NC0040797_Wasteload Allocation_19921019

NPDES DOCUHENT SCANNINL COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0040797
Henry Fork 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:
October 19, 1992
This document is printed on reuse paper - ignore any
content on the reYerse side

NPDES WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION
PERMIT NO.: NC0040797
PERMITTEE NAME: City of Hickory
FACILITY NAME: Henry Fork Wastewater Treatment Plant
Facility Status: Existing
Permit Status: Renewal
Major Minor
Pipe No.: 001
Design Capacity: 6.0 MGD
Domestic (% of Flow): 66 %
Industrial (% of Flow): 33
Comments:
RECEIVING STREAM: the Henry Fork River
Class: C
Sub -Basin: 03-08-35
Reference USGS Quad: E13NE
County: Catawba
Regional Office: Mooresville Regional Office
Previous Exp. Date: 10/31/92 Treatment Plant Class: class IV
Classification changes within three miles:
no change within three miles.
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Reviewed b
ts)
Randy Kepler
(please attach)
Date: 5
Date: /0 .s 92'
Date: i D ®GI
lq �Zf
Modeler
Date Rec.
(0 39
Drainage Area (mi2 ) /o,Z. Avg. Streamflow (cfs): /6 7
7Q10 (cfs) 2 7 Winter 7Q10 (cfs) 39 30Q2 (cfs) »o
Toxicity Limits: IWC -76 % Acute/Chronic
Instream Monitoring:
Parameters �,,.�,. 30 F.c�2 ��j. "'.-- G" ll' C.�.ti-
Upstream Y Location /od/t : - aQ
Downstream Y Location © / C-9/13
© /74 �, id e- SGC --.,4,, ---
Effluent
Characteristics
Summer
Winter
BOBS (mg/1)
e2.3
36 (613)
NH3 N (mg/1)
i
4✓ ((4)9)
D.O. (mom)
S
S (()9 )
TSS (mg/1)
30
-30 (` )
F. Col. (/100 ml)
zoo
Z 0o (iA47)
pH (SU)
G -1
G -' (c0
Fndn:v ( le)
C4IMi.Ap -viX)
7. P D9, ,y .4a x
7.1
Cwo,.,;/,,, ( /V
Ncfi/ (�/12)
195
393
/ (4.1.6x,ze)
,I (c�./e)
9e
Zo
mercw5 (v/,e) �
'14-7
B,f�ai`�MI"6 )� 7
0.054./dittA- J
615/ i/z
.^,
�� ,emu Q,
,��,
Tti;
Coments: 41j�'e"

Facility Name:
NPDES No.:
Type of Waste:
Facility Status:
Permit Status:
Receiving Stream:
Stream Classification:
Subbasin:
County:
Regional Office:
Requestor:
Date of Request:
Topo Quad:
FACT SHEET FOR WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Request # 6939
City of Hickory -Henry Fork WWTP
NC0040797
66% Domestic / 34% Industrial
Existing
Renewal
Henry Fork River
H, 1 5 ,992'
030835
Catawba
Mooresville
Kepler
5/18/92
E13NE
Wasteload Allocation Summary
(approach taken, correspondence with region, EPA, etc.)
Facility requesting renewal of existing permit. Technical Support recommends renewal of Permit
with additional limits for metals, endrin (pesticide), and monitoring requirements.
Color monitoring requirements attached. Note: Monitoring language may change prior to permit
issuance.
N. C. DEPT. OF NATURAL
RESOURCES AND ''F�
COMMUNITY DLYKLOPMEITA
Stream Characte0 5. [IF ENVI4('1:3 ENTIlf sJL9dEEME�
USGS # '"
Date:
1 CORESVILLE REGIONAL �f1CF/J
Drainage Area (mi2):
Summer 7Q10 (cfs):
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
Average Flow (cfs):
30Q2 (cfs):
IWC (%):
102
27
39
167
60
26
Special Schedule Requirements and additional comments from Reviewers:
Recommended by;
Reviewed by
Instream Assessment:
Regional Supervisor: /)
Permits & Engineering:
-2;
Date: 8/17/92_
P/a$/'z
Date: g o 1 a'
Date: V7/
Date: /Z61/ 2—
SEP 2 1' RETURN TO TECHNICAL SERVICES BY:

2
Fxisting Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
Recommended Limits:
Wasteflow (MGD):
BOD5 (mg/1):
NH3N (mg/1):
DO (mg/1):
TSS (mg/1):
Fecal Col. (/100 ml):
pH (SU):
Residual Chlorine (µg/1):
:
TP (mg/1):
TN (mg/1):
CONVENTIONAL PARAMETERS
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
6.0 6.0
23 30
9 nr
5 5
30 30
1000 1000
6-9 6-9
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
Monthly Average
Summer Winter
6.0 6.0
23 30
9 nr
5 5
30 30
200 200
6-9 6-9
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
monitor monitor
WQorEL
WQ
WQ
WQ
WQ
WQ
WQ
wig he rec�mmehcle�lpey Adn� e�a�i've
Limits Changes Due To: ,Parameter(s) Affected
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
Instream data
New regulations/standards/procedures Fecal Coliform
New facility information
(explanation of any modifications to past modeling analysis including new flows, rates, field data,
interacting discharges)
(See page 4 for miscellaneous and special conditions, if applicable)

3`
Type of Toxicity Test:
Existing Limit:
Recommended Limit:
Monitoring Schedule:
Existing Limits
Copper (µme):
Recommended Limits
TOXICS/METALS
Chronic Ceriodaphnia P/F
27%
26%
FEB MAY AUG NOV
Endrin (ng/1)•
Cadmium (14/1):
Chromium (14/1)•
Copper (µme):
Nickel (14/1):
Lead WI):
Zinc (14/1):
Cyanide (14/1):
Chloride (mg/1):
Mercury (4/1):
Fluoride(mg/1):
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
(ug/1)
Daily Max.
monitor
Daily Max. WQ or EL
7.8 WQ
7.8 WQ
195 WQ
monitor WQ
343 WQ
98 WQ
monitor WQ
20 WQ
monitor WQ
0.05 WQ
monitor WQ
112 WQ
Limits Changes Due To:
Change in 7Q10 data
Change in stream classification
Relocation of discharge
Change in wasteflow
New pretreatment information
Failing toxicity test
Other (onsite toxicity study, interaction, etc.)
Parameter(() Affected
Cd,Cr,Ni,Pb,Cn,Hg
Endrin, Bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
_X_ Parameter(s) are water quality limited. For some parameters, the available load capacity of
the immediate receiving water will be consumed. This may affect future water quality based
effluent limitations for additional dischargers within this portion of the watershed.
OR
No parameters are water quality limited, but this discharge may affect future allocations.

4
INSTREAM MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Upstream Location: 100 ft. g-sutfall_ �, �-- 9���fz,�,74)
Downstream Location: a mouth of Henry F A
Parameters: "Iiform,Condueti ty ,Color
Special instream monitoring locations or monitoring frequencies:
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION & SPECIAL CONDITIONS
Adequacy of Existing Treatment
Has the facility demonstrated the ability to meet the proposed new limits with existing treatment
facilities? Yes No
If no, which parameters cannot be met?
Would a "phasing in" of the new limits be appropriate? Yes No
If yes, please provide a schedule (and basis for that schedule) with the regional
office recommendations:
If no, why not?
Special Instructions or Conditions
Wasteload sent to EPA? (Major) (Y or N)
(If yes, then attach schematic, toxics spreadsheet, copy of model, or, if not modeled, then old
assumptions that were made, and description of how it fits into basinwide plan)
Additional Information attached? (Y or N) If yes, explain with attachments.

Facility Name
wcor,
Permit # A/c cfp g°7 9 7
Pipe # 4'4"/
CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT (QR''RLY)
(**Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F ata6 %,(g/ife 4,�`(' V See Part , Condition .)
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit chronic toxicity using test procedures outlined in:
1.) The North Carolina Ceriodaphnia chronic effluent bioassay procedure (North Carolina Chronic Bioassay
Procedure - Revised *September 1989) or subsequent versions.
The effluent concentration at which there may be no observable inhibition of reproduction or significant mortality
is A % (defined as treatment two in the North Carolina procedure document). The permit holder shall perform
quarterly monitoring using this procedure to establish compliance with the permit condition. The first test will be
pe ormed after thirty days from the effective date of this permit during the months of
AI
,4y AUG Ala . Effluent sampling for this testing shall be performed at the NPDES
permitted final effluent discharge below all treatment processes.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent Discharge
Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the month in which it was performed, using the parameter code TGP3B.
Additionally, DEM Form AT-1 (original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: Environmental Sciences Branch
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.C. 27607-6445
Test data shall be complete and accurate and include all supporting chemical/physical measurements performed in
association with the toxicity tests, as well as all dose/response data. Total residual chlorine of the effluent toxicity
sample must be measured and reported if chlorine is employed for disinfection of the waste stream.
Should any single quarterly monitoring indicate a failure to meet specified limits, then monthly monitoring will
begin immediately until such time that a single test is passed. Upon passing, this monthly test requirement will
revert to quarterly in the months specified above.
Should any test data from this monitoring requirement or tests performed by the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management indicate potential impacts to the receiving stream, this permit may be re -opened and
modified to include alternate monitoring requirements or limits.
NOTE: Failure to achieve test conditions as specified in the cited document, such as minimum control organism
survival and appropriate environmental controls, shall constitute an invalid test and will require immediate
retesting(within 30 days of initial monitoring event). Failure to submit suitable test results will constitute
noncompliance with monitoring requirements.
7Q10 a7 cfs
Permitted Flow 6. 0 MGD Recommended by:
IWC% 't
Basin & Sub -basin 673 3s
Receiving SyeAm �'" Date 71.t ' z
Countyf
QCLR Version 9191

L - s
'(57<6/k, / ;4
)v."1nt t✓
517- 23
, 42f r, 3 D
/o6
/6-e.X / CA)
;4_1 — 7
7 e��2
/076gr •
9.3
5.3h2-7
p.Z.lf3(9.2c)6o /5+0.
Firki5 co
4, /6 2 ,, Z
", 3 $r1.4
NoV
YA-uc-
A/L-S; iJ V g/ SCP ocT I 9co A.t /
r
FEW MAY /i$

f
r,
6J6<f/-7
a
f44d..e.�/ 4
Vi41
c-ic 71- o2 G-7 6.?
93c
a " (16r/e--
U6
%, G
9,5 c_7ic
(e_ 4iv E,/climi
(Wc C37i c-'z7�' J�z �,�
GS3�
�• � G� 9.3
*t(ia_ ‘1,1 70.00 vs
°'j-L`i 04 4- r/"iv E '- / 8 7o /
writ 9, 3 c_7
7.3G
40,‘
z 7 ,t/. 0,15-e •
avo ujte
2 7/ 7(6 otAi/
/2if
7,6 rnJ%�
ci/4-tc/t

1
;44t ift,"/c
e/YhA
idn,/aa Colitc-t-h4)4ePt s
�,S �2- �f�t}c� � AarC`T. 3 e.{s f /6 7 �� � S-92
Y. s .6
/0v3.7 c74
9,3c4
wt,,z__ 3 ; • 24,14,ii,,,tecti4
#44711 = (7.3 r' /47 (-)0Zivz) la)
9.3
17, i
�(9/YZ
\lie-44.4e_ A-6'
Z 33
A4.7),, .
AA._ 0.4.4r,
fri/543 ,
g:tit 6f.,�P.d k u„ Ao.e.-,7
OA it< Ar. '41,k/A-g (gkc
gr..) /AA, ea /it_
4/7_
a;„0 xze

STREAM DATA
INSTREAM SELF -MONITORING DATA
MONTHLY AVERAGES
Discharger:
Receiving Strea
Upstream Location:
DATE
Dec-91
Nov-91
Oct-91
Sep-91
Aug-91
JuI-91
Jun-91
May-91
Apr-91
Mar-91
Feb-91
Jan-91
Dec-90
Nov-90
Oct-90
Sep-90
Aug-90
JuI-90
Jun-90
May-90
Apr-90
Mar-90
Feb-90
Jan-90
Dec-89
Nov-89
Oct-89
Sep-89
Aug-89
JuI-89
Jun-89
May-89
Apr-89
Mar-89
Fqb-89
4-
Jan-89
TEMP
D.O.
• COND.
Permit No. AVCoo1p7f7
Sub -basin: GTBfS
Downstream Location:
FECAL COLT. C6coK, TEMP
l9
22-
,,9
• z
7,7
SS
Zdy
/6 z
.22
7.5
/73
2,
/7
A. I
S66
A y,z (57,4
D.O.
GOOD
FECAL CO co c02
lZ
Jz 9
1?
7- 7
23
�- Y
7, z
* 3
Z03
/7
12o
789
• 77
G6
87
No
9/
6�6
76
teet
76
/07 7y
Page 1

07/24/92 ver 3.1 TOXICS REVIEW
Facility: HICKORY -HENRY FORK WWTP
* - NPDES Permit No.: NC0040787
� L
Status (E, P, or M) : E
Permitted Flow: 6.0 mgd
• Actual Average Flow: 3.3 mgd
Subbasin: '030835
Receiving Stream: HENRY FORK RIVER I PRETREATMENT DATA I----EFLLUENT DATA ----
Stream Classification: C I ACTUAL PERMITTED)
7Q10: 27.0 cfs I Ind. + Ind. + 1 FREQUENCY
IWC: 25.62 % I Domestic PERMITTED Domestic 1 OBSERVED of Chronic
Stn'd / Bkg 1 Removal Domestic Act.Ind. Total Industrial Total 1 Eflluent Criteria
Pollutant AL Conc. 1 Eff. Load Load Load Load Load 1 Conc. Violations
(ug/1) (ug/1) 1 % (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) 1 (ug/1) (#vio/#sam)
Cadmium S 2.0 1 92% 0.1 0.0 0.13 1.3 1.410 1 8.0
Chromium S 50.0 1 89% 1.3 1.1 2.36 6.5 7.790 1 43.0 1 I
Copper AL 7.0 1 90% 1.6 0.0 1.59 0.8 2.420 1 98.0 1 N
Nickel S 88.0 1 39% 0.6 0.1 0.62 1.2 1.730 1 70.0 1 P
Lead S 25.0 1 81% 1.3 0.2 1.51 1.7 3.040 1 1 U
Zinc AL 50.0 I 89% 4.6 0.4 5.00 1.0 5.550 1 112.0 1 T
Cyanide S 5.0 1 59% 1.1 0.3 1.33 1.1 2.170 1 6.0
Mercury S 0.012 1 0% 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.000 1 2.0 1 S
Silver AL 0.06 1 0% 1 1 E
Selenium S 5.00 1 0% 1 1 C
Arsenic S 50.00 1 0% 1 I T
Phenols S NA 1 0% 1 1 I
Chloride AL 230.0 1 0% 1 291,000.0 1 0
Fluoride S 1,800.0 1 0% 1 1,870.0 1 N
Pollutant
I I
I I
ALLOWABLE PRDCT'D PRDCT'D PRDCT'D MONITOR/LIMIT I--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S--
Effluent Effluent Effluent Instream 1 Recomm'd
Conc. using using Conc. Based on Based on Based on 1 FREQUENCY INSTREAM
Allowable CHRONIC ACTUAL PERMIT using ACTUAL PERMITTED OBSERVED 1 Eff. Mon. Monitor.
Load Criteria Influent Influent OBSERVED Influent Influent Effluent 1 based on Recomm'd 2
(#/d) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) Loading Loading Data 1 OBSERVED (YES/NO)
Cadmium S 1 4.33 7.806 0.372 4.096 2.05 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 A
Chromium S 1 78.68 195.161 9.427 31.116 11.02 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 N
Copper AL 1 12.12 27.323 5.780 8.788 25.11 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Weekly YES 1 A
Nickel S 1 24.97 343.484 13.734 38.321 17.93 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 L
Lead S 1 22.78 97.581 10.391 20.974 0.00 Limit Limit 1 1 Y
Zinc AL 1 78.68 195.161 19.960 22.169 28.69 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Monthly NO 1 S
Cyanide S 1 2.11 19.516 19.757 32.307 1.54 Limit Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 I
Mercury S 1 0.00 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.51 Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 S
Silver AL 1 0.01 0.234 0.000 0.000 0.00 1
Selenium S 1 0.87 19.516 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 R
Arsenic S 1 8.65 195.161 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 E
Phenols S 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 S
Chloride AL 1 897.742 74553.72 S.O.P 1 NCAC YES 1 U
Fluoride S 1 7025.806 479.09 1 NCAC NO 1 L
I I I T
I i I S

city of hickory -henry fork
AMMONIA ANALYSIS
7Q10: 27.0000 cfs
NH3 Effl. Conc: 9.0000 mg/1
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) : 1000.00 ug/1
Upstream NH3 Conc.: 220.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 6.0000 MGD
Predicted NH3 Downstream: 2469.42 ug/1
2.469421 mg/1
NH3 Limit: 3264.516 ug/1
3.264516 mg/1
AMMONIA ANALYSIS (WINTER)
7Q10: 39.0000 cfs
NH3 Effl. Conc: 9.0000 mg/1
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) : 1800.00 ug/1
Upstream NH3 Conc.: 220.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 6.0000 MGD
Predicted NH3 Downstream: 1910.56 ug/1
1.910559 mg/1
NH3 Limit: 8425.806 ug/1
8.425806 mg/1

•
■ •
hickory -henry fork
CHLORINE ANALYSIS
7Q10: 27.0000 cfs
CL2 Effl. Conc: 2.7500 mg/1
AL (17/19 ug/1) : 17.0000 ug/1
Upstream CL2 Conc.: 0.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 6.0000 MGD
Predicted CL2 Downstream: 704.55 ug/1
0.704545 mg/1
CL2 Limit: 66.35483 ug/1
0.066354 mg/1

WI IOLE EFFLUENT TOXICITY TESTING 0[SELF-MONITORING SUMMARY] Thu, May 14, 1992
YEAR JAN FRB MAR APR MAY JUI JUL AUO SEP OCT NOV DEC
Y '88 — (PAIL) — NR (FAIL) — — PASS — — PASS —
'89 — PASS — — PASS — — PAIL — — FAIL
'90 — PASS PAIL PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS FAIL FAIL PASS PA- SS
'91 PASS PASS — — PASS — — PASS — - FAIL PASS
'92 — PASS — —
Y 18(—) FAIL NR (—) PASS — — PASS — — PASS
PACo!.ITY R`QUIRF.MLNT
HICKORY -HENRY FORK WWI? PJRM CHR LIM:27%
MESS: NC0040797 SubBuim CTB3S Begin 11/1/87
County: CATAWBA Rngion:MRO Non -Comp:
PP: 6.00 SOCJJOC Rcq:
7Q10: 24.90 IW C(%): 27.19
HICKORY-N.E. WWTP
NPDBSS: NC0020401
County: CATAWBA
PF: 6.00
7Q l0: 60.00
PERM CHR LIM:13%
SuhBasim CT B32 Begin 8/1/89
Reg)on:MRO Not -Carp:
SOCJJOC Roq:
rWC(%):13.4
Prer1 cn y Q P/1'
Months: NOV PT11B MAY AUG
Pregnancy: Q P/1' A
Months: JAN APR JUL OCT
89 —
'90 PASS
'91 PASS
'92 PASS
HIGH POINT CARP. CENTER PERM tail LIM:Ll'h tunny)
NPDES/: NC0046035 SubBum: YAD07 Begin: 11/1/90 Pruittmey Q P/P A
County: FORSYTII Region:WSRO Nc .Ccmp: Months: MAR JUN SBP DEC
PP': 0.01 SOCAOC Rol:
7Q10:0.06 IWC(%):20.5
__
19
90
'91 -
'92 -
IIGH POINT EAST WW1? PERM CHR LIM:96% Y
18 -
719 I
NPDE.SI: NC0024210 SubBasin CPF08 Bogor 9/1/87 Proqumcy. Q P/P
I
County: GUB.PORD Region: W SRO Non -Camp: Months: OCT JAN APR JUL
90
'91 1
PP: 16.00 SOCPOC Reg:
'92 1
7Q10:1.00 IWC(%):96.11
Y
18 I
191
IIUl{POINT \VESTSIDE WWTP PERM CHR LIM:93%
NPDBS 0: NC0024228 SabBuircYAD07 Bcetc 5/1/89 Frogrm'-y QP/F A
'90 I
County: DAVIDSON Ragiac:WSRO Non -Comp: Months: JAN APR JUL OCT
'91 '.
PP: 6.20 SOCJJOC Rag:
'92
7Q10:0.67 rWC(%) 93.47
HILL PETROLEUM CO. PERM:48 FIR AC MONTT EPIS (GRAB)
'88
'89
NPOESII:NO3004723 SubBam: Bcps9/1/89 Prcquary 5OWD
County: MEO(LENBURG Ragloat:MRO Non -Comp: Months:
90
'91
PP: NA SOC/IOC Rol:
'92
7QI0: 7 IWC(%):7
HILL PETROLEUM COJSELMA PERM:48 HR AC MONIT EPIS (GRAB)
'88
19
NPDP.SI: NC0076457 SabBasm NEli 02 Bcgi r 2/2 90 Proq° cy 30WD(
'90
Coaay: JOHNSTON R,gion:RRO Non -Comp: Months:
'91
PP: NA SOC/IOC Req:
'92
7Q10.0.0 IWC(%):103.0
IELLS BOROUGH WWI? PERM CHR R L1M 96%
'88
'89
NPDFS*: NC 026433 SubBssic NEU91 Bogis4/3(YS9 lioquency. Q P/F A
'90
County: ORANGE Region: RRO Nos -Camp: Months: FEB MAY AUG NOV
PP: 3.00 SOC/JOC Roq
'91
'92
7Q10:0.18 IWC(%):96.27
HOECHST CFLANESEJNFEDMRE RD PERM AC LIM:42% LC50 DAP 48 FIR (GRAB)
18
19
NPDMSI: NC0079898 SubAuin: YA D Bognc 11/1/91 Frequency- Q A
90
County: ROWAN Regjon:MRO Non -Camp: Months: JAN APR JUL OCT
'91
PP:0.288 SOC/JOC Roq:
'92
7Q10. 106 IWC (%):0.419
11OEO-IST CELANESE/NEEDMRE RD PFRMTT ACUTE LIMIf:42% LC50 DM'HNID 4 }DR (GRAB)
'88
NPDESI: NC0079898 SabBuiru YA D04 Aegis 11/1/91 Fmquerc : Q
County: ROWAN Rorke:MR° Nnn Comup: Months: JAN APR JUL OCT
9C
'91
PP: 0.288 SOC/JOC Rog:
'9:
7010. 106 IWC(%):0.419
PASS — — PASS — — PASS — PASS — —
- PASS — — PASS — — PASS
- PASS — — PASS — — PASS — —
- PASS — —
— PASS — — FAIL PASS — PASS
— FAIL PASS -
- (PASS) — PASS (PASS) PASS PASS (PASS) PASS FAIL PASS
ASS,F PASS PASS PASS,P PASS PASS PASS PASS PAIL PASS PASS —
'A1(JPAS — — PASS FAR. FAIL FAIL PASS,P FAIL PASS PASS —
'ASS FAIL PASS PASS — — PASS — — PASS —
'AL — — FAIL — —
—) — FAIL (—) PAIL PASS (PASS) PASS PASS (PASS) FAIL FAIL
'ASS,P PASS PASS,P PASS,P PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PAIL,P PASS
ASS — — PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS,P PASS PASS PASS PASS
PASS PASS PASS PASS — — PASS — - PASS
ASS — — FAIL — —
P15'57
>10'
NONE.
90• 119• — >90.60• — —
PASS
PASS
(NR) — — (—) — FAIL (—) — — — PASS —
— NR FAIL — FAIL — PAIL PAIL PAIL PAIL PASS —
PASS NR — — PAIL PAIL NR PAIL FAIL PASS PAIL
PASS PASS — — PASS — — PASS — — FAIL PAI.
PASS FAIL PASS —
NR NR NR
hR NR NR
0 2consecutive failures = significantnmcompl imam Y Pre1988 dos available
LEGEND: d M-Monthly; BM-Almmthl SA-AtwaOy;
PP=Permitted flow (MGD), 7QI0=Aeceiving .rant low now ail.riem (chi), IWC%=Intream wasto concentration, llogimsFurt month required, Froqumtiya(Moniuring (rogues -my): IQ -Quarto y; Y• Y•
OW D-Only whim discharging: D-Disu otimrcd monitoring roquuune nt: IS -Conducting ink -pendent study), P/F=Paaa/Fail chronic bioassay. AcssAcun, Qv=Clunnic, A=rlaartotly mautcting macasoa to monthly upon single (Minn,
Ily.us NPtd ion): I r-1'.tlr.ad Minnow,' Ws-26101614nu..p., my.Mys41 shrimp, (7,V.(:Mmic v.lue, I' .Mrxtalhy of stated peroentyp at hlghost ernreraatim, stsPerfo wwd by DAM Aq Tot (hoop, bt-Bad Rost),
(Reporting N,a.tlni):I.--=Dsts i cct uequhed, NA -Not repeotod, ( )-Ito8oni gof Quutarh (facility Activity Status ):II-lmctive.N=Nowly Inuod(fo construct), I I=Activo but not dlschsrgm8)
27

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
September 8, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Randy Kepler
THRU: Mike Scoville AO
Carla Sanderso
FROM: Jackie Nowell
SUBJECT: Downstream Monitoring Sites for Hickory - Henry Fork WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0040797
Stanly County
The Technical Support Branch has reviewed the August 6th letter from Mr.
Twiggs concerning the subject facility. After reviewing the area downstream of
Hickory's outfall and studying the Level B model output, we recommend that the
facility collect samples at two downstream sites. Since our model results indi-
cate that the dissolved oxygen sag occurs at the mouth of Henry Fork, and data
can no longer be obtained at that site, we recommend getting data above and
below the sag point to determine the water quality impact of the Henry Fork
facility. With the planned expansion of the Henry Fork WWTP to 9.0 MGD and pos-
sibly to.12 MGD in the future, there is justification for the establishment of
two sites. The first site is State Road 1143 crossing the Henry Fork River, and
the second site is Highway 10 crossing the South Fork Catawba River.
Please modify the permit to reflect the revised downstream monitoring sites.
If there are any questions, please contact me.
cc: Colleen Sullins
Rex Gleason
WLA File

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Permits and Engineering/ NPDES Unit
August 19, 1992
Memorandum ��
4y�Ya, `� m �o
TO: Technical Support Branch 0/3 Wo1-
Mooresville Regional Office ���'
r
FROM: Randy Kepler `� 13
,<<
SUBJECT: City of Hickory
Henry Fork Wastewater TP/ NC0040797
Stanly County
Attached is a letter sent to us requesting a new monitoring location. Please
comment and return to me.
Thank You

CITY OF HICKORY
POST OFFICE BOX 398 • HICKORY, NORTH CAROLINA 28603 • 704-322-2605
Public Utilities Department
August 6. 1992
Mr. Donald Safr i t, Supervisor
NC' DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
AND NATURAL AL RESOURCES —, - 2
PC Box 29535 .- �•r--'
Raleigh, \C . 75_6--i0535 4m1Pm.�3 :�_
a , -
Dear vIr. . Sa f r i t : . =1.::
';;
At the last State inspection of the Henry Fork Was teti eatmalit 1-
P lant . the inspector noted that the actual downstream sampl g -..
point was different from the permitted downstream sampling point.
Since that time all downstream samples have been taken at the point
the State considered the permitted downstream point.
On July 30, i '92 when we went to collect the downstream
sample, the landowner told us we could no longer cross his property
to get to the Henry Fork River. Since it is not feasible to go to
the other side of the Henry Fork River because we cannot cross the
Jacob Fork River, and because of the lack of access above the
permitted point, we need your advise as to where to collect the
downstream sample.
We look forward to hearing from you soon concerning this
matter.
Sincerely,
\314;10
Wm. 'Jerr, Tw i g g s
Public Utilities Director
b ij
pc: Watkins Bradberry, HP Plant Supervisor
Keith S. Buff, PU Plants Superintendent

v

Asheville
704/251-6208
Fayetteville
919/486-1541
Mooresville
704/663-1699
Raleigh
919/571-4700
Washington
919/946-6481
Wilmington
919/395-3900
Winston-Salem
919/896-7007
el
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Regional Offices
Mr. Ray Hamilton
HDR, Engineering, Inc.
Suite 1400
128 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, N.C. 28202-5001
August 31, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Acting Director
Subject: City of Hickory - Henry Fork WWTP Expansion
NPDES Permit No. NC0040797
Catawba County
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
Per your telephone request on August 14th, speculative effluent limits
for the proposed expansion of the Henry Fork WWTP have been completed by
staff of the Water Quality Section. In order to receive final permit lim-
its, a formal application will have to be submitted to the Division's Permits
and Engineering Unit. Per North Carolina's anti -degradation policy (15A NCAC
2B.0201 (c)(1)), each application for an NPDES permit or NPDES permit expan-
sion to discharge treated waste will require documentation of an effort to
consider non -discharge alternatives pursuant to North Carolina Regulation 15A
NCAC 2H.0105 (c) (2) .
It should also be noted that an expansion of more than 0.5 MGD for an
existing facility, will require that an environmental document be prepared by
the applicant. The N.C. Environmental Policy Act and its associated rules
require that an environmental assessment and Fonsi (Finding of No Significant
Impact) be prepared before the permit for expansion is issued. Ifthe permit
is controversial,there is a possibility that an environmental impact state-
ment (EIS) might be needed.
After consultation with the Mooresville Regional Office, it was deter-
mined to be beneficial to evaluate speculative limits for 9.0 MGD and 12.0
MGD. Based on the information available, effluent limits for both wasteflows
were developed. The tentative limits for conventional constituents are as
follows:
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Letter to Mr. Hamilton
- page 2 -
Summer Winter
Wasteflow (MGD) 9.0 9.0
BOD5 (mg/1) 19 30
NH3-N (mg/1) 2.5 6.2
DO (mg/1) 5 nr
TSS (mg/1) 30 30
Fecal Coliform (#/100m1) 200 200
pH (SU) 6-9 6-9
Summer Winter
Wasteflow (MGD) 12.0 12.0
BOD5 (mg/1) 15 30
NH3-N (mg/1) 2.1 5.1
DO (mg/1) 5 nr
TSS (mg/1) 30 30
Fecal Coliform (#/100m1) 200 200
pH (SU) 6-9 6-9
It should be noted that the tentative NH3 limits are based on protecting
Henry Fork River against instream toxicity. North Carolina is currently
evaluating all NPDES dischargers for ammonia toxicity following the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance to protect the waters for an instream
criteria of 1 mg/1 in the summer and 1.8 mg/1 in the winter, under 7Q10 flow
conditions.
Based on data submitted to the Section's Pretreatment Unit, effluent lim-
its were developed for metals at the expanded wasteflows. The tentative daily
maximum limits are:
Wasteflow
9.0 MGD 12.0 MGD
Cadmium 6.0 ug/1 4.9 ug/1
Chromium 147 ug/1 123 ug/1
Nickel 258 ug/1 216 ug/1
Lead 73 ug/1 61 ug/1
Cyanide 15 ug/1 12 ug/1
Mercury 0.04 ug/1 0.03 ug/1
Bis (2-ethyl-
hexyl) phthalate 77 ug/1 59 ug/1
Monthly effluent monitoring requirements will also be included at both
wasteflows for copper, zinc, chloride, and fluoride. It should be noted that
a pesticide, endrin, was detected in the annual pollutant scan. It is not
likely that endrin came from any of the City's industrial sources, however
the concentration reported (0.7 ug/l) merits some attention. We do not rec-
ommend a limit at this time, however Hickory does need to continue to monitor
for its presence. We recommend quarterly effluent monitoring for one year,
after which we will reevaluate the need for additional monitoring. We encourage
Hickory to continue to educate the public and other users not to dispose
of pesticides or other household chemicals directly into the sewer system.

Letter to Mr. Hamilton
- page 3 -
The instream waste concentrations (IWCs) at 9.0 and 12.0 MGD are 34% and
41%, respectively. A chronic toxicity testing requirement with quarterly
monitoring will remain a condition of the NPDES permit. The facility should
continue instream monitoring above and below the outfall pipe for the parame-
ters of temperature, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform and conductivity.
Under a relatively new Division of Environmental Management (DEM) proce-
dure, dechlorination and chlorine limits are now recommended for all new or
expanding dischargers proposing the use of chlorine for disinfection. An
acceptable level of chlorine in your effluent is 28 ug/1 for protection
against acute toxicity. The process of chlorination/dechlorination or an
alternate form of disinfection - such as ultraviolet radiation - should allow
the facility to comply with the total residual chlorine limit.
DEM is currently planning a basinwide water quality management initia-
tive. Our schedule for implementation in the Catawba River Basin is set for
1995. The plan will address all sources of point and nonpoint pollutants
where deemed necessary to protect or restore water quality standards. In
addressing interaction of sources, wasteload allocations may be affected.
Those facilities that already have high levels of treatment technology are
least likely to be affected. The City of Hickory may want to consider the
implementation of this basinwide strategy in planning its expansion, as
opposed to limits proposed here which only address localized receiving waters
of the Henry Fork River.
Basin management plans are likely to develop strategies to address docu-
mented water quality problems. Our records indicate that color problems
exist at. the Henry Fork WWTP at this time. The City should note that DEM is
evaluating the state color standard and is considering potential management
actions. Therefore, you may wish to begin building a data -base of influent
and effluent color (we recommend monitoring in units of ADMI).
This information should provide some assistance in your planning endeav-
ors. As previously mentioned, final NPDES effluent limitations will be
determined after a formal permit application has been submitted to the Divi-
sion. If there are any additional questions concerning this matter, please
feel free to contact Trevor Clements or Jackie Nowell of my staff at (919)
733-5083.
SWT/jmn
cc: Trevor Clements
Don Safrit
Rex Gleason
Bill Hoffman
Central Files
Sincerely,
Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section

I�r
N17j
3/ 19 9
..4
/99,3

l 4,101
9, 7/s•
«,
fps ; a 3 ' C'�aY = �� (,�,tiet = z)
Nfixrp = f ' /+J&s go. S
7trawri FF(. j T clm f r5
Ca.9,U M& IS�MM�✓�
5X7S = /9 hyQ
/ O5 = /7 3/,2
4.113 = 8.5-,3 / 2-
/s _ 2-2 rD,fi-
AJN 3 7 ylja
9. 116-2 (�, f�✓
13s6 S = 30 n j /t
Q /?M 629
=
36 /3 u

(gw i o Al , : /3, 95" c7/' /z .tic _
(./-3,95-c6 t -27 6)(-2-2,5*
C 9 xf�q /.r. 9.5-'c
it- e6
=.45/` s9
/Y.9�c{r
r.tAl '- CAB. G c_1 74. 7 c6)� )/2 9 4.5 /L ! ("AV
11;5 l a - y/`l�xc�l /!% Ill _ �3. 9 5 f- / 7 cr )(r z vf7.e) _ /4.%
Adoe /3. 3 sr,
{3
C7fS (2- E15749 `i`rffsl. _ /4 f/G7c72(<5, 9z 0/.Q) =
C/3.95 c1»1/L
/s,�.�
Fo :11, Car •1L' 2- C_ or
5, 2 7 tj /L _ n,,,,Y, i �w -

M
.!.fr . .i
1♦
MODEL RESULTS
.pischarger : TOWN OF HICKORY
:• Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK
SUMMER
MODEL EXPANSION TO 12 MGD
BOD5=15, NH3=7.5, DO=5
The End D.O. is 6.26 mg/l.
° The End CBOD is 6.54 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 5.78 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.06 3.60 1
Reach 1 30.00 33.75 5.00 12.00000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
•
:•Discharger : TOWN OF HICKORY Subbasin : 030835
Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK Stream Class: C
•S;ummer 7Q10 : 27.0 Winter 7Q10 : 39.0
-Design Temperature: 25.0
!LENGTH! SLOPE' VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd I Kd 1 Ka I Ka I KN I
I mile 1 ft/mil fps 1 ft (design l @204 (design l @204 (design'
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
Segment 1 I 3.601 3.881 0.540 1 2.41 10.29 10.23 1 2.05 1 1.841 0.44
Reach 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
Segment 1 I 4.501 3.881 0.661 12.88 1 0.29 1 0.23 1 2.52 1 2.261 0.44
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Flow 1 CBOD 1 NBOD 1 D.O.
I cfs 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 18.600 1 30.000 1 33.750 1 5.000
Headwaters) 27.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.440
Tributary 1 0.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff 1 0.830 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste 1 0.000 I 0.000 1 0.000 1 0.000
Tributary 132.000 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff 1 0.830 I 2.000 1 1.000 1 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

Seg
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I Seg
# I
#
SUMMER
MODEL EXPANSION TO 12 MGD
BOD5=15, NH3=7.5, DO=5
Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I
1 0.00 6.44 13.42 14.36 45.60
1 0.10 6.37 13.36 14.26 45.68
1 0.20 6.31 13.29 14.17 45.77
1 0.30 6.24 13.23 14.07 45.85
1 0.40 6.18 13.17 13.98 45.93
1 0.50 6.12 13.10 13.89 46.01
1 0.60 6.06 13.04 13.79 46.10
1 0.70 6.00 12.98 13.70 46.18
1 0.80 5.95 12.92 13.61 46.26
1 0.90 5.89 12.85 13.52 46.35
1 1.00 5.84 12.79 13.43 46.43
1 1.10 5.80 12.73 13.34 46.51
1 1.20 5.75 12.67 13.26 46.60
1 1.30 5.70 12.61 13.17 46.68
1 1.40 5.66 12.55 13.08 46.76
1 1.50 5.62 12.49 12.99 46.84
1 1.60 5.58 12.43 12.91 46.93
1 1.70 5.54 12.37 12.82 47.01
1 1.80 5.50 12.32 12.74 47.09
1 1.90 5.47 12.26 12.65 47.18
1 2.00 5.43 12.20 12.57 47.26
1 2.10 5.40 12.14 12.49 47.34
1 2.20 5.37 12.08 12.41 47.43
1 2.30 5.34 12.03 12.32 47.51
1 2.40 5.31 11.97 12.24 47.59
1 2.50 5.28 11.91 12.16 47.67
1 2.60 5.26 11.86 12.08 47.76
1 2.70 5.23 11.80 12.00 47.84
1 2.80 5.21 11.75 11.93 47.92
1 2.90 5.19 11.69 11.85 48.01
1 3.00 5.17 11.64 11.77 48.09
1 3.10 5.14 11.58 11.69 48.17
1 3.20 5.13 11.53 11.62 48.26
1 3.30 5.11 11.48 11.54 48.34
1 3.40 5.09 11.42 11.46 48.42
1 3.50 5.07 11.37 11.39 48.50
1 3.60 5.06 11.32 11.32 48.59
2 3.60 6.00 7.62 7.22 80.59
2 4.10 6.03 7.49 7.04 81.00
2 4.60 6.05 7.36 6.87 81.42
2 5.10 6.08 7.24 6.70 81.83
2 5.60 6.11 7.11 6.54 82.25
2 6.10 6.14 6.99 6.38 82.66
2 6.60 6.17 6.88 6.22 83.08
2 7.10 6.20 6.76 6.07 83.49
2 7.60 6.23 6.65 5.93 83.91
2 8.10 6.26 6.54 5.78 84.32
Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I

5
Facility /4 ./ .. t// Wasteflow (MGD) /2, ° 4/4
Summer/Winter (circle one)
■
•
__N.■■i■■■■_._u_.■__■■■N■
ON
1111
Ni N■MNIN■NN■■w■N■■N■N■...ii
NN■N■N■■■■■■■■N■N■■■■■■■N■
MNN■■N■■N■■NNNN■■IIlliI_M_
w�N■■■■NN■N■INuuw
wN�■■NN■NNN■wN■w■■N■NN��■
-�w�w�N�NN�:■-�twi��■■�i■
N►�NNN■NN■N■wN■NN■N■N■■■■■NNN
N■■■■■N■■N■wN■■■■N■N■■
■■ MI N■■■IN■N■■■■NN■N■w■■■N■
w■i■MN■■■w■NNNw■•11N111111Mw
N�N■N■■■NNNN_N■N■■N■
■\r■■N■■NNNNr■■■w■■■N
■■■■N■■N■■■■■■Nnw■n■w■■N
N�■wN■NN■N■■w■■N■■■■N■■■NN
N■�NI■■N■■NNN■U■NN■■■N■n■N■
■■NNrNNNNNN■I■N■N■rN■■N■NNN
IN 1111 11111111111111111111111111111111111wM�_ ■
Nr■■■NNN■NNN■■N■NUINi■ii
1111 ••■■w••■■w■■NN■■■■■NN
IM
■w■N-■N■N■iiwMil�i■1111N NNN iNN■
NNNN■■NN1MIN■NNw■w_■■■■■n■
r�■w■■■■■r■■w■■N■■■■
�■111111■■NMN©N®N■wN1111■N■oo■
.?.:■ENEMIN° ■: CN
■N ■■■■■N■N ■■ ■N■ MN
■ iii■i■®i■®■ii i i®iNE i iwN■■■i■
N■N■11NNNIMMI M ■■■N■■
■■■•NNN N■_■■■N■■■■
Nei Ni_■NN■■NN RN __-• ■N■■■■
i°N■■■N ■Nr■■■■■■■■
iwn■wNN■NNn�NN■N■N��■�
■■i■111111 iiNNNii ii■■■iiiN
!iE!IUi!L1iiIi!!
NH3-N (mg/1)
Potential effluent limit. combinations:
/Ivx CRoO : 7?
B 0 NH -N 1 Nrlo)
G83� ; go 1Jgb`o— 13.0 / +3 = a, 4 3
C ' b iV�3� , 5y. o P�Fr3 = 1 Z- 4 .,) 5 (2 2 . S)
($3) ._ 6 C27)
1 S '� 7.5 03.75/

A 08/24/92 ver 3.1 T OXICS REVIEW
Facility: HICKORY -HENRY FORK WWTP
.
NPDES Permit No.: NC0040787
• Status (E, P, or M) : E
Permitted Flow: 12.0 mgd
• , Actual Average Flow: 3.3 mgd
Subbasin: '030835
Receiving Stream: HENRY FORK RIVER 1 PRETREATMENT DATA 1----EFLLUENT DATA---- 1
Stream Classification: C 1 ACTUAL PERMITTEDI
7Q10: 27.0 cfs I Ind. + Ind. + 1 FREQUENCY 1
IWC: 40.79 % 1 Domestic PERMITTED Domestic 1 OBSERVED of Chronic)
Stn'd / Bkg 1 Removal Domestic Act.Ind. Total Industrial Total 1 Eflluent Criteria 1
Pollutant AL Conc. 1 Eff. Load Load Load Load Load 1 Conc. Violations)
(ug/1) (ug/1) 1 Is (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (t/d) (#/d) 1 (ug/1) (#vio/#sam))
Cadmium S 2.0 1 92% 0.1 0.0 0.13 1.3 1.410 1 8.0
Chromium S 50.0 1 89% 1.3 1.1 2.36 6.5 7.790 1 43.0 1 I
Copper AL 7.0 1 90% 1.6 0.0 1.59 0.8 2.420 1 98.0 1 N
Nickel S 88.0 1 39% 0.6 0.1 0.62 1.2 1.730 1 70.0 1 P
Lead S 25.0 1 81% 1.3 0.2 1.51 1.7 3.040 1 1 U
Zinc AL 50.0 1 89% 4.6 0.4 5.00 1.0 5.550 1 112.0 1 T
Cyanide S 5.0 1 59% 1.1 0.3 1.33 1.1 2.170 1 6.0
Mercury S 0.012 1 0% 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.000 1 2.0 1 S
Silver AL 0.06 1 0t 1 1 E
Selenium S 5.00 1 0* 1 1 C
Arsenic S 50.00 1 0% 1 1 T
Phenols S NA 1 0% 1 1 I
Chloride AL 230.0 1 0% 1 291,000.0 1 0
Fluoride S 1,800.0 1 0% 1 1,870.0 1 N
( ALLOWABLE PRDCT'D PRDCT'D PRDCT'D MONITOR/LIMIT 1--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S--
i Effluent Effluent Effluent Instream 1 Recomm'd
Conc. using using Conc. Based on Based on Based on 1 FREQUENCY INSTREAM
1 Allowable CHRONIC ACTUAL PERMIT using ACTUAL PERMITTED OBSERVED 1 Eff. Mon. Monitor.
Pollutant Load Criteria Influent Influent OBSERVED Influent Influent Effluent 1 based on Recomm'd ?
(#/d) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) Loading Loading Data 1 OBSERVED (YES/NO)
Cadmium S 1 4.33 4.903 0.372 4.096 3.26 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 A
Chromium S 1 78.68 122.581 9.427 31.116 17.54 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 N
Copper AL 1 12.12 17.161 5.780 8.788 39.97 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Weekly YES 1 A
Nickel S 1 24.97 215.742 13.734 38.321 28.55 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 L
Lead S 1 22.78 61.290 10.391 20.974 0.00 Limit Limit 1 1 Y
Zinc AL 1 78.68 122.581 19.960 22.169 45.68 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Monthly YES 1 S
Cyanide S 1 2.11 12.258 19.757 32.307 2.45 Limit Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 I
Mercury S 1 0.00 0.029 0.000 0.000 0.82 Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 S
Silver AL 1 0.01 0.147 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 I
Selenium S 1 0.87 12.258 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 R
Arsenic S 1 8.65 122.581 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 E
Phenols S 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 S
Chloride AL 1 563.871 118697.37 S.O.P 1 NCAC YES 1 U
Fluoride S 1 4412.903 762.76 1 NCAC NO 1 L
1 I I T
1 I S

•
hickory -henry fork wwtp
AMMONIA ANALYSIS
7Q10: 27.0000 cfs
NH3 Effl. Conc: 9.0000 mg/1
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) : 1000.00 ug/1
Upstream NH3 Conc.: 220.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 12.0000 MGD
Predicted NH3 Downstream: 3801.32 ug/1
3.801315 mg/1
NH3 Limit: 2132.258 ug/1
2.132258 mg/1
AMMONIA ANALYSIS (WINTER)
7Q10: 39.0000 cfs
NH3 Effl. Conc: 9.0000 mg/1
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) : 1800.00 ug/1
Upstream NH3 Conc.: 220.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 12.0000 MGD
Predicted NH3 Downstream: 3055.21 ug/1
3.055208 mg/1
NH3 Limit: 5112.903 ug/1
5.112903 mg/1

-"_' Hickory _ Henry Fork WWTP
oz
.
CHLORINE
7Q10:
CL2 Effl. Conc:
AL (17/19 ug/1) :
Upstream CL2 Conc.:
Design Flow:
Predicted CL2 Downstream:
CL2 Limit:
27.0000
0.0000
17.0000
0.0000
12.0000
0.00
0
41.67741
0.041677
ANALYSIS
cfs
mg/1
ug/1
ug/1
MGD
ug/1
mg/1
ug/1
mg/1

•
.Discharger
MODEL RESULTS
: TOWN OF HICKORY
`Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK
SUMMER
MODEL FOR 9.0 MGD: BOD5=18,
NH3=8, DO=5
The End D.O. is 6.34 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 6.56 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 4.92 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 5.07 3.60 1
Reach 1 38.00 36.00 5.00 9.00000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
• Discharger : TOWN OF HICKORY Subbasin : 030835
Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK Stream Class: C
`Summer 7Q10 : 27.0 Winter 7Q10 : 39.0
' Design Temperature: 25.0
!LENGTH' SLOPE! VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd 1 Ka 1 Ka 1 KN 1
mile I ft/mil fps 1 ft Idesign l @201 Idesign l @201/2 Idesign'
I 1 1 I I I I I I
Segment 1 I 3.601 3.881 0.499 1 2.38 10.29 10.23 11.90 I 1.701 0.44
Reach 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 1 4.50) 3.881 0.633 12.86 1 0.29 10.23 1 2.41 1 2.161 0.44
Reach 2 I I 1 I I 1 1 I I
I Flow 1 CBOD I NBOD 1 D.O. 1
cfs 1 mg/1 I mg/l 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 1 13.950 138.000 136.000 I 5.000
Headwaters) 27.000 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
Tributary 1 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff I 0.830 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 132.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff I 0.830 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 7.440
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

.
r'j Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O.
1 1 0.00 6.61
1 1 0.10 6.53
: 1 1 0.20 6.46
1 1 0.30 6.38
1 1 0.40 6.31
1 1 0.50 6.24
1 1 0.60 6.18
1 1 0.70 6.12
1 1 0.80 6.05
1 1 0.90 6.00
1 1 1.00 5.94
1 1 1.10 5.89
1 1 1.20 5.83
1 1 1.30 5.78
1 1 1.40 5.74
1 1 1.50 5.69
1 1 1.60 5.64
1 1 1.70 5.60
1 1 1.80 5.56
1 1 1.90 5.52
1 1 2.00 5.48
1 1 2.10 5.45
1 1 2.20 5.41
1 1 2.30 5.38
1 1 2.40 5.35
1 1 2.50 5.32
1 1 2.60 5.29
1 1 2.70 5.26
1 1 2.80 5.23
1 1 2.90 5.21
1 1 3.00 5.19
1 1 3.10 5.16
1 1 3.20 5.14
1 1 3.30 5.12
1 1 3.40 5.10
1 1 3.50 5.08
1 1 3.60 5.07
1 2 3.60 6.07
1 2 4.10 6.09
1 2 4.60 6.12
1 2 5.10 6.15
1 2 5.60 6.18
1 2 6.10 6.21
1 2 6.60 6.24
1 2 7.10 6.27
1 2 7.60 6.31
1 2 8.10 6.34
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O.
SUMMER
MODEL FOR 9.0 MGD: BOD5=18,
NH3=8, DO=5
CBOD I NBOD I Flow I
14.26 12.92 40.95
14.19 12.83 41.03
14.12 12.74 41.12
14.04 12.64 41.20
13.97 12.55 41.28
13.90 12.46 41.36
13.82 12.37 41.45
13.75 12.28 41.53
13.68 12.20 41.61
13.61 12.11 41.70
13.54 12.02 41.78
13.47 11.93 41.86
13.40 11.85 41.95
13.33 11.76 42.03
13.26 11.68 42.11
13.19 11.59 42.19
13.12 11.51 42.28
13.06 11.43 42.36
12.99 11.35 42.44
12.92 11.27 42.53
12.86 11.19 42.61
12.79 11.11 42.69
12.72 11.03 42.78
12.66 10.95 42.86
12.59 10.87 42.94
12.53 10.79 43.02
12.47 10.72 43.11
12.40 10.64 43.19
12.34 10.56 43.27
12.28 10.49 43.36
12.21 10.41 43.44
12.15 10.34 43.52
12.09 10.27 43.61
12.03 10.19 43.69
11.97 10.12 43.77
11.91 10.05 43.85
11.85 9.98 43.94
7.70 6.20 75.94
7.56 6.04 76.35
7.43 5.88 76.77
7.30 5.73 77.18
7.17 5.59 77.60
7.04 5.45 78.01
6.92 5.31 78.43
6.80 5.17 78.84
6.68 5.04 79.26
6.56 4.92 79.67
CBOD I NBOD I Flow I

WINTER
MODEL FOR EXPANSION TO 9.0 MGD
MODEL RESULTS
'Discharger : TOWN OF HICKORY
Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK
The End D.O. is 8.45 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 8.27 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 10.72 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/ l) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 6.74 2.50 1
Reach 1 60.00 90.00 0.00 9.00000
Reach 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000

•
*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
a
• •
•`abischarger : TOWN OF HICKORY
Receiving Stream : HENRY FORK
'Summer 7Q10 : 27.0
"Design Temperature: 14.0
Subbasin : 030835
Stream Class: C
Winter 7Q10 : 39.0
ILENGTHI SLOPE' VELOCITY 1 DEPTH' Kd 1 Kd I Ka 1 Ka 1 KN I
I mile I ft/mil fps I ft Idesignl @20' Idesignl @204 Idesign'
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
Segment 1 I 3.601 3.881 0.606 1 2.46 10.18 10.23 1 1.81 I 2.07I 0.19
Reach 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 I
I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I
Segment 1 I 4.501 3.881 0.811 12.98 10.18 10.24 1 2.43 I 2.77) 0.19
Reach 2 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I
I Flow I CBOD I NBOD I D.O. I
I cfs 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 1 mg/1 I
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste 113.950 1 60.000 190.000 1 0.000
Headwaters) 39.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Tributary I 0.000 I 2.000 1 1.000 I 9.280
* Runoff I 1.100 1 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
Segment 1 Reach 2
Waste I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000 I 0.000
Tributary 149.000 I 2.000 I 1.000 I 9.280
* Runoff 1 1.100 1 2.000 1 1.000 1 9.280
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

a
WINTER
MODEL FOR EXPANSION TO 9.0 MGD
•
2' 1 Seg
. 1
1
•
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I Seg
# I Reach #
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
# I Reach #
I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD
0.00 6.84 17.28 24.45
0.10 6.83 17.22 24.35
0.20 6.82 17.16 24.26
0.30 6.81 17.09 24.16
0.40 6.80 17.03 24.07
0.50 6.80 16.97 23.98
0.60 6.79 16.91 23.88
0.70 6.79 16.85 23.79
0.80 6.78 16.79 23.70
0.90 6.77 16.73 23.61
1.00 6.77 16.67 23.52
1.10 6.77 16.61 23.43
1.20 6.76 16.55 23.34
1.30 6.76 16.49 23.25
1.40 6.75 16.44 23.16
1.50 6.75 16.38 23.07
1.60 6.75 16.32 22.98
1.70 6.75 16.26 22.89
1.80 6.74 16.20 22.81
1.90 6.74 16.15 22.72
2.00 6.74 16.09 22.63
2.10 6.74 16.03 22.55
2.20 6.74 15.98 22.46
2.30 6.74 15.92 22.38
2.40 6.74 15.87 22.29
2.50 6.74 15.81 22.21
2.60 6.74 15.75 22.12
2.70 6.74 15.70 22.04
2.80 6.74 15.64 21.96
2.90 6.74 15.59 21.87
3.00 6.74 15.54 21.79
3.10 6.74 15.48 21.71
3.20 6.74 15.43 21.63
3.30 6.75 15.38 21.55
3.40 6.75 15.32 21.46
3.50 6.75 15.27 21.38
3.60 6.75 15.22 21.30
3.60 7.92 9.10 11.91
4.10 8.00 9.00 11.77
4.60 8.07 8.91 11.63
5.10 8.14 8.81 11.49
5.60 8.20 8.72 11.36
6.10 8.26 8.63 11.23
6.60 8.31 8.54 11.10
7.10 8.36 8.45 10.97
7.60 8.41 8.36 10.84
8.10 8.45 8.27 10.72
I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD
Flow I
52.95
53.06
53.17
53.28
53.39
53.50
53.61
53.72
53.83
53.94
54.05
54.16
54.27
54.38
54.49
54.60
54.71
54.82
54.93
55.04
55.15
55.26
55.37
55.48
55.59
55.70
55.81
55.92
56.03
56.14
56.25
56.36
56.47
56.58
56.69
56.80
56.91
105.91
106.46
107.01
107.56
108.11
108.66
109.21
109.76
110.31
110.86
I Flow I

6
Facility /7� :. - 1/;:7 Fo Wasteflow'(MGD) 7,0 M&D
(SummecJ/Winter (circle one)
I II
NH3—N (mg/1)
Potential effluent limit combinations:
afro= o / 44x /VQoi: b1 L NM3
G3n0 = 6a oxY mio : .171J I LL7
80D5 C( y NH3-N _N/ f9
19 (3/0 0 . (30
(3/../5)
a (14. )
7 (31.9

08/24/92 ver 3.1 TOXICS REVIEW
Facility: HICKORY -HENRY FORK WWTP
NPDES Permit No.: NC0040787
Status (E, P, or M) : E
Permitted Flow: 9.0 mgd
Actual Average Flow: 3.3 mgd
Subbasin: '030835
Receiving Stream: HENRY FORK RIVER 1 PRETREATMENT DATA I----EFLLUENT DATA---- 1
Stream Classification: C I ACTUAL PERMITTEDI I
7Q10: 27.0 cfs 1 Ind. + Ind. + I FREQUENCY 1
IWC: 34.07 % I Domestic PERMITTED Domestic 1 OBSERVED of Chronic)
Stn'd / Bkg 1 Removal Domestic Act.Ind. Total Industrial Total I Eflluent Criteria 1
Pollutant AL Conc. 1 Eff. Load Load Load Load Load 1 Conc. Violations)
(ug/1) (ug/1) 1 % (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) (#/d) 1 (ug/1) (#vio/#sam)1
I I 1
Cadmium S 2.0 1 92% 0.1 0.0 0.13 1.3 1.410 1 8.0 1
Chromium S 50.0 1 89% 1.3 1.1 2.36 6.5 7.790 1 43.0 1 I
Copper AL 7.0 1 90% 1.6 0.0 1.59 0.8 2.420 1 98.0 1 N
Nickel S 88.0 1 39% 0.6 0.1 0.62 1.2 1.730 1 70.0 I P
Lead S 25.0 I 81% 1.3 0.2 1.51 1.7 3.040 1 1 U
Zinc AL 50.0 I 89% 4.6 0.4 5.00 1.0 5.550 1 112.0 1 T
Cyanide S 5.0 1 59% 1.1 0.3 1.33 1.1 2.170 1 6.0 I
Mercury S 0.012 I 0% 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.000 1 2.0 1 S
Silver AL 0.06 1 0% 1 I E
Selenium S 5.00. 1 0% 1 1 C
Arsenic S 50.00 1 0% 1 1 T
Phenols S NA 1 0% 1 1 I
Chloride AL 230.0 1 0% 1 291,000.0 I 0
Fluoride S 1,800.0 1 0% 1 1,870.0 I N
I I I
I 1
I I I
ALLOWABLE PRDCT'D PRDCT'D PRDCT'D MONITOR/LIMIT I--ADTN'L RECMMDTN'S--
Effluent Effluent Effluent Instream 1 Recomm'd
Conc. using using Conc. Based on Based on Based on 1 FREQUENCY INSTREAM
Allowable CHRONIC ACTUAL PERMIT using ACTUAL PERMITTED OBSERVED I Eff. Mon. Monitor.
Pollutant Load Criteria Influent Influent OBSERVED Influent Influent Effluent 1 based on Recomm'd ?
(#/d) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) (ug/1) Loading Loading Data 1 OBSERVED (YES/NO)
Cadmium S 1 4.33 5.871 0.372 4.096 2.73 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 A
Chromium S 1 78.68 146.774 9.427 31.116 14.65 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 N
Copper AL 1 12.12 20.548 5.780 8.788 33.38 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Weekly YES 1 A
Nickel S 1 24.97 258.323 13.734 38.321 23.85 Monitor Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 L
Lead S 1 22.78 73.387 10.391 20.974 0.00 Limit Limit 1 1 Y
Zinc AL 1 78.68 146.774 19.960 22.169 38.15 Monitor Monitor Monitor 1 Monthly YES 1 S
Cyanide S 1 2.11 14.677 19.757 32.307 2.04 Limit Limit Limit 1 NCAC NO 1 I
Mercury S 1 0.00 0.035 0.000 0.000 0.68 Limit 1 NCAC YES 1 S
Silver AL 1 0.01 0.176 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 I
Selenium S 1 0.87 14.677 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 R
Arsenic S 1 8.65 146.774 0.000 0.000 0.00 1 1 E
Phenols S 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 ( I S
Chloride AL 1 675.161 99131.87 S.O.P 1 NCAC YES 1 U
Fluoride S 1 5283.871 637.03 1 NCAC NO 1 L
I I I T
I I I S

hickory -henry fork wwtp
AMMONIA
7Q10:
NH3 Effl. Conc:
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) :
Upstream NH3 Conc.:
Design Flow:
Predicted NH3 Downstream:
NH3 Limit:
27.0000
9.0000
1000.00
220.0000
9.0000
3210.99
3.210989
2509.677
2.509677
AMMONIA
7Q10:
NH3 Effl. Conc:
AL (1/1.8 mg/1) :
Upstream NH3 Conc.:
Design Flow:
Predicted NH3 Downstream:
NH3 Limit:
39.0000
9.0000
1800.00
220.0000
9.0000
2533.14
2.533144
6217.204
6.217204
ANALYSIS
cfs
mg/1
ug/1
ug/1
MGD
ug/1
mg/1
ug/1
mg/1
ANALYSIS (WINTER)
cfs
mg/1
ug/1
ug/1
MGD
ug/1
mg/1
ug/1
mg/1

•`� Hickory - Henry Fork WWTP
a
CHLORINE ANALYSIS
7Q10: 27.0000 cfs
CL2 Effl. Conc: 0.0000 mg/1
AL (17/19 ug/1) : 17.0000 ug/1
Upstream CL2 Conc.: 0.0000 ug/1
Design Flow: 9..0000 MGD
Predicted CL2 Downstream: 0.00 ug/1
0 mg/1
CL2 Limit: 49.90322 ug/1
0.049903 mg/1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
,William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Regional Offices
Asheville
704/251-6208
Fayetteville
919/486-1541
Mooresville
704/663-1699
Raleigh
919/571-4700
Washington
919/946-6481
Wilmington
919/395-3900
Winston-Salem
919/896-7007
August 18, 1992
Mr. B. Gary McGee, City Manager
City of Hickory
P. O. Box 398
Hickory, North Carolina 28603
Dear Mr. McGee:
S Ci
C1 VS ;•' \
C�
`
Resources \'
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Acting Director
SUBJECT: City of Hickory
Henry Fork
WWTP Improvements
In -Progress Plan Review
Conference
Project No. CS370389-17
This is to advise of the State requirement that final plans,
specifications and supporting design data must be submitted for State
review and approval, before State loan funding can be approved for the
subject project. In accordance with the established schedules, the
complete/final plans and specifications should be submitted by May 31,
1993 in order to be reviewed and approved in time to meet the Binding
Commitment Date of August 30, 1993. •If the Binding Commitment Date
is not met, the Loan funding will be withheld.
A review of the plans, specifications, supporting documents and
checklist (see below) in conference with the City of Hickory's
authorized representative and the Consultant Engineer at the 10% and
50% level of completion is required. The 10% In -Progress Plan review
conference should be held in October or early November. Therefore,
when the detailed project design with preliminary plans and
specifications is initiated, you or your engineer must advise us of the
time and date chosen for the 10% "In -Progress" plan review conference
as soon as possible. The attendance of the City's authorized
representative at the 10% In -Progress conference is required; and the
conference is not to be scheduled until this person can be present.
Attached is the "In -Progress Review Checklist" which includes
review items to be discussed in our 10% and 50% conferences with you
and the consulting engineer. You and your consultant engineer should
review this prior to our conference, so that any questions can be
resolved; or any needed clarification/information can be provided
during this conference.
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Pnna1 (lnnnrn,n;tz, Affirm. -At a - ; ��,,..1...�s.•

Page 2
Three (3) sets of the initial plan details and ccxnplete design
basis are to be suhnitted at the 10% review conference; and for the 50%
review conference, three (3) sets of the plans/specifications, final
design basis and an up -dated cost estimate are to be presented.
The 10% and 50% In -Progress Reviews of the plan documents are
required in order to obtain the following:
1. Every effort must be taken to prevent bid overruns, since a
project is not to receive loan funding in excess of that
established on the priority list for the project. It is the
Recipient's sole responsibility to see that the project is
designed in such a manner as to stay within the established
funding limit. If bids exceed the loan amount, the Recipient
must pay the additional amount; or redesign and rebid the
project to get within the funded amount. If a JOC/SOC
schedule is involved and is not extendable, then Recipient
must proceed with award of bid(s) or be subject to the fine
amount stipulated in order; and possible loss of loan funds.
2. A timely submittal of final plans, specifications and
supporting documents which are final and complete in all
respects, including:
a. In complete compliance with Loan conditions, the 201
Facilities Plan, and any contingencies imposed on the
design by the environmental review.
b. Compliance with EPA and State regulatory requirements.
3. Clear, precise and complete plan documents for the
Biddability/Constructibility review, for which a review
period or thirty (30) days is required.
4. Pratt resolution of other Agency review comments which could
result in lengthy delays in plan processing and approval.
5. Mutual understanding and effort by all parties to coordinate
and maintain processing of project plan documents to meet
target dates designated for State funding.
If a new or revised NPDES Permit is required for the subject
facilities, it is imperative that you take this action immediately by
making application to Ms. Brenda Smith, Regional Supervisor, Division
of Environmental Management, Mooresville Regional Office. Your
project plans cannot be approved until a Permit has been issued.
Please note that the processing and issuance of a Permit will
normally take six (6) months, but can take as much as nine (9) months.

Page 3
The Recipient and consultant engineer must adhere to the schedules
for obtaining the NPDES Permit, complying with JOC/SOC and submission
of final plans and specifications in order that all other established
schedules can be met. If the Binding Commitment date is not met, the
Loan funding will be withheld.
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact Mr. Robert Teulings, the State Project Review
Engineer, at [phone], extension 610.
Sincerely,
,- W. S. Hoffman, Supervisor
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Design Management Unit
Attachment
RPT:vk
cc: HDR Engineers
Mooresville Regional Office
Mr. John R. Blowe
Mr. Coy Batten
Mr. Allen Wahab
Mr. Joe Martin
Mr. Tom Fahnestock
Mr. Dale Overcash
Mr. Donald Safrit
Ms. Ruth Swanek
Mr. Robert Teulings
DMU
SRF