NC0040011_Instream Assessment_19860904

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0040011
NPDES Permit:
Yanceyville WWTP
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
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 4, 1986
Thies document iss printed on reutse paper - ignore any
content on the re'erse iecide

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Winston-Salem Regional Office
September 4, 1986
MEMORANDUM
TO: Meg Kerr
Technical Support Group
THROUGH: Steve Mauney -1,11
Water Quality Supervisor
FROMr Gray Hauser
Environmental Tech. IV
SUBJECT: Yanceyville In -Stream Assessment
In a memo on In -Stream Assessments dated March 12, 1985, you stated
that "analysis should compare the plant's flow pre-SOC to the flow with
accumulated additions. The determination of significant degradation should
be based on this comparison." The In -Stream Assessment prepared by Trevor
Clements, dated August 11, 1986 did not use these flow values.
The pre-SOC flow used in the first In -Stream Assessment in 1981
was .100 MGD. The flow at Yanceyville reached a peak of .1372 MGD in
August, 1985. The closing of Hanover Mills in September, 1985, and
generally drier weather have resulted in flows less than .1200 MGD for
the past 11 months. Previously approved SOC flows totaling 14,670 GPD
are already tributary to the plant and reflected in current flow data.
A 10,000 GPO apartment complex went on-line in August, 1986. The proposed
additional flow is 5,650 GPD. Using a generous estimate, the maximum
volume of the flow with accumulated additions (proposed and approved)
will be .1356 MGD (wet month). A more accurate estimate is .12505 MGD.
In summary, the In -Stream Assessment should be run using a pre-SOC
flow of .100 MGD, and an "accumulated flow" of .12505 MGD. This may or
may not change the conclusion on significant degradation, but it should
be done in the interest of fair and objective regulatory control.
Attachments
TGH/cm
cc: L. Page Benton
Kent Wiggins
WSRO
c• ;

Flow Data, Yanceyville WWTP
NPDES Permit NC0040011
Month 1980 1982
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Average
.091
.102
. 103
.102
. 102
.1009
.1070
.100 .1040
1983
Flow
.1088
.1030
.1077
.1115
.1100
.1203
.1219
.1177
.1178
.1112
.1063
.1179
.1128
Av. Flow Sept. 1985-Aug. 1986
Approved Flow Not Yet Tributary to WWTP
Proposed Flow
Total Accumulated Flow
1984
(MGD)
. 1260
.1287
.1294
.1220
.1197
.1123
.1216
.1206
. 1197
.1202
.1214
.1323
.1228
1985 1986
.1323 .1102
.1300 .1087
.1276 .1105
.1325 .1195
.1354 .1073
.1331 .1055
.1366 .0902
.1372
.1190
.1083
.1173
.1065
.1263 .1074
.10940
.01000
.00565
.12505

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 11, 1986
MEMORANDUM
TO: Larry Coble
THROUGH: Meg Kerr
Steve Tedder
FROM:
SUBJECT: Town of Yanceyville SOC
J. Trevor Clements01141
SUMMARY
The Technical Support Unit has reviewed the Town of Yanceyville's
request for additional wasteflow under their current SOC. An instream
water quality assessment has been performed and, based upon the results,
there are grounds for denial. At the proposed SOC limits, the total SOC
wasteflow is predicted to cause D.O. concentrations in Jailhouse Branch
to fall to zero and the D.O. minimum in Country Line Creek to drop 1.0
mg/1 further below the standard (sag = 2.8 mg/1) than without the SOC
flow (sag = 3.8 mg/1). Further details are given below.
ANALYSIS
An instream water quality analysis was performed by Technical
Support for the proposed SOC limits for the Town of Yanceyville (see
Table 1). Yanceyville discharges to Jailhouse.Branch (Class "C")
approximately '4 mile upstream of ,-CountrytCreek (Class "A -II").
This facility has been under an SOC since 1981 and continues to dis-
charge poor quality effluent which will not meet their final permit
limits (see Table 2).
The impact of Yanceyville's effluent on Jail House Branch water
quality is severe, as was noted in a DEM survey in August, 1981. The
survey was performed under low flow conditions and D.O. concentrations
of 0.0 mg/1 were observed downstream of the discharge. Blue green

Larry Coble
August 11, 1986
- page two -
algae blooms were noted as were deep black sludge deposits. Water quality
conditions in Country Line Creek were notably better.
A level B model was developed for predicting water quality impacts
under the proposed SOC limits. The model was checked by inputting the
plant's average discharge characteristics into the model and comparing
the model's results with the survey data. The predicted D.O. profile
matched the survey data well.
The model was run with the existing average wasteflow (0.1155 MGD)
and the proposed SOC BOD5 limit of 140 mg/1. Dissolved oxygen in the
wasteflow was assumed to be zero and NH3-N was assumed to be 20.0 mg/1.
The model predicted anaerobic conditions in Jailhouse Branch and a D.O.
minimum of 3.8 mg/1 in Country Line Creek. The model was then run with
the additional SOC flow (0.1155 + 0.0303 = 0.1458 MGD). Again, anaerobic
conditions were predicted in Jailhouse Branch. However, a D.O. sag of
2.8 mg/1 was predicted for Country Line Creek.
The net change in the D.O. minimum of 1.0 mg/1 is twice as large as
the criterion for significant impact. The results should not be sur-
prising since the proposed SOC limits essentially reflect untreated raw
sewage. Additional wasteflow to Yanceyville's lagoon treatment system
will only exacerbate the current pollutant removal efficiency problem.
Technical Support cannot, in good conscience, recommend approval of this
request.
JTC:mlt
cc: Kent Wiggins
Page Benton

Table 1. Proposed SOC Limits
Flow 0.140 MGD
BOD5 140 mg/1
NH3-N -- mg/1
DO -- mg/1
TSS 100 mg/1
Fecal Coliform . 1000 /100 ml
pH 6-9 SU
Table 2. Comparison of Effluent Limits with . Self -Monitoring Data
Current Final Self -Monitoring
SOC Limits Limits (7/85 to 6/86)
Flow (MGD) 0.140 0.200 0.1155
BOD5 (mg/1) 140 12 65
NH3-N (mg/1) -- 2 13
D.O. (mg/1) -- 6 6.35
TSS (mg/1) 100 30 67
Fecal Coliform (/100 ml) 1000 1000 20
pH (SU) 6-9 6-9
OD IMO

;0.
MEMO.
I
TO: //7,Ee2
AQ- O (4/14 // /;r- ygnG € y ' V/e j S Oe .'•��
DATE:'3<��Y'C
SUBJECT: y - SI/e c 'i & 5 e 5$s r.474
/e. /' 'T1e t
05 „Oa'T Oi 4,/0 '4.4 / , O i 7 ; / ,[ , A/ 5
�acc. o.•7Olsiio 7," 44 f•9 /✓Pofa0.5e0( "/
M./OG�Gj Qe
aVe ijs.s� ssPno, A s/fo i4/ a/sv le /2 4.-e�
r CUNi7/7 Li'4 e Cre !C /VG14u4/ .5 GO�
I opn Gdwvss - y G, / 5 Ao I s 49091 e
fri6.,. yam,/% .
Ai 414-49dire- G vrllis79,1/5 0 /! S'ts b✓C
/
/Veer el 4/ e7147-G=40 ,$T//earx,S %Q%Jor f.
North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources &Community Development

James G. Martin, Governor
MEMORANDUM
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Winston-Salem Regional Office
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary
July 31, 1986
TO: Meg Kerr
Technical Support Unit
FROM: Gray Hauserg5M1
Environmental Tech. IV
SUBJECT: In -Stream Assessment
Town of Yanceyville SOC
EMC WQ 81-26 AD V
NPDES Permit NC 0040011
Caswell County
Attached is the in -stream assessment request for the subject SOC.
WSRO is recommending 4,350 GPD of the requested 5,650 GPD be approved.
Please give me a call if you have any questions.
TGH/em
cc: WSRO
Chi tv/�
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100, Winston-Salem, N.C. 27106-3295 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

a
•
�/? 0 /Y 4 4/ a—c-, .' / O/c,. se C /. 5 .
Ctie4-7,'c4/ - .5e.,--ece.
0/pJJ c;,'c4I 4 70G,„
�IfeL f - .Sc ✓e/e_
S/,' C.0- /f
/GO feC r'
/,— c, 4,1
O / PGf e y a ssc- h or, e ,2 ° C 0. 0, - S -27, /4
p / l (�6 e, 0't )
7
5 6.. 4o.rlh5A ,C/of,. ,., cr/.•�csr
P r�r�,'iely Cvey��✓cseG/ o ef//,F1s, i.� th li.l G,/fac
y.`/
// i7 o { 5.74 et; ,-.� I71 e 4 5 •�r .e ..J e /5
Th. ',v. a %C:4)42 a 4/4 `S'6' /
o/nts� . .71 Ejai✓,'/Ec//
.O/e e-1 5 e5 e.5/4, C-4, . /-,✓o /i►t > 41.- p Pe sN .-7,'l
;47.1 / N/1/ ram
"nor'
oloc ,'(u/ — /1/, -j C
/21•',1,f
/1//1e, y/�
wA /e ,-`,1/rI e , lc-. c
, 4
}�/'
Cs%%eGr1j ,� GCS/ • FrrcF �t�l ✓A,/�J:/'���G �le
4/Gc ac•, /.�r••e•n ce.
i
1 �1� /, L -- / , •-
`C', / D, G
Cc /rLl�,inc t
L..- • rl'!
Gr
/ i % e, ,. U fN /
r�C'S'• �i / 5,014// ,. e , -4
/

IN -STREAM ASSESSMENT REQUEST FORM
I . Facility name Ya n e e y v+ //e- S4A. ;,574".4-f (Town o�' J.rc.e ye //a }
Design flow • /1/0
Subbasin 0 3 - 0 A.- 0 / County C°as we/�
Receiving stream-34; / Alouso$rw0611
Classification
II. Existing plant data time period averaged $ 5 0 7—
flow • / / 5. 5 mgd
BOD5 c 4/. % mg/1
NH3 / 3, 041 mg/1
DO 6.35 mg/1
TSS 6 7. 3 mg/1
fecal coliform ; 0 . / /100 ml
pH /% z— f.t/ su
Suggested SOC limits:
flow a /1/0 mgd
BOD5 / 4/0 mg/1
mg/1
mg/1
/00 mg/1
/000 /100 mi
G-9 su
NH3
DO
TSS
fecal coliform
pH
C.
8"6 06
C wti� So hisk? 1
III. Previously Approved SOC flow a /) 6.7e) c`rA mgd
Approximate percent domestic /0 0 %
Approximate percent industrial %
Currently requested SOC flow Jr, 650 Q i ` mgd
percent domestic /0 6 %
percent industrial %
List industries and type of waste below: