
NO DATA ________________________
Lead
NC
25 N 33.8
uglL
10 1
Note: n<12
Limited data
8.8
set
Acute: 251
_Ch_ron___2___
RPA does not exceed WOS
_A oe_no_exc_ee_WOS_________
Mercury
NC
12
2.0000
ng/L
8 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
100.0000
set
Acute: NO WOS
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Chronic: 105
No rdg above WOS _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Note: Need to correct PPA to use 1631E
7.57 ngll & 7.7 ngl/ not used in RPA
Molybdenum
A
2.000
uglL
7 0
Note: n412
Limited data
5.0
set
Acute: NO WOS
_ _ _ _
Chronic: #VALUE!
N_O3001_0DATA _ _ _ _ _._____.____
RPA and rdg below WOS (undiluted)
Nickel
NC
88 261
uglL
10 9
Note: n<12
Limited data
79.0
set
Acute: 1.935
_ _ __ _ _
Chronic: 769�
RPA does not exceed WOS
_ _ _ ___ _ _______________.
RPA does not exceed WOS
Phenols
A
1 N
uglL
3 0
Note: n<12
Limited data
2.5
set
Acute: NO WOS
_ __
Chronic: #VALUE!
N_O3001_0DATA
_______._______._____
BPJ below WOS
Selenium
NC
5.0 56
uglL
10 1
Note: n412
Limited data
12.7
set
Acute: 415
_ _ __ __
Chronic: 44
RPA does not exceed WOS
_ _ _ _ ___ _ ___________.___,
RPA does not exceed WOS
Silver
NC
0.06 AL 1.23
ug/L
32 30
366.1
Acute: 9
Chronic: 1
ACTION LEVEL. PASSING TOXICITY TEST
Zinc
NC
50 AL 67
ug/L
32 32
•
541.4
Acute: 497
_ _ __ _ _
Chronic: 437
ACTION LEVEL, PASSING TOXICITY TEST
___._._______.___________._._.
'Legend:
C = Carcinogenic
NC = Non -carcinogenic
A = Aesthetic
•• Freshwater Discharge
r
oPs
/a1
ras
RPA, rpa
4/6/2010

6/22/2010 IWC Calculations
Town of Maiden WWTP
NC0039594
Prepared By: RDB
Assume upstream TRC level = 0
Assume upstream Fecal level = 0
Check Box if WTP Facility 0
Enter Design Flow (MGD):
Enter s7Q10(cfs):
Enter w7Q10 (cfs):
1.000 Enter Upstream NH3-N Level (mg/L):
12.000
22.000
0.220
Total Residual Chlorine
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (UG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL (
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (ug/1)
Fecal Limit
(If DF >331; Monitor)
(If DF <331; Limit)
Dilution Factor (DF)
Ammonia (NH3 as N)
(summer)
12 7Q10 (CFS)
1 DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
1.55 DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
17.0 STREAM STD (MG/L)
0 UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
11.44 IWC (%)
28 Allowable Conc. (mg/l)*
WEEKLY AVG LIMIT (mg/I)
200/100m1
8.74
Check other limit docs such as basin plan or model
NPDES Servor/Current Versions/IWC
Ammonia (NH3 as N)
(winter)
7Q10 (CFS)
DESIGN FLOW (MGD)
DESIGN FLOW (CFS)
STREAM STD (MG/L)
UPS BACKGROUND LEVEL
IWC (%)
Allowable Conc. (mg/I)*
WEEKLY AVG LIMIT (mg/I)
MONTHLY AVG OMIT
12
1
1.55
1.0
0.220
11.44
7.0
21.1
22
1
1.55
1.8
0.220
6.58
24.2
35.0
Limit MAX
35.0 mg/L
NON-POTW
7.0
35.0
(MONTHLYIDAILY)
NON-POTW
24.2
35.0
(MONTHLY/DAILY)
6/22/2010

NPDES/Aquifer Protection Permitting Unit Pretreatment Information Request Form
PERMIT WRITER COMPLETES THIS PART:
PERMIT WRITERS - AFTER You Pet this form
.
back from PERCS:
Check all that apply
- Notify PERCS if LTMP/STMP data we said should
Date of Request
4/7/2010
municipal renewal
x
be on DMRs is not really there, so we can get it for
Requestor
Ron Berrry
new industries
you (or NOV POTW).
Facility Name
Town of Maiden
WWTP expansion
- Notify PERCS if you want us to keep a specific
Permit Number
NC0039594
Speculative limits
POC in LTMP/STMP so you will have data for next
renewal.
Region
Mooresville
stream reclass.
permit
-Email PERCS draft permit, fact sheet, RPA.
Basin
Catawba
stream relocation
- Send PERCS paper copy of permit (w/o NPDES
7Q10 change
boilerplate), cover letter, final fact sheet. Email RPA
other
if changes.
other
check applicable
PERCS staff:
Other Comments
to
PERCS: 0 I
CPF - TBA (to Dana in mean time)
1) Need list, SIU of
O
industries
X
CTB, CHO, LUM, NEU, ROA - Dana Foiley (523)
2) Have already pulled
DMR data G.--,
BRD, FRB, NEU - Monit Hassan (371)
cirear
HIW, LTN, TAR, YAD - Tom Ascenzo (526)
fri 115
rer&
(9u8"-)
PERCS
Status of
PRETREATMENT STAFF COMPLETES THIS PART: •
Pretreatment Program (check all that apply)
Q V o
1) facility has no SIU's, does have Division approved Pretreatment Program
that is INACTIVE
2) facility has no SIU's, does not have Division approved Pretreatment
Program
V
3) facility has Sills and DWQ approved Pretreatment Program (list "DEV".
if program still under development)
3a) Full Program with LTMP
-
V
3b) Modified Program with STMP 7 FkY[W Ul•
4) additional conditions regarding Pretreatment attached or listed below
STMP time frame:
Most recent:
7-0to d 9 =7 ilt at, 6
— SA
Flow, MGD
Permitted
Actual
Time period for Actual
Next Cycle:
fo 1 !' - 91 S
Industrial
00o15'
6►O Oat-
111o3—
ce
Uncontrollable
n/a
6.23S
n
POC in
LTMP!
STMP
Parameter of
Concern (POC)
Check List
POC due to
NPDES! Non-
Disch Permit
Limit
Required
by EPA*
Required
by 503
Sludge**
POC due
to SID***
POTW POC
(Explain
below)****
STMP
Effluent
F
LTMP
Effluent
Freq
d.
BOD
V
4
Q M
V
TSS
1
4
Q M
Q = Quarterly
v
NH3
4
Q M
M = Monthly
V
Arsenic
r/
4 1
Q M
J
Cadmium •
4
v
1
4
Q M
4
Chromium '
-4
y
4
Q M
\I
Copper
4
v
v
I
4
Q M
1
Cyanide
V
v
4
Q M
all data on DMRs?
4
Lead
d
v
v
4
Q M
YES
V
v
Mercury
i
t
4
Q M
NO (attach data)
✓
Molybdenum
v
4 1
Q M
-1
Nickel
4
v
V
4
Q M
f
Silver
v
4
Q M
Selenium
i
i 4
Q M
Zinc '
✓
y
J
Q M
data ' spre sheet?
Total Nitrogen
4
Q M
YES (email titer)
Phosphorus
4
Q M
NO
1
4
Q M
— UJ t
rrv±e4 — ce.Awry.,,
PAA/Ad <
4
Q M
J/o�S
j
e� n
J� �
4
Q M
*aiwaysin the LIMP/,ATM
*** Only in LTMP/STMP while
** Only in TMP/STMP if sludge land app or composte (dif POCs for incinerators)
SIU still discharges to POTW **** Only in LTMP/STMP when pollutant is still of concern to POTW
Comments to Permit Writer (ex.. explanation of any POCs: Info you have on IU related investigations into NPDES problems):
l'' c i �---�, — ,
PERC NPDES_Pretreatment request form july2007
Revised: July 24, 2007

S P
w
P
-)3
jays2.
c-en,crAzi
W04-\-6
taLtd. W-P/3
��. Q-t
{'l,ew D RG
be)&k, . a � /AAJ3
+VTI.«6oy
--,/tA/y./40)
ele
Yew w w-l7� on L}I"e 9/06;"
c�i-Q p1ta&LbQ
nAel-kzto ?/L- bo-v-LAAed
/31 � °9� c2j2
oinao Tom mid-,.� o(�u.,�vLC to no
nteiNA- /9.414/\
beta-4/- i:it.w. Yhd�-�" s�-�.�.-4 08 � Pow
w7P t s�vl- u� / din t y�w�^4z. �t
6ertfulL_ ,5C) dIAA.
kAiv-t Twwi, 09, � 09 -D�un PL ��+ /JL 6y
c�/� S cwn )
/-;Af--avie\yfrp
i, i r e 1 f !� �i
1-cr-oa d Au) pekenviA0 On-rtvl,d/3 ge-±-
1)4A-t Gti7A.0 frvv.kr-44
-lam hoc[ �+r(-ulrv� orr�+ a o
� I3 tl 1� �~T�s . �AG( tia
uro-tdet -���i�' �r�{- W ft1
I 0 orkt)
CtLCA,(1t-ed JO Ote) 4-t/r-r it(t3t
by w� �.�,c.r�� -� PA-d
G�-e -1-�- l� : N��+.�-� ark � �
ureAk. 13f

§ 403.8 Pretreatment Program Requirements: Development and Implementation by POTW.
(a) POTWs required to develop a pretreatment program. Any POTW (or combination of POTWs operated by the same authority) with a
total design flow greater than 5 million gallons per day (mgd) and receiving from Industrial Users pollutants which Pass Through or
Interfere with the operation of the POTW or are otherwise subject to Pretreatment Standards will be required to establish a POTW
Pretreatment Program unless the NPDES State exercises its option to assume local responsibilities as provided for in §403.10(e). The
Regional Administrator or Director may require that a POTW with a design flow of 5 mgd or less develop a POTW Pretreatment
Program if he or she finds that the nature or volume of the industrial influent, treatment process upsets, violations of POTW effluent
limitations, contamination of municipal sludge, or other circumstances warrant in order to prevent Interference with the POTW or Pass
Through.
(b) Deadline for Program Approval. A POTW which meets the criteria of paragraph (a) of this section must receive approval of a POTW
Pretreatment Program no later than 3 years after the reissuance or modification of its existing NPDES permit but in no case later than
July 1, 1983. POTWs whose NPDES permits are modified under section 301(h) of the Act shall have a Pretreatment Program within
three (3) years as provided for in 40 CFR part 125, subpart G. POTWs identified after July 1, 1983 as being required to develop a
POTW Pretreatment Program under paragraph (a) of this section shall develop and submit such a program for approval as soon as
possible, but in no case later than one year after written notification from the Approval Authority of such identification. The POTW
Pretreatment Program shall meet the criteria set forth in paragraph (f) of this section and shall be administered by the POTW to ensure
compliance by Industrial Users with applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements.
(c) Incorporation of approved programs in permits. A POTW may develop an appropriate POTW Pretreatment Program any time before
the time limit set forth in paragraph (b) of this section. The POTW's NPDES Permit will be reissued or modified by the NPDES State or
EPA to incorporate the approved Program as enforceable conditions of the Permit. The modification of a POTWs NPDES Permit for the
purposes of incorporating a POTW Pretreatment Program approved in accordance with the procedure in §403.11 shall be deemed a
minor Permit modification subject to the procedures in 40 CFR 122.63.
(d) Incorporation of compliance schedules in permits. [Reserved]
(e) Cause for reissuance or modification of Permits. Under the authority of section 402(b)(1)(C) of the Act, the Approval Authority may
modify, or alternatively, revoke and reissue a POTWs Permit in order to:
(1) Put the POTW on a compliance schedule for the development of a POTW Pretreatment Program where the addition of pollutants
into a POTW by an Industrial User or combination of Industrial Users presents a substantial hazard to the functioning of the treatment
works, quality of the receiving waters, human health, or the environment;
(2) Coordinate the issuance of a section 201 construction grant with the incorporation into a permit of a compliance schedule for POTW
Pretreatment Program;
(3) Incorporate a modification of the permit approved under section 301(h) or 301(i) of the Act;
(4) Incorporate an approved POTW Pretreatment Program in the POTW permit; or
(5) Incorporate a compliance schedule for the development of a POTW pretreatment program in the POTW permit
(6) Incorporate the removal credits (established under §403.7) in the POTW permit.
(f) POTW pretreatment requirements. A POTW pretreatment program must be based on the following legal authority and include the
following procedures. These authorities and procedures shall at all times be fully and effectively exercised and implemented.
(1) Legal authority. The POTW shall operate pursuant to legal authority enforceable in Federal, State or local courts, which authorizes
or enables the POTW to apply and to enforce the requirements of sections 307 (b) and (c), and 402(b)(8) of the Act and any regulations
implementing those sections. Such authority may be contained in a statute, ordinance, or series of contracts or joint powers
agreements which the POTW is authorized to enact, enter into or implement, and which are authorized by State law. At a minimum, this
legal authority shall enable the POTW to:
(i) Deny or condition new or increased contributions of pollutants, or changes in the nature of pollutants, to the POTW by Industrial
Users where such contributions do not meet applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements or where such contributions would
cause the POTW to violate its NPDES permit;
(ii) Require compliance with applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements by Industrial Users;
(iii) Control through Permit, order, or similar means, the contribution to the POTW by each Industrial User to ensure compliance with
applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements. In the case of Industrial Users identified as significant under §403.3(v), this
control shall be achieved through individual permits or equivalent individual control mechanisms issued to each such User except as
follows.

§ 133.103 Special considerations.
(a) Combined sewers. Treatment works subject to this part may not be capable of meeting the percentage removal requirements
established under §§133.102(a)(3) and 133.102(b)(3), or §§133.105(a)(3) and 133.105(b)(3) during wet weather where the treatment
works receive flows from combined sewers ( i.e., sewers which are designed to transport both storm water and sanitary sewage). For
such treatment works, the decision must be made on a case -by -case basis as to whether any attainable percentage removal level can
be defined, and if so, what the level should be.
(b) Industrial wastes. For certain industrial categories, the discharge to navigable waters of BOD5and SS permitted under sections
301(b)(1)(A)(i), (b)(2)(E) or 306 of the Act may be less stringent than the values given in §§133.102(a)(1), 133.102(a)(4)(i),
133.102(b)(1), 133.105(a)(1), 133.105(b)(1) and 133.105(e)(1)(i). In cases when wastes would be introduced from such an industrial
category into a publicly owned treatment works, the values for BOD5and SS in §§133.102(a)(1), 133.102(a)(4)(i), 133.102(b)(1),
133.105(a)(1), 133.105(b)(1), and 133.105(e)(1)(i) may be adjusted upwards provided that: (1) The permitted discharge of such
pollutants, attributable to the industrial category, would not be greater than that which would be permitted under sections
301(b)(1)(A)(i), 301(b)(2)(E) or 306 of the Act if such industrial category were to discharge directly into the navigable waters, and (2) the
flow or loading of such pollutants introduced by the industrial category exceeds 10 percent of the design flow or loading of the publicly
owned treatment works. When such an adjustment is made, the values for BOD5or SS in §§133.102(a)(2), 133.102(a)(4)(ii),
§133.102(b)(2), 133.105(a)(2), 133.105(b)(2), and 133.105(e)(1)(ii) should be adjusted proportionately.
(c) Waste stabilization ponds. The Regional Administrator, or, if appropriate, State Director subject to EPA approval, is authorized to
adjust the minimum levels of effluent quality set forth in §133.105 (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) for treatment works subject to this part, to
conform to the SS concentrations achievable with waste stabilization ponds, provided that: (1) Waste stablization ponds are the
principal process used for secondary treatment; and (2) operation and maintenance data indicate that the SS values specified in
§133.105 (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) cannot be achieved. The term "SS concentrations achievable with waste stabilization ponds" means
a SS value, determined by the Regional Administrator, or, if appropriate, State Director subject to EPA approval, which is equal to the
effluent concentration achieved 90 percent of the time within a State or appropriate contiguous geographical area by waste stabilization
ponds that are achieving the levels of effluent quality for BOD5specified in §133.105(a)(1). [cf. 43 FR 55279].
(d) Less concentrated influent wastewater for separate sewers. The Regional Administrator or, if appropriate, State Director is
authorized to substitute either a lower percent removal requirement or a mass loading limit for the percent removal requirements set
forth in §§133.102(a)(3), 133.102(a)(4)(iii), 133.102(b)(3), 102.105(a)(3), 133.105(b)(3) and 133.105(e)(1)(iii) provided that the
permittee satisfactorily demonstrates that: (1) The treatment works is consistently meeting, or will consistently meet, its permit effluent
concentration limits but its percent removal requirements cannot be met due to Tess concentrated influent wastewater, (2) to meet the
percent removal requirements, the treatment works would have to achieve significantly more stringent limitations than would otherwise
be required by the concentration -based standards, and (3) the less concentrated influent wastewater is not the result of excessive I/1.
The determination of whether the Tess concentrated wastewater is the result of excessive I/1 will use the definition of excessive I/1 in 40
CFR 35.2005(b)(16) plus the additional criterion that inflow is nonexcessive if the total flow to the POTW (i.e., wastewater plus inflow
plus infiltration) is less than 275 gallons per capita per day.
(e) Less concentrated influent wastewater for combined sewers during dry weather. The Regional Administrator or, if appropriate, the
State Director is authorized to substitute either a lower percent removal requirement or a mass loading limit for the percent removal
requirements set forth in §§133.102(a)(3), 133.102(a)(4)(iii), 133.102(b)(3), 133.105(a)(3), 133.105(b)(3) and 133.105(e)(1)(iii) provided
that the permittee satisfactorily demonstrates that: (1) The treatment works is consistently meeting, or will consistently meet, its permit
effluent concentration limits, but the percent removal requirements cannot be met due to less concentrated influent wastewater; (2) to
meet the percent removal requirements, the treatment works would have to achieve significantly more stringent effluent concentrations
than would otherwise be required by the concentration -based standards; and (3) the less concentrated influent wastewater does not
result from either excessive infiltration or clear water industrial discharges during dry weather periods. The determination of whether the
less concentrated wastewater results from excessive infiltration is discussed in 40 CFR 35.2005(b)(28), plus the additional criterion that
either 40 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) or 1500 gallons per inch diameter per mile of sewer (gpdim) may be used as the threshold
value for that portion of the dry weather base flow attributed to infiltration. If the Tess concentrated influent wastewater is the result of
clear water industrial discharges, then the treatment works must control such discharges pursuant to 40 CFR part 403.
[49 FR 37006, Sept. 20, 1984, as amended at 50 FR 23387, June 3, 1985; 50 FR 36880, Sept. 10, 1985; 54 FR 4228, Jan. 27, 1989]

Berry, Ron
From: Hyatt.Marshall©epamail.epa.gov
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 3:21 PM
To: Berry, Ron
Subject: Fw: percent removal/pretreatment question
I asked our pretreatment guru....here is his reply...
Forwarded by Marshall Hyatt/R4/USEPA/US on 04/21/2010 03:21 PM
From:
>
>
I
>
'David Phillips/R4/USEPA/US
>
I
To:
>
>
I
>
I
'Marshall Hyatt/R4/USEPA/US@EPA
>
I
Date:
>
>
I
>
I
'04/21/2010 01:17 PM
>
I
Subject:
>
>
I
>
I
'percent removal/pretreatment question
>
I
I
Part 403.5(b)(4) in the specific prohibitions of pollutants that shall not be introduced to a
POTW includes:
1

• •
"Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc) released in a Discharge at a
flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which will cause Interference with the POTW."
Interference is when a discharge or combination of discharges both (1) inhibits or disrupts
the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge disposal operations, and (2)
therefore is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW's NPDES permit or other
listed statutes.
So, there doesn't seem to be an argument to be made for Interference since the weaker
wastestream isn't inhibiting or disrupting the POTW treatment processes or operations.
There wasn't much said about what the industry was doing that changed the TSS in its
discharge, but if the wastestream is weaker because they are diluting it then the POTW may
need to impose mass limits on the
industry per 403.6(d). However doing that won't solve their NPDES %
removal problem.
David R. Phillips
Clean Water Enforcement Branch
U.S. EPA Region 4
404-562-9773 (Tel) 404-562-9729 (Fax)
• Environmental Engineer
• Senior Commissioned Enforcement Officer
• Industrial Pretreatment Program Manager
2

§ 433.15 Pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES).
(a) Except as provided in 40 CFR 403.7 and 403.13, any existing source subject to this subpart that introduces pollutants into a publicly
owned treatment works must comply with 40 CFR part 403 and achieve the following pretreatment standards for existing sources
(PSES):
PSES for All Plants Except Job Shops and Independent Printed Circuit Board Manufacturers
Pollutant or pollutant property
Maximum for any 1 day
Monthly average shall not exceed
Milligrams per liter (mg/1)
Cadmium (T)
0.69
0.26
Chromium (T)
2.77
1.71
Copper (T)
3.38
2.07
Lead (T)
0.69
0.43
Nickel (T)
3.98
2.38
Silver (T)
0.43
0.24
Zinc (T)
2.61
1.48
Cyanide (T)
1.20
0.65
TTO
2.13
(b) Alternatively, for industrial facilities with cyanide treatment, upon agreement between a source subject to those limits and the
pollution control authority. The following amenable cyanide limit may apply in place of the total cyanide limit specified in paragraph (a) /1°.21
of this section:
Pollutant or pollutant property
Maximum for any 1 day
Monthly average shall not exceed
Milligrams per liter (mg/1)
Cyanide (A)
0.86
0.32
(c) No user introducing wastewater pollutants into a publidy owned treatment works under the provisions of this subpart shall augment
the use of process wastewater as a partial or total substitute for adequate treatment to achieve compliance with this standard.
(d) An existing source submitting a certification in lieu of monitoring pursuant to §433.12 (a) and (b) of this regulation must implement
the toxic organic management plan approved by the control authority.
(e) An existing source subject to this subpart shall comply with a daily maximum pretreatment standard for TTO of 4.57 mg/I.
(f) Compliance with the provisions of paragraph (c), (d), and (e) of this section shall be achieved as soon as possible, but not later than
June 30, 1984, however metal finishing facilities which are also covered by part 420 (iron and steel) need not comply before July 10,
1985. Compliance with the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section shall be achieved as soon as possible, but not later than
February 15, 1986.
[48 FR 32485, July 15, 1983, as amended at 48 FR 41410, Sept. 15, 1983; 48 FR 43682, Sept. 26, 1983]

r
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: Yes No X
To: Western NPDES Program Unit
Surface Water Protection Section
Attention: Dina Sprinkle
Date: March 8, 2010
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
County: Catawba
Permit No. NC0039594
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
I. Facility and Address: Town of Maiden WWTP
Post Office Box 125
Maiden, N.C. 28650
2. Date of Investigation: March 4, 2010
3. Report Prepared By: Samar Bou-Ghazale, Env. Engineer II
4. Person Contacted and Telephone Number: Randy Smith, ORC [phone].
5. Directions to Site: From the jct. of Main Street and South "E" Avenue in the Town of
Maiden, travel west on South "E" Avenue 0.2 mile and turn right onto Finger Street. The
WWTP is located at the end of Finger Street.
6. Discharge Point(s), List for all discharge Points: -
Latitude: 35° 34' 35" Longitude: 81° 14' 26"
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No.: E 14 SW USGS Name: Maiden, NC
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application: Yes.
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): Hilly topography changing rapidly to
flood plain adjacent to the WWTP site.
9. Location of Nearest Dwelling: No dwellings are located within 1000 feet of the WWTP
site.
10. Receiving Stream or Affected Surface Waters: Clark Creek

Page Two
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 030835
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The receiving
stream is 20-25 feet wide and variable in depth. Upstream dischargers are Duck
Head Apparel and City of Newton. The receiving stream is discolored by the
discharge from Duck Head Apparel.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of Wastewater: 1.0 MGD (Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity: 1.0 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of current facility (current design capacity): 1.0 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous ATCs issued in the
previous two years: N/A
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: The existing
WWT facilities consist of influent pumps followed by mechanical screening, grit
removal, instrumented flow measurement, two new sequencing batch reactor
(SBR) biological treatment units, post equalization basin, chlorination and
de -chlorination chamber, two aerobic digesters, sludge transfer box, and stand-by
power.
f. Description of proposed WWT facilities: N/A
g. possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Approved (only one permitted SIU).
2. Residual handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied, please specify DWQ permit No.:WQ0004563
b. Other disposal/utilization scheme: Residuals are removed by the Town of Maiden
and transported to the Hickory regional compost facility.
3. Treatment Plant Classification: (include rating sheet). Class III
4. SIC Code(s): 4952
Wastewater Code(s): 01
5. MTU Code(s): 13005

Page Three
PART III - OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION
1. Is this facility being constructed with Construction Grant Funds or are any public monies
involved (municipals only)? Public monies were used in the construction of this facility.
2. Special monitoring or limitations (including toxicity) requests: None at this time.
3. Important SOC/JOC or Compliance Schedule dates: N/A
4. Alternative Analysis Evaluation: N/A
5. Other Special Items: N/A
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Town of Maiden has requested renewal of the subject NPDES Permit. The Town had
upgraded the plant in 2007 and replaced the influent pump with new vertical centrifuge influent
sewage pumps. The two existing pure oxygen treatment system were converted to aerobic
digesters. Two new sequencing batch reactor (SBR) biological treatment units were constructed
to replace the two old pure oxygen treatment systems. A post equalization basin and chlorine
contact chamber and de -chlorination chamber were constructed. The existing stand-by power
generator was replaced with a larger generator. The sludge drying beds were eliminated.
The new plant was in good operational condition at the time of the investigation.
Pending review and approval by the Western NPDES Program Unit, It is recommended
that the NPDES permit be renewed as requested.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor Date

TOWN OF MAIDEN
Wastewater Treatment Plant
113 W. Main Street • Maiden, NC 28650
Office [phone] • Fax [phone]
01/29/10
NPDES Permitting Unit,
Included in this packet is the NPDES Form 2A Application for NPDES permit renewal. Also
included within this packet is a topographic map of the facility, plant schematic and Narrative,
attached Toxicity reference sheet and copies of 3 Toxicity tests that the Permitting Unit might
not have copies of yet.
Please keep in mind when reviewing the WWTP's data that we have undergone an upgrade
in 2008 and no longer have the industrial park discharging to us that helped cause past BOD
and solids issues.
The Town of Maiden is please to apply for NPDES permit renewal and will continue to do
everything in our power to discharge the cleanest effluent possible.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this NPDES permit renewal application
please contact Randy Smith at (828) 428- 5032 or rsmithPmail.ci.maiden.nc.us.
Sincerely,
Rand
Town of/ Eiden
WWTP Superintendent

FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Maiden WWTP, NC0039594
SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION }INFORM ATI
i • X.. 'r .a 4ht r} 4xa"A3'�.u1tk��.,7� �t5.�r�i v>F �t ;.a,r�j f.
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba (CTB35)
PART F�.INDUSTRIAL USER,DISCHII RGESANDRCRAICERCLAWASTES
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 to. an approved pretreatment program?
® Yes ❑ No
F.2. Number of Significant Industrial Users (Sills) 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. 0
b. Number of CIUs. 1
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: Getraq Corporation
Mailing Address: 1848 Getraq Parkway
Newton, NC 28658
F.4. Industrial Processes. Describe all the industrial processes that affect or contribute to the SIU's discharge.
metal finishing and coating of transmition parts
F.6. Principal Product(s) and Raw Materiat(s). Describe ail of the principal processes and raw materials that affect or contribute to the SIU's
discharge.
Principal product(s): Autimotive drivetrain components
Raw materiat(s): Steel forainos and aluminum castinas
F.6. Flow Rate.
a. Process wastewater flow rate. Indicate the average dairy volume of process wastewater discharge into the collection system in gallons per
day (gpd) and whether the discharge is continuous or intermittent.
3595 apd gpd ( continuous or X 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.
gpd ( continuous or
F.T. 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?
433
intermittent)
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 19 of 22

4-•
FACILITY NAME AND PERMIT NUMBER:
Town of Maiden WWTP, NC0039594
PERMIT ACTION REQUESTED:
Renewal
RIVER BASIN:
Catawba (CTB35)
F.8. Problems at the Treatment Works Attributed to Waste Discharge
upsets, interference) at the treatment works in the past three years?
by the SIU. Has the SIU caused or•contributed to any.problems (e.g.,
• 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?
that apply):
(volume or mass, specify units).
Units
• Yes 0 No (go to F.12)
F.10. Waste transport. Method by which RCRA waste is received (check all
❑ Truck 0 Rail 0 Dedicated Pipe
F.11. Waste Description. Give EPA hazardous waste number and amount
EPA Hazardous Waste Number Amount
CERCLA (SUPERFUND) WASTEWATER, RCRA REMEDIATION/CORRECTIVE ACTION
WASTEWATER, AND OTHER REMEDIAL ACTIVITY WASTEWATER:
F.12. Remedlation Waste. Does the treatment works currently (or has it been
notified that it will) receive waste from remedial activities?
other remedial waste originates (or is excepted to origniate in
❑ Yes (complete F.13 through F.15.) 0 No
F.13. Waste Origin. Describe the site and type of facility at which the CERCLA/RCRA/or
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 wi[I 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?
intermittent, describe discharge schedule.
❑ Continuous • Intermittent If
f ��- •.:� , �Y-ye YF• _:�.'� rZ`•.Y r'�.. t .� ..if...� d-d Tr'••r'i--� H:•:ks.. .`"'y./. �' . ~�� u. .. .�� a,s Sr•i.�
ti � t.+ ..r• �vi.+�Y 'a"'sr .e _ i- G-��=i`��;rr .;'. ,`
ii . .- `y ft,_•.•�.r'yy� ,b '.i"17 END�O:P TF �� _ - �j _, s-, ,. :� s- �
� .aT G�, 4,> �' �t1""'�, � r� ^n� � • � 're�i. t�s%rz 3.*4 s .. .t • ,r,.� • �.a� i., rJi ,,:r , .r .3 it f � �--`'•4A7,.•y.
r i , L.-.� 'ram �:.h^�dr_:Yc'7*.. a+ 'J Sl'Y s'ts r s,r.Z ^E.. .,,r .t"�a.Sr..�sr��-+�' .�T�u w.G"�+q .i{i a < .Y ..
REFERTOTH - P ,=LIC ITIOII O..ER /IEW (PAGE3:1,), O DETERMINE WHICH OTHER PARTS„
r•i i :'+Zt+--��� i�.�� tf.A�cr'�'$.'.-�'.t��..i�'it' � �_ k �°` �: �"" .rt :.'�' :. :i�. R � �;���-� � <E� rr t
. T '. � � . ' z -tr mot- ' ° C�E� FORM 2 . MUST COMPLET
.. ,V j l At xf.. 1 Y 'i # 1`iH.. �j1. � ( �t , •Fd f . YYt, 'R�i . T.M Y . . — I '- M. + . ;tiirit : it a. - '`7 .��.. r • -...
,..
i •
'Y .,
EPA Form 3510-2A (Rev. 1-99). Replaces EPA forms 7550-6 & 7550-22.
Page 20 of 22

Last 5 years of Toxicity Sampling (25Toxicity events)
Dates Collected:
01/05/10 and 01/08/10
01/05/10 , 01/08/10, 01/11/10
12/08/09, 12/11/09,12/14/09
10/20/09, 10/23/09, 10/26/09
10/20/09 and 10/23/09
07/28/09 and 07/31/09
07/28/09, 07/31/09, 08/03/09
04/14/09 and 04/17/09
01/13/09 and 01/16/09
10/07/08 and 10/10/08
07/29/08 and 08/01/08
04/15/08 and 04/18/08
01/15/08 and 01/18/08
10/09/07 and 10/12/07
07/10/07 and 07/13/07
04/10/07 and 04/13/07
01/16/07 and 01/19/07
10/17/06 and 10/20/06
07/18/06 and 07/21/06
04/04/06 and 04/07/06
01/10/06 and 01/13/06
10/18/05 and 10/21/05
07/19/05 and 7/22/05
04/05/05 and 04/07/05
01/04/05 and 01/07/05
Type of Toxicity Test:
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
2nd Species (Fathead Minnow)
2nd Species (Fathead Minnow)
2nd Species (Fathead Minnow)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
2nd Species (Fathead Minnow)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia)
Result:
PASS
PASS (growth)
PASS (growth)
PASS (growth)
PASS
PASS
PASS (growth)
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS

4
CHLORINATION
ttemplo CONTACT BASIN (E ffi.l) #2
EHluenl)
STORAGE
BUILDING
NOT TO SCALE
Sample Point #6
(Sludge to Disposal)
too
INFLUENT PUMP STATION
AEROBIC DIGESTERS
24" INTERCEPTOR
a.mPb P IM M1
OnHu.nt)
INFLUENT HEADWORKS
ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING
.3' N
61(
TOWN OF MAIDEN
CATAWBA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

Narrative of plant Schematic
The Two basins that make up the SBR facility alternate treatment they do not run in series. The
pretreated influent is pumped into one of two SBR bacons during the fill stage. Once the fill
cycle is complete (after 120 minutes) then the basin goes into a 30 minute react stage. During
the fill and react stages the aerators run to provide adequate mix and D.O.. Once the react
stage is complete then the basin settles for 50 minutes and then begins decanting treated
effluent to an equalization basin. From the EQ basin the treated effluent flows to the head of
the Chlorine Contact Chamber where it is disinfected. At the end of the contact chamber the
chlorine is removed with sodium bisulfite and discharged to the outfall. The SBR basins will
decant back to 9.1 ft and will then waste sludge from the bottom into a digester. Once the
wasting cycle is complete the basin aerators come back on and that basin will start filling again.
Our current average flow is 0.1306 MG, so roughly half is treated in SBR 1 and half treated in
SBR2.