NC0085359_Permit (Issuance)_20021213

NPDES DOCUMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NPDES Permit:
NC0085839
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Document Type:
ermit Issuance n..
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:
December 13, 2002
This document printed on reuse paper. - ignore any
content on the " Nw-erne side

t state of North Carolina
4 ' Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Mr. Jon C. Dyer
Union County Public Works
400 North Church Street
Monroe, North Carolina 28112
Dear Mr. Dyer:
NCDENR
December 13, 2002
Subject: Issuance of NPDES Permit NC0085359
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Union County
Division personnel have reviewed and approved your application for renewal of the subject permit.
Accordingly, we are forwarding the attached NPDES discharge permit. This permit is issued pursuant to
the requirements of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and the Memorandum of Agreement
between North Carolina and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as
subsequently amended.)
This permit authorizes Union County Public Works Department to discharge up to 2.5 MGD of treated
wastewater from the Twelve Mile Creek WWTP to Twelve Mile Creek, a class C water in the Catawba River
Basin. The permit includes discharge limitations and/or monitoring for flow, biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD), total suspended solids (TSS), ammonia (NH3 as N), fecal coliform bacteria, pH, total residual
chlorine, copper and zinc.
The following modifications that have been included in the final permit:
• Effluent limitations for copper and zinc. These limits have been added based on the results of
reasonable potential analyses which showed that the discharge had the potential to exceed North
Carolina water quality standards. Because of Union County's discharge into Twelve Mile Creek drains
into South Carolina, it is necessary to also protect for the South Carolina water quality standards. The
South Carolina water quality criteria for copper and zinc are more stringent than North Carolina's and
therefore the limits in the permit are well below the North Carolina action levels. Because Twelve Mile
Creek WWTP is a major, 100% domestic facility with no significant industrial users and has no active
pretreatment program, a schedule of compliance has been included in the permit for the copper and
zinc limits. Please carefully review footnotes 7 and 8 of the Effluent Limitations and Monitoring
Requirements page to clearly understand these requirements.
• Total Phosphorus mass limit. The permit includes a total phosphorus mass limit equivalent of 1
mg/L. This limit is assigned based on water quality issues associated with eutrophication in South
Carolina lakes.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 [phone] / FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

• Fecal coliform limit (daily maximum). In order to achieve protection of the South Carolina instream
fecal coliform standard, the weekly average fecal coliform limit of 400/100m1 has been modified to a
daily maximum limit of 400/100m1.
• Weekly average ammonia limits. This permit includes summer and winter weekly average limits for
NH3 as N. This is done to comply with the Code of Federal Regulations [40 CFR 122.45 (d)] and South
Carolina's water quality standards. The new summer and winter weekly average NH3 as N limits are 5.0
mg/L and 9.0 mg/L, respectively.
• The special condition for the nutrient study has been deleted from the permit. The permit
already contains a total phosphorus limit and total nitrogen monitoring. The study is therefore not
necessary.
If any parts, measurement frequencies or sampling requirements contained in this permit are unacceptable
to you, you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this letter. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-6714. Unless such a demand is made, this permit shall be final and
binding.
This permit is not transferable. 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, Coastal Area
Management Act, or any other Federal or Local governmental permits may be required.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Jacquelyn Nowell at telephone
number [phone], extension 512.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Central Files
Mooresville Regional Office / Water Quality Section
NPDES Unit/Permit File
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
EPA/ Region IV: Attn: Roosevelt Childress
Jeff deBessonet/ Bureau of Water DHEC, 2600 Bull St. Columbia SC 29201

4 Permit NC0085359
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, the
Union County Public Works Department
is hereby authorized to discharge wastewater from a facility located at the
Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
3104 Providence Road South
Waxhaw
Union County
to receiving waters designated as Twelve Mile Creek in the Catawba River Basin in
accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions
set forth in Parts I, II and III hereof.
This permit shall become effective January 1, 2003
This permit and authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight on June 30, 2005.
Signed this day December 13, 2002
original Signed By
David A. Goodrich
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

Permit NC00853,9i'
SUPPLEMENT TO PERMIT COVER SHEET
The Union County Public Works Department is hereby authorized to:
1. Continue to operate an existing 2.5 MGD wastewater treatment facility that includes
the following components:
> Self-cleaning influent filter screen
> Vortex grit chamber
> pH adjustment
> Two oxidation ditch systems
> Two final clarifiers
> Dual tertiary sand filters
> Ultraviolet disinfection
> Cascade post aeration
> Two sludge storage tanks with diffused aeration
> Sludge digester (1.0 MGD)
> Alum and polymer feed systems
> Stand-by power generator
This facility is located at the Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant off
Providence Road South near Waxhaw in Union County.
2. Discharge from said treatment works at the location specified on the attached map into
Twelve Mile Creek, a class C stream in the Catawba River Basin.

Facility Information
Latitude: 34°5T'O 1" Sub -Basin: 03-08-38
Longitude: 80°45'44"
Quad #: H15NE
Stream Class: C
Receiving Stream: Twelve Mile Creek
Permitted Flow: 2.5 MGD
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
NC0085359 •
UnionCounty+

Permit NC008535.9
A. (1.) EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning on the effective date of the permit and lasting until expiration, the
Permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall 001. Such' discharges shall be limited and monitored
by the Permittee as specified below:
EFFLUENT
CHARACTERISTICS
LIMITS
MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monthly
Average
Weekly
Average
Daily
Maximum
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
Sample Location'
Row
2.5 MGD
Continuous
Recording
Influent or Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(April 1- October 31) 2
5.0 mg/L
7.5 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
BOD, 5-day, 20°C
(November 1- March 31) 2
10.0 mglL
15.0 mg/L
Daily •
Composite
Influent & Effluent
Total Suspended Solids 2
30.0 mglL
45.0 mg/L
Daily
Composite
Influent & Effluent
NH3 as N
(April 1— October 31)
2.0 mg/L
5.0 mglL
Daily
Composite
Effluent
NH3 as N
(November 1— March 31)
4.0 mg/L
9.0 mglL
Daily
Composite
Effluent
Dissolved 0xygen3
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Dissolved Oxygen
(June through September)
3/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Dissolved Oxygen
(October through May)
1/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
pH4
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Residual Chlorines
17.0,uglL
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Total Nitrogen (NO2+NO3+TKN)
Monthly
_ Composite
Effluent
Total Phosphorus 6
Monthly Average: 41.70 pounds/day
12 Month average: 20.85 pounds/day
Monthly
Composite
Effluent
Temperature, °C
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Temperature, QC
(June through September)
3/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Temperature, QC
(October through May)
1/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
200/100 ml
400/100 ml
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
(June through September)
3/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Fecal Coliform (geometric mean)
(October through May)
llWeek
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Conductivity
Daily
Grab
Effluent
Conductivity
(June through September)
3/Week
Grab
Upstream & Downstream'
Conductivity
(October through May)
1/Week
Grab -
Upstream & Downstream'
Total Copper7,8
2.9 pg/I
3.8 Ngll
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Total Zinc7'8
37.0 Ng/1
Weekly
Composite
Effluent
Chronic Toxicity9
Quarterly
Composite
Effluent
Notes
1. Upstream: 50 feet upstream from the outfall. Downstream samples shall be collected at two locations. D 1:
One quarter mile downstream from the outfall. before confluence with the first tributary. D2: at NCSR 1301.
Additional downstream dissolved oxygen monitoring is recommended to provide DO stream profile of Twelve
Mile Creek in North Carolina and South Carolina.
2. The monthly average effluent BOD5 and Total Suspended Solids concentrations shall not exceed 15% of the
respective influent value (85% removal).

Permit NC0085359
1
3. The daily average dissolved oxygen effluent concentration shall not be less than 6.0 mg/L.
4. The pH shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units.
5. Monitoring requirement and limit applies only if chlorine is added for disinfection.
6. Part A. (4.) describes the methodology for calculation of the monthly average and 12-month limits.
7. The permittee has been granted a schedule of compliance for copper and zinc. The permittee shall provide the
Division with a course of action for achieving compliance with the proposed limits within three months of the
permit effective date. If Union County Public Works Department decides to develop site -specific standards.
the course of action should be consistent with "Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of Water -Effect
Ratios for Metals" EPA-823-B-94-001, February 1994. The Division of Water Quality and EPA will review the
plan associated with this course of action and may provide comments. The limits for copper and zinc will
become effective 18 months after completion of the site -specific standards. The permittee shall submit
a report to the Division upon completion of the site -specific standard no later tha i 21 months from the
effective date of the permit. Alter completion of the site -specific standards, the Division will reassess the need
for limits. If no "reasonable potential" exists, based on the site -specific standards, then the limits will be
removed from the permit. If "reasonable potential" exists, the permit will be modified to reflect the
appropriate limits. If no site -specific standards are developed, then the copper and zinc limits in this
permit become effective 21 months from the effective date of the permit. In addition, the permittee
shall provide the Division of Water Quality with status reports every six months, with the first status report
due nine months after the effective date of the permit.
8. The limits stipulated are based on "total recoverable". Alternatively, the permittee may request limits based
on total dissolved as allowed under South Carolina standards.
9. Chronic Toxicity (Ceriodaphnia) P/F @ 90% with testing in February, May, August and November (see A. (2.)
Special Conditions of the Supplement to Effluent Limitations).
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts.
SUPPLEMENT TO EFFLUENT LIMITATIONSAND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. (2.) CHRONIC TOXICITY PASS/FAIL PERMIT LIMIT
The effluent discharge shall at no time exhibit observable inhibition of reproduction or significant
mortality to Ceriodaphnia dubia at an effluent concentration of 90%.
The permit holder shall perform at a minimum, auarteriu monitoring using test procedures outlined in
the "North Carolina Ceriodaphnia Chronic Effluent Bioassay Procedure," Revised February 1998, or
subsequent versions or "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure"
(Revised -February 1998) or subsequent versions. The tests will be performed during the months of
February, May, August, and November. 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 chronic value for multiple concentration tests will be determined using the geometric mean of the
highest concentration having no detectable impairment of reproduction or survival and the lowest
concentration that does have a detectable impairment of reproduction or survival. The definition of
"detectable impairment," collection methods, exposure regimes, and further statistical methods are
specified in the "North Carolina Phase II Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Procedure" (Revised -
February 1998) or subsequent versions.
All toxicity testing results required as part of this permit condition will be entered on the Effluent
Discharge Monitoring Form (MR-1) for the months in which tests were performed, using the parameter
code TGP3B for the pass/fail results and THP3B for the Chronic Value. Additionally, DWQ Form AT-3
(original) is to be sent to the following address:
Attention: NC DENR / DWQ / Environmental Sciences Branch
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621

Permit NC0085359
Completed Aquatic Toxicity Test Forms shall be filed with the Environmental Sciences Branch 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 Branch 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.
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.
A. (3.) TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (TP) MONITORING
The Permittee shall calculate a 12-month rolling average mass loading as the sum of monthly loadings,
according to the following equations:
(1) Monthly Average (pounds/day) = TP x Qw x 8.34
Where:
TP = the arithmetic average of total phosphorus concentrations (mg/L) obtained via composite
samples (either daily, weekly, or monthly average values) collected during the month
Qw = the average daily waste flow (MGD) for the month
8.34= conversion factor, from (mg/L x MGD) to pounds
The 12-month rolling average mass loading is defined as the sum of the monthly average loadings for
the previous 12 months inclusive of the reporting month:
12
(2) 12-Month Mass Loading (pounds/day)= >TPma 4-12 (inclusive of reporting month)
Where:
TPma is defined as the total phosphorus monthly average mass loading (calculated above).
The monthly average and 12-month average mass loadings shall be reported on the attached
worksheet and submitted with the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) for Twelve Mile Creek WWTP.
The first worksheet is due with the DMR 12 months from the effective date of the TP limit (referenced
in A. (3)). In the period between the effective date and the requirement to submit the attached
worksheet, the TP monthly average mass loadings should be reported on the appropriate monthly
DMR.
The Permittee shall report the TP concentration for each sample on the appropriate DMR. Reporting of
and compliance with the TP limit shall be done on a monthly basis.

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
DEC 11 2002
an . Klimek, P.E., Director
'vision of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Review of Proposed Final NPDES Permit
Union County/Twelve Mile Creek
NC0085359
Dear Mr. Klimek:
DEC 2 0 2002
tg4z6A-1.4,-.3ro
D C 1 ` 2002`_•�p
DIV OF wit' a�Ih1
DIRECT , optic, Tl`
u1
EPA Region 4 has received the proposed final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit by e-mail November 19, 2002, for the above referenced facility. In
accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/North Carolina (NC) Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA), we have no objection to the issuance of the proposed final permit. The
proposed final NPDES permit contains appropriate monthly average and daily maximum fecal
coliform limits protective of the downstream South Carolina water quality standards.
In accordance with the NC/EPA MOA and 40 C.F.R. § 123.44, North Carolina has
submitted a proposed final draft permit which satisfies EPA's objection. Therefore, this letter acts
to withdraw EPA's August 22, 2002, objection to the May 24, 2002, draft permit concerning
appropriate fecal coliform limits. We request that we be afforded an additional review
opportunity only if significant changes are made to the permit prior to issuance or if significant
comments to the permit are received. Otherwise, please send us one copy of the final permit
when issued. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me directly or have your staff
contact Ms. Dee Stewart at [phone], stewart.dee@epa.��ov.
James D. Giattina
Director
Water Management Division
cc: Mr. John C. Dyer
Union County Public Works
Alton Boozer, SCDHEC
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable 01 Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Poslconsumer)

Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Review of Proposed Final NPDES Permit
Union County/Twelve Mile Creek
NC0085359
Dear Mr. Klimek:
EPA Region 4 has received the proposed final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit by e-mail November 19, 2002, for the above referenced facility. In
accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/North Carolina (NC)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), we have no objection to the issuance of the proposed final
permit as it addresses EPA's August 22, 2002, objections to t e May 24, 2002, draft permit with
regard to fecal coliform limits. The proposed final NPDES permit contains appropriate monthly
average and daily maximum fecal coliform limits protective of the downstream South Carolina
water quality standards.
EPA understands that South Carolina requested testing of copper and zinc after review of
the May 24, 2002, draft permit and that ten data samples were subsequently collected in a two
week sampling period which indicated reasonable potential to exceed South Carolina's fresh
water aquatic life standards. South Carolina's copper and zinc numeric criteria are expressed as
a function of hardness (mg/1) in the water column and a 25 mg/1 hardness as CaCO3 is assumed if
no other data is available. The equations used to calculate the hardness dependent metals values
are assumed valid between a hardness of 25 mg/1 and 400 mg/1 per South Carolina water quality
standards (R.61-68). The values for the criteria maximum concentration (ug/1) and the criteria
continuous concentration (ug/l) at a 25 mg/1 hardness as CaCO3 for copper and zinc are 3.8 ug/1
and 2.9 ug/1 and 37 ug/1 and 37 ug/1, respectively.

The proposed final permit contains a daily maximum limit for copper of 3.6 ug/1 and a
weekly average limit of 2.75 ug/1 The proposed final permit contains a daily maximum limit for
zinc of 35.6 ug/1 while the fact sheet states that the limit in the permit will be a daily maximum
of 37.0 ug/1. The fact sheet and permit should support each other with regards to the zinc limit.
These limits are based on hardness data from a North Carolina ambient station above the Union
County/Twelve Mile Creek facility of 23.9 mg/1 as CaCO3. The proposed final permit limits for
copper and zinc are protective of South Carolina standards but should be based on a 25.0 mg/1
hardness as CaCO3. C'A requests these changes prior to permit issuance.
Footnote number 7 of the permit effluent limitations page reflects a compliance schedule
for the Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities District (CMUD) for copper, silver, and zinc versus a
compliance schedule for copper and zinc for the Union County/Twelve Mile Creek facility.
Federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. §122.47 allow for schedules leading to compliance with
regulations to be included in NPDES permits which reflect the appropriate parameters. While
EPA does not oppose the CMUD language as a model compliance schedule for this permit, EPA
requests that the proposed final permit be modified to include an appropriate compliance
schedule for this facility. Suggested language has been enclosed with this letter in Attachment A.
In accordance with the NC/EPA MOA and 40 C.F.R. §123.44, North Carolina has
submitted a proposed final draft permit which satisfies EPA's objection. Therefore, this letter
acts to withdraw EPA's August 22, 2002, objection to the above referenced draft permit. We
request that we be afforded an additional review opportunity only if significant changes are made
to the permit prior to issuance or if significant comments to the permit are received. Otherwise,
please send us one copy of the final permit when issued. If you have any questions please feel
free to contact me directly or have your staff contact Ms. Dee Stewart at [phone],
[e-mail].
Sincerely;
James D. Giattina
Director
Water Management Division
cc: Mr. John C. Dyer
Union County Public Works
Alton Boozer, SCDHEC
Please Date and Sign: Stewart Proofed Childress
Gordon Kemker Proofed
2

Attachment A
Suggested Compliance Schedule Language for Union County/Twelve Mile Creek NPDES Permit
"The permittee has been granted a schedule of compliance for copper and zinc. The
permittee shall provide the Division with a proposed course of action for achieving
compliance with the proposed limits within three months of the permit effective date. If
the Union County Public Works Department decides to develop site -specific standards,
the proposed course of action should be consistent with the "Interim Guidance on
Determination and Use of Water -Effect Ratios for Metals" EPA-823-B-94-001,
February 1994. The Division of Water Quality and EPA will review the proposed course
of action and may provide comments. The limits for copper and zinc will become
effective 18 months after completion of the site -specific standards. The permittee shall
submit a report to the Division upon completion of the site -specific standard development
but no later than 21 months from the effective date of the permit. After completion of the
site -specific standards, the Division will reassess the need for limits. If no "reasonable
potential" exists, based on the site -specific standards, then the limits will be removed
from the permit. If "reasonable potential" exists, the permit will be modified to reflect
the appropriate limits:Xlf no site -specific standards are developed, then the limits in this
permit become effective 21 months from the effective date of the permit#In addition, the
permittee shall provide the Division of Water Quality with status reports every six
months, with the first status report due nine months after the effective date of the permit."

RE: Union Co Permit Objection
Subject: RE: Union Co Permit Objection
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:13:13 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Hello Dee, please excuse me for not responding earlier. I was absent
for two days due to the ice storm in NC and also out on personal leave.
Attached you will find several files: one will show the equations used
to develop Cu and Zn limits, two others will show the NC hardness data
used and the ten data values that Union Co. submitted to NC. The RPA
analysis was attached with the original email sent on 11/19 and has been
sent once again. There are 13 data points used in the Cu and Zn RPA
analysis, ten provided by Union Co. in Oct. 2002 and three other data
points taken from DMR data submitted in 2000 and 2002. Our RPA
implementation recommendations will show monitoring only with no limit
recommended because both parameters are NC action levels. Limits have
been developed based on SC and EPA recommendations. The difference in
the permit Zn limit and the limit in the factsheet amendment pages was a
typo error, according to our estimation using a hardness value of 23.9
mg/1, the Zn limit should be 35.6 ug/1. Please note that assistance was
solicited from SCDEH for confirmation on these limits, however we had to
submit these limits to EPA before a response was received.
If Union County does not choose to pursue a site specific standard for
copper and zinc, the metals limits will become effective within 3 months
of issuance of the permit. A telephone conversation with Union County
has indicated that they will pursue the site specific standard. Also,
corrections have been made in the permit condition where the word CMUD
appears instead of Union County.
Please contact me after you have reviewed these files. A corrected
factsheet amendment is forthcoming. Thanks
D1 Union Co - metals limit equations.doc
Name: 1_Union Co - metals limit equations.doc
Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
Encoding: base64
D12mi.waxhaw.hardness.data.xls
Name: 12mi.waxhaw.hardness.data.xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
D12 mile metals l .xls
Name: 12 mile metals l .xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
Dunionco.tox.2002data.xls'
Name: unionco.tox.2002data.xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
1 of 2
12/10/02 11:15 AM

[Fwd: Union County Permit Objection]
Subject: [Fwd: Union County Permit Objection]
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:27:46 -0500
From: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Union County Permit Objection
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:06:18 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>
CC: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>, [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]
Dave,
Jackie got back to us earlier today and committed to addressing the
issues Dee listed. The hardness issue we raised was just a comment and
we are not going to list that in our letter withdrawing the objection.
Please provide us with a copy of the final permit and the revised fact
sheet.
Thanks,
Ro
Dave Goodrich
<dave.goodrich@nc To: Roosevelt
Childress/R4/USEPA/US@EPA
mail.net> cc: Scott
Gordon/R4/USEPA/US@EPA, Jackie Nowell
<[e-mail]>
12/10/02 03:53 PM Subject: Re: Union County Permit
Objection
Ro -
Thanks for the update and the opportunity to look at the letter. Jackie
and Dee are working on these
clarification issues. I just returned to the office today. We will
take a quick look at your letter and
provide any comments ASAP. - Dave
[e-mail] wrote:
> Dave,
> We are preparing a letter (attached below) to withdraw our May 24,
2002
> objection letter on the Union County draft permit. However, we have
> identified some clarification/edits that should be made to the permit
> and fact sheet before final permit issuance. Although these are
issues
> that we are not objecting to, the permit and its supporting materials
1 of 3 12/11/02 2:27 PM

[Fwd: Union County Permit Objection]
> would be more accurate if you addressed them.
> Also shown below is the e-mail message to you and Jackie Nowell of
your
> staff. Our letter has to go out by Wednesday, and we can revise it if
> you care to advise us of your reaction to this information.
> Thanks,
> Roosevelt
> (See attached file: union county objection withdrawal.wpd)
> Forwarded by Roosevelt Childress/R4/USEPA/US on 12/09/02 11:23
AM
> Dee Stewart
> To:
[e-mail],
> 12/03/02 03:24 PM
[e-mail]
> cc: Marshall
Hyatt/R4/USEPA/US@EPA, Roosevelt
Childress/R4/USEPA/US@EPA, Madolyn Dominy/R4/USEPA/US@EPA
> Subject: Union County
Permit Objection
>
> Jackie,
> Thank you for the proposed final permit for the Union County/Twelve
Mile
> Creek WWTP, NC0085359 received by e-mail on 11/19/02. I was on
vacation
> last week and have reviewed this permit today, 12/3/02.
> Our original objection to the lack of fecal coliform limits protective
> of SC standards has been addressed with the inclusion of a daily
maximum
> fecal coliform limit of 4001/100 ml. Additionally, a summer and
winter
> weekly average limit for NH3 has been included in the proposed final
as
> requested.
> The proposed final permit includes limits for copper and zinc
protective
> of SC fresh water aquatic life standards. The numeric criteria listed
> in the SC standards Appendix: Water Quality Numeric Criteria for the
> Protection of Aquatic Life and Human Health provides freshwater
> criterion for these metals expressed as a function of hardness (mg/1)
> in the water column. The value given in the chart corresponds to a
25.0
> mg/1 hardness expressed as CaCO3. The values for the CMC (ug/1) and
CCC
> (ug/l) for copper and zinc are 3.8 ug/1 & 2.9 ug/1 and 37 ug/1 & 37
> ug/l, respectively. The proposed final permit contains a daily max
> for copper of 3.6 ug/1 and a weekly average of 2.75 ug/1 and as stated
> in the fact sheet. The proposed final permit contains a daily max for
> zinc of 35.6 ug/1 while the fact sheet states that the limit in the
> permit will be a daily max of 37.0 ug/l. I am unsure of the minor
2 of 3 12/11/02 2:27 PM

[Fwd: Union County Permit Objection]
> discrepancies between the SC standard based on a 25 ug/1 hardness and
> the proposed final permit limits as well as the discrepancy for the
zinc
> permit limit and the fact sheet limit. Please clarify.
> The fact sheet documenting the inclusion of copper and zinc limits
does
> not reference the hardness of the water column or the assumption of a
> 25.0 ug/1 hardness if no data exists. It does not include the 10 data
> samples collected from the recent two week sampling period and the
> reasonable potential determination based on this data. I would
suggest
> that it would be beneficial and supported by federal regulations
> regarding fact sheet information to expand the fact sheet to address
> this issue in depth.
> Additionally, it makes sense to base the compliance schedule on the
> language used in the CMUD permits, but all reference to CMUD should be
> removed and replaced with Union County Public Works Department. (See
> footnote 7). I am also confused about the exact date when the metals
> limits become effective if Union County does not choose to pursue a
> site-specifc standard for copper and zinc. Please clarify.
> EPA has until December I1, 2002, to provide you a formal letter
> concerning the review of the proposed final permit for Union County.
> Before I write this letter I wanted to clarify the above questions
> concerning the metals limits.
> Thank you
> Dee Stewart
> 404/562-9334
> Name: union county
objection withdrawal.wpd
> union county objection withdrawal.wpd Type: WordPerfect Document
(application/wordperfect5.1)
> Encoding: base64
3 of 3 12/11/02 2:27 PM

RE: Union Co Permit Objection
Subject: RE: Union Co Permit Objection
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:13:13 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Hello Dee, please excuse me for not responding earlier. I was absent
for two days due to the ice storm in NC and also out on personal leave.
Attached you will find several files: one will show the equations used
to develop Cu and Zn limits, two others will show the NC hardness data
used and the ten data values that Union Co. submitted to NC. The RPA
analysis was attached with the original email sent on 11/19 and has been
sent once again. There are 13 data points used in the Cu and Zn RPA
analysis, ten provided by Union Co. in Oct. 2002 and three other data
points taken from DMR data submitted in 2000 and 2002. Our RPA
implementation recommendations will show monitoring only with no limit
recommended because both parameters are NC action levels. Limits have
been developed based on SC and EPA recommendations. The difference in
the permit Zn limit and the limit in the factsheet amendment pages was a
typo error, according to our estimation using a hardness value of 23.9
mg/1, the Zn limit should be 35.6 ug/1. Please note that assistance was
solicited from SCDEH for confirmation on these limits, however we had to
submit these limits to EPA before a response was received.
If Union County does not choose to pursue a site specific standard for
copper and zinc, the metals limits will become effective within 3 months
of issuance of the permit. A telephone conversation with Union County
has indicated that they will pursue the site specific standard. Also,
corrections have been made in the permit condition where the word CMUD
appears instead of Union County.
Please contact me after you have reviewed these files. A corrected
factsheet amendment is forthcoming. Thanks
Di Union Co - metals limit equations.doc
Name: 1_Union Co - metals limit equations.doc
Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
Encoding: base64
fl12mi.waxhaw.hardness.data.xls
Name: 12mi.waxhaw.hardness.data.xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
D12 mile metalsl.xls
Name: 12 mile metals l .xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
Dunionco.tox.2002data.xls
Name: unionco.tox.2002data.xls
Type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (application/vnd.ms-excel)
Encoding: base64
1 of 2 12/ 11 /02 2:27 PM

Union Co. Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
DWQ determination of Cu and Zn effluent limits based on SC criteria
For hardness, used data from NC ambient station, Twelve Mile Creek at
Waxhaw. Used four years of data from 1998 through 2002, per SC
requirement used the 1st percentile of data. Hardness value used was 23.9
mg/1.
1) for Copper
SC standard/water quality criteria CMC = 3.8 ug/1 CCC = 2.9 ug/1 , assumes hardness
of 25 mg/1
NCDWQ used the following equation to develop Cu limit for Union Co. -
Twelve Mile Creek, using hardness of 23.9 mg/1.
Acute = CMC= e {m [In (hardness)] + b }
a a
Chronic = CCC= e {m [In (hardness)] + b }
c
ma , ba, mc, and be are " parameters for calculation freshwater dissolved metals
criteria that are hardness dependent . Reference: Attachment 2 from the
SCDEC Water Classifications and Standards.
For Copper, the parameters are as follows:
a = 0.9422
b
a = -1.700
m
c=0.8545
b
c = -1.702
The acute copper limit was estimated to be: e (0.9422(ln 23.9)- 1.7 = 3.6
The chronic copper limit was estimated to be: e (o.8545(111(23.9)-1.702 = 2.75

2) for Zinc
SC standard/criteria CMC = 37 ug/1 CCC = 37 ug/1 , assumes hardness of 25 mg/1
NCDWQ used the following equation to develop Cu limit for Union Co. -
Twelve Mile Creek, using hardness of 23.9 mg/l.
Acute = CMC= e { ma [In (hardness)] + ba
Chronic = CCC= e ("lc [In (hardness)] + b )
ma , ba, mc, and be are " parameters for calculation freshwater dissolved metals
criteria that are hardness dependent . Reference: Attachment 2 from the
SCDEC Water Classifications and Standards.
For Zinc, the parameters are as follows:
a=0.8473
b
a = 0.884
m
c = 0.8473
b
c = 0.884
The acute zinc limit was estimated to be: e (0.8473(ln 23.9)+ 0.884 = 35.6
The chronic zinc limit was estimated to be: e (0.8473(ln 23.9)+ 0.884 = 35.6

3,
=---
ZX 9� i
il m q
."-• 6,,Ow 0- wi c .:- firl'' r'44-4---)-3 + 64
6. vii
.4 • , i 70z-
/Re. 214c�11 6cs
Clov.v d,c2 - e.;
C/OC CC C
37 3 7
(e„_744,=ci,
o. vt75 G` "4L) r a . se/
zz (, (//)
/ 7) 6
zJ
iivooe ea

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKKS
TWELVE MILE CREEK VW TP NPDES NO. NC0085359
EFFLUENT METAL CONCENTRATIONS
DATE CU (mg/I) ZN (mg/I)
Aug. 26, 2002
Aug. 27, 2002
Aug. 28, 2002
Aug. 29, 2002
Aug. 30, 2002
Sept.3, 2002
Sept. 4, 2002
Sept. 5, 2002
Sept. 6, 2002
Sept. 9, 2002
0.0023 0.045
0.0037 0.042
0.0051 0.045
<.002 0.042
0.006 0.048
<.002 0.031
<.002 0.026
<.002 0.025
<.002 0.033
<.002 0.053
All samples were collected via flow proportional refrigerated sampler.
Samples were collected and preserved by Public Works staff.
Pace Analytical performed analysis. Chain of Custody and QA/QC are available for inspection.

Ambient Station at Twelve Mile Creek @ Waxhaw
STATION
SAMPLING
DATE
HARDNESS
TOTAL (MG/L
AS CACO3)
C9819500 E 01/20/98
C9819500 ` 02/18/98
C9819500 03/12/98
C9819500 04/27/98
30
20
78
36
C9819500 i 05/20/98 40
C9819500 I 06/15/98 50
IC9819500 07/21/98 34
C9819500 08/06/98132
I C9819500 E 09/15/98' 54
C9819500 7 10/13/98 42
C9819500 J 11 /05/98 49
C9819500 12/08/98 52
C9819500 01/05/99139
C9819500 02/04/99 36.72
C981950003/04/99 42
IC9819500 '; 04/06/99 69.3
C9819500 05/11/99 48
C9819500 i 06/28/99 43.56
C9819500 ! 07/21/99 54
C9819500 08/19/99 84.46
C9819500. 09/13/99 74.2
C9819500 10/18/99 58.58
C9819500 11/18/99 52.085
IC9819500 12/14/99136.72
C9819500 01/19/00 42.42
IC9819500 02/03/00 34.68
`C9819500 _ 03/06/00 64
C9819500 — 04/04/00 47
C9819500 — 05/10/00 44
C9819500 06/22/00 78
C9819500 07/25/00 74
C9819500 08/14/00 40
C9819500 i 09/11/00 55
C9819500 12/12/00 79
C9819500 04/05/0140
C9819500 06/12/0161
IC9819500 : 09/06/01 38
015, e, s tEricf ,,, E.

Union County Permit Objection
Subject: Union County Permit Objection
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 15:24:15 -0500
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail], [e-mail]
CC: [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail]
Jackie,
Thank you for the proposed final permit for the Union County/Twelve Mile
Creek WWTP, NC0085359 received by e-mail on 11/19/02. I was on vacation
last week and have reviewed this permit today, 12/3/02.
Our original objection to the lack of fecal coliform limits protective
of SC standards has been addressed with the inclusion of a daily maximum
fecal coliform limit of 400#/100 ml. Additionally, a summer and winter
weekly average limit for NH3 has been included in the proposed final as
requested.
The proposed final permit includes limits for copper and zinc protective
of SC fresh water aquatic life standards. The numeric criteria listed
in the SC standards Appendix: Water Quality Numeric Criteria for the
Protection of Aquatic Life and Human Health provides freshwater
criterion for these metals expressed as a function of hardness (mg/1)
in the water column. The value given in the chart corresponds to a 25.0
mg/1 hardness expressed as CaCO3. The values for the CMC (ug/1) and CCC
(ug/l) for copper and zinc are 3.8 ug/1 & 2.9 ug/1 and 37 ug/1 & 37
ug/l, respectively. The proposed final permit contains a daily max
for copper of 3.6 ug/1 and a weekly average of 2.75 ug/1 and as stated
in the fact sheet. The proposed final permit contains a daily max for
zinc of 35.6 ug/1 while the fact sheet states that the limit in the
permit will be a daily max of 37.0 ug/l. I am unsure of the minor
discrepancies between the SC standard based on a 25 ug/1 hardness and
the proposed final permit limits as well as the discrepancy for the zinc
permit limit and the fact sheet limit. Please clarify.
The fact sheet documenting the inclusion of copper and zinc limits does
not reference the hardness of the water column or the assumption of a
25.0 ug/1 hardness if no data exists. It does not include the 10 data
samples collected from the recent two week sampling period and the
reasonable potential determination based on this data. I would suggest
that it would be beneficial and supported by federal regulations
regarding fact sheet information to expand the fact sheet to address
this issue in depth.
Additionally, it makes sense to base the compliance schedule on the
language used in the CMUD permits, but all reference to CMUD should be
removed and replaced with Union County Public Works Department. (See
footnote 7). I am also confused about the exact date when the metals
limits become effective if Union County does not choose to pursue a
site-specifc standard for copper and zinc. Please clarify.
EPA has until December 11, 2002, to provide you a formal letter
concerning the review of the proposed final permit for Union County.
Before'I write this letter I wanted to clarify the above questions
concerning the metals limits.
Thank you
Dee Stewart
404/562-9334
I of 2 12/4/02 2:53 PM

Re: Union County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed...
Subject: Re: Union County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed permit
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:55:34 -0500
To: [e-mail]
CC: Jeff DeBessonet <[e-mail]>,
Michael Montebello <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Jackie,
Thank you for the proposed final permit for the Union County/Twelve
Mile
Creek WWTP, NC0085359. It was received by e-mail dated 11/19/02.
In
accordance with the NC/EPA Memorandum of Agreement, EPA will review
this
permit within 15 working days or by Wednesday, December 11, 2002.
If you have any further questions, please call.
Dee Stewart
404/562-9334
jackie.nowell@ncm
ail.net
Stewart/R4/USEPA/US@EPA, Roosevelt
To: Dee
Childress/R4/USEPA/US@EPA, Scott Gordon/R4/USEPA/US@EPA,
11/19/02 02:45 PM Jeff DeBessonet
<[e-mail]. STATE. SC. US>,
Please respond to Michael Montebello
<[e-mail]>
jackie.nowell cc:
Subject: Union
County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed
permit
To EPA Region IV,
1 of 2 2/13/2004 9:18 AM

Re: Union County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed...
Attached for your review is the final proposed permit for the
subject facility, an amendment to the factsheet, a proposed final
permit
cover letter, the reasonable potential analysis for the copper and
zinc
dat, and a nutrient data worksheet. Thanks for your consideration.
Jacquelyn M. Nowell
11/19/2002
(See attached file: 1_85359.fct.amend)(See attached file: 85359
final.covltr.doc)(See attached file: 85359.final.proposed.doc)(See
attached file: Union Co. WWTP Nutrient Worksheet.doc)(See attached
file:
unionco.tox.2002data.xls)
2of2
2/13/2004 9:18 AM

Union County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed permit
Subject: Union County - Twelve Creek WWTP final proposed permit
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 14:45:51 -0500
To: "Stewart.Dee @ epamail.epa.gov" <Stewart.Dee @ epamail.epa.gov>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, Jeff
DeBessonet <[e-mail]>, Michael
Montebello<[e-mail]>
BCC: Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>, Alan Klimek
<Alan.Klimek @ ncmail.net>
To EPA Region IV,
Attached for your review is the final proposed permit for the
subject facility, an amendment to the factsheet, a proposed final
permit
cover letter, the reasonable potential analysis for the copper and
zinc
dat, and a nutrient data worksheet. Thanks for your consideration.
Jacquelyn M. Nowell
11/19/2002
1 of 1 2/10/2004 4:51 PM

[Fwd: unionco.tox.2002data.xls]
Subject: [Fwd: unionco.tox.2002data.xls]
From: Jackie Nowell <j ackie.nowell @ ncmail.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 11:31:54 -0400
To: Michael Montebello<[e-mail]>
CC: Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>, Jeff DeBessonet
<DEBESSJP @ COLUMB32.DHEC.STATE.SC.US>
Hello Mike, per this earlier email. Just wanted to check on whether
you
have finished your review. We still need to contact Union Co. to
let
them know that Cu and Zn limits will probably be in the permit. We
would also like to start the permit finalization process so that
Union
County can receive this permit by the end of 2002. Please contact
me
if it is okay with you to proceed. Thank you
Subject: unionco.tox.2002data.xls
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 16:20:55 -0400
To: Michael Montebello<[e-mail]>
Attached is
Twelve Mile
Cu
and Zn tabs
the NC DWQ reasonable potential analysis for Union Co.
Creek which includes copper and zinc data. (Click on the
to see data and statistics)
Despite the low values and several below detections for copper, the
analysis indicates that for both parameters there is reasonable
potential to exceed the NC standards. If limits are placed in the
permit, we would need to give Union Co. a schedule for compliance,
since
this would be the first metals limits ever assigned.
I can't remember whether you wanted to run some analyses using SC
standards. Please contact me when you have finished your review.
Thanks.
1 of 1 2/13/2004 9:06 AM

Actiorl Level Calculation (May 2003) 7/15/03
Metal
Copper
Zinc
Facility
Monsanto WWTP
CMU Sugar Crk
Facility
Monsanto WWTP
CMU Sugar Crk
Chronic AL
7
50
Acute AL 1/2 FAV Chronic CF
7.3 0.96
67 0.986
Acute CF
0.96
0.978
Kpo
1.04E+06
1.25E+06
alpha WQCdis(chrnc) WQCdis(ac)
-0.7436 6.72 7.008
-0.7038 49.3 65.526
Permit No. Flow 7Q10s IWC Subbasin TSS(15th ptci Cu fD=cD/cT Zn fD=cD/cT Cu C instrm Zn C instrm Cu Ac Ins Zn Ac Inst
NC0003719 1.25
002
NC0024937 20
Permit No.
NC0003719 17 179
002
NC0024937 18
791 0.24 CPF15 3 4.20E-01 3.66E-01
3.4 90.12 CTB34 3 4.20E-01 3.66E-01
Cu Limit Zn Limit (If blank, no RP to exceed the recalculated Action Level)
NOTES:
Monsanto has Acute P/F tox testing - the predicted copper and zinc limit is based on acute values (as per our established policy).
CMU - Sugar Creek: Only the recalculated copper showed reasonable potential to exceed. The letter regarding the action level for copper is
likely to confuse CMU because they are in the process of getting copper and zinc limits based on South Carolina's dissolved standards.
16 135 17 179
16
135
17 179

SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Purpose
In the late 1980's many states adopted very stringent metal limits in response to the EPA's
amendments to the Clean Water Act. These metal limitations were based entirely on work
performed in the late 1970's and early 1980's by the EPA and published in various criteria
documents which established the acute and chronic toxicity of metals in the most toxic (ionic)
form in synthetic laboratory water to various aquatic organisms. As a result, these water quality
criteria for metals did not take into consideration the bioavailability of the metal. The
bioavailability of trace metals to aquatic organisms is dependent on a number of factors which
determine the speciation of the metal including oxidation state, complexation, sorption to
suspended solids, and sorption with organic compounds. As a result, the form of the metal
present in an effluent discharge is more important with regards to toxicity than the total
recoverable concentration.
In response to this problem, many states adopted the use of EPA developed linear partition
coefficients (Kp) to calculate the fraction of the dissolved metal and limits metals discharged
based on dissolved versus total content. Since only a part of dissolved fraction has the potential
of being bioavailable (and therefore toxic) it is believed that this is a conservative and more
appropriate means of limiting metals discharged.
For the Union County Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, the use of dissolved
metal content approach will not give adequate relief for copper and/or zinc. Limits for these
metals were added to the NPDES permit in order to meet North Carolina and South Carolina
stream standards. In order to request increased NPDES permit limitations for copper and/or
zinc, the Recalculation and Water Effect Ratio (WER) Procedures will be used jointly to provide
Twelve Mile Creek site specific criterion maximum concentrations (CMC) and criterion
continuous concentrations (CCC). The Recalculation Procedure will be performed first. After
completion of the recalculations for copper and/or zinc, it will be determined if a WER study is
necessary.
The recalculated site specific criteria will provide more appropriate acute and chronic criteria for
the Twelve Mile Creek below the WWTP discharge. This procedure will account for the
differences between the range of sensitivities of the species used to develop the national criteria
and the sensitivities of the species resident to the site. The WER method compares the toxicity
J:1Union County130873 1 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

of a metal (as a mineral salt) in the actual receiving stream water mixed with effluent to the
toxicity of a metal in standardized laboratory water. The resulting LC50's (lethal concentration
at which 50% of the organisms expire) are used to derive a water effect ratio which in turn can
be used to adjust the recalculated criteria. Both procedures will utilize methods as outlined in
"Interim Guidance on Determination and Use of Water -Effect Ratios for Metals" (EPA-823-B-94-
001). A schedule for completion of the project is provided in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Project Schedule
TASK
Submit Draft Technical Proposal to Union County
Submit Final Technical Proposal to NCDENR
Perform Habitat Assessment at site
Perform Recalculation Procedure
Perform Effluent and Stream Sampling for Hardness,
Copper and/or zinc and Zinc. Collect 3X/week for
approximately 7 weeks.
Calculated potential NPDES permit limits for Cu and Zn and
determine if WER necessary
WER Testing (if needed)
Exact sampling will depend on weather conditions.
Tentative sampling dates are:
June 3, 2003 1st WER
July 8, 2003 2nd WER
August 5, 2003 3rd WER
Sampling seasons — Spring and Summer
Submittal of Final Report
EXPECTED
COMPLETION DATE
April 13, 2003
April 20, 2003
April .30, 2003
May 30, 2003
May 30, 2003
June 10, 2003
August 15, 2003
September 15, 2003
J:\Union County\30873 2 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

SECTION 2.0 - RECALCULATION PROCEDURE
2.1 Definitions
For this study, the "site" will be defined as the segment of the receiving waters from
approximately 165 feet upstream from the WWTP outfall to approximately 1 kilometer
downstream after complete mixing has occurred. For this study, "occur at the site" will mean
species that have been collected at or near the site or are suspected to be present seasonally
or intermittently.
2.2 Determination of Resident Species
The taxa that "occur at the site" will not be determined solely from collection data at the site or in
nearby streams. For instance, if a specie occurs only seasonally due to migration or other
environmental factors, the specie may not be found when the instream sampling is performed.
Failure to collect a species does not necessarily mean that it does not occur at the site
periodically.
Any taxa which are not collected at the site but whose habitat and distribution could include the
site will be maintained in the base data set. Appropriate references will be used to determine
which species would or would not likely occur at the site. The following in -stream collection data
may be used for this study.
• Qualitative macroinvertebrate data from assessments performed by Shealy Environmental
Services, Inc. in nearby waters over the past two (2) years.
• A habitat assessment performed by SHEALY in April 2003 at the study site.
• Fish collection data obtained from the SC Wildlife and Marine Resources Department in
nearby South Carolina streams.
• Fish collection data obtained from the NC Department of Health and Environmental
Management.
J:\Union County\30873 3 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

• Any other scientifically valid data source not presently identified such as the Catena Group,
North and South Carolina Universities, USEPA, and USGS.
2.3 The Deletion Process
Once all of the in -stream data is evaluated, the first step of the recalculation procedure will be to
delete certain non-resident species from the copper and/or zinc national acute data set.
Generally, there will be four (4) steps in the deletion process.
Step 1 involves circling all species that are known to exist at the site. The criteria for
considering a specie to be resident will be basically the same as described in the EPA Guidance
Document (page 90). A specie will be considered to exist at the site if any of the following
criteria are met:
A) The specie has been collected at the site or at nearby sites during any of
the in -stream assessments.
B) The specie distribution includes or may include the site.
Step 2 involves deleting any species in the data set for which there are no usable toxicity data.
Step 3 involves performing the deletion process for each specie. The steps used in the deletion
process are given in Table 2 and utilize the EPA deletion process.
Step 4 checks to verify that the minimum data requirements (MDR's) are met. The following are
the MDR's:
■ Must include the Family Salmonidae, class Osteichthyes.
■ Must include a second family in the class Osteichthyes, preferably a commercially or
recreationally important species (e.g.Bluegill, Channel Catfish).
■ Must include a third family in the Phylum Chordata.
■ Must include a Planktonic Crustacean.
■ Must include a Benthic Crustacean.
■ Must include an insect.
■ Must include a family in a phylum other than Anthropoda or Chordata.
■ Must include a family in any order of insect or any phylum not already represented.
J:\Union County\30873 4 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

TABLE 2
Stepwise Procedure Utilized in the Deletion Process
Step 1 Does the genus occur at the site?
• If NO, go to Step 2.
• If YES, is there one or more species in the genus that occur at the site but are not in the
dataset?
If NO, go to Step 2.
If YES, retain the uncircled species.
Step 2 Does the family occur at the site?
• If NO, go to Step 3.
• If YES, is there one or more species in the family that occur at the site but are not in the
dataset?
If NO, go to Step 3
If YES, retain the uncircled species.
Step 3 Does the order occur at the site?
• If NO, go to Step 4.
• If YES, does the dataset contain a circled species that is in the same order?
If NO, retain the uncircled species.
If YES, delete the uncircled species.
Step 4 Does the class occur at the site?
• If NO, go to Step 5.
• If YES, does the dataset contain a circled species that is in the same class?
• If NO, retain the uncircled species.
If YES, delete the uncircled species.
Step 5 Does the phylum occur at the site?
• If NO, delete the uncircled species.
• If YES, does the dataset contain a circled species that is in the same phylum?
• If NO, retain the uncircled species.
If YES, delete the uncircled species.
J:\Union County\30873 5 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

If no species of a particular group required occurs at the site, but a species in the same order
does, the MDR (Minimum Data Requirements) can only be satisfied by data for a species that
occurs at the site and is in that order; if no species in the order occurs at the site, but a species
in the class does, the MDR can only be satisfied by data for a species that occurs at the site and
is in that class. If no species in the same class occurs at the site, but a species in the phylum
does, the MDR can only be satisfied by data for a species that occurs at the site and is in the
phylum. If no species in the sample phylum occurs at the site, any species that occurs at the
site and is not used to satisfy a different MDR can be used to satisfy the MDR.
If a specific requirement above can not be satisfied after deletion because the group does not
occur at the site, a taxonomically similar resident species will be substituted in order to meet the
eight MDR's.
2.4 Criterion Maximum Calculations (CMC) and Continuous Concentration
Calculations (CCC)
The calculations for the Final Acute Value (FAV's) will be performed according to the methods
as outlined in "Guidelines for Deriving Numerical Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of
Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses" and given below.
S2=E [(In GMAV)21 — HE (In GMAV))2 I41
E (P) — [((E(JP))2 /4]
L = [(E(In GMAV) — S (E(IP))] /4
A = S(-1.05) + L
FAV = eA
Where S2, L and A are variables used in the derivation of the FAV,P is the degrees of freedom, and
GMAV is defined as the genus mean acute value. The equations for S2, L and A are used to derive the
geometric mean of four most sensitive genera in the data set.
The final acute -chronic ratio (A-C Ratio) for copper or zinc will be used to calculate the CCC as
follows:
FINAL CHRONIC VALUE (CCC) = FAV / A-C RATIO
J:\Union County\30873 6 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

• SECTION 3.0 - WATER EFFECT RATIO METHOD
For the Twelve Mile Creek WWTP, the full WER Procedure may be utilized for copper and/or
zinc, depending on the results from the Recalculation. Three (3) WER values will be derived for
the primary species, Ceriodaphnia dubia (water flea), and 1 WER will be derived for a
secondary species, Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). The WER tests will include both
Type I (to simulate dilution at 1 to 2 times the 7Q10 flow) and Type II (to simulate dilution at 2 to
10 times the 7Q10 flow) tests using a simulated stream mixture prepared based on the actual
stream flow at the time of sampling.
3.1 Preparation of Sampling Equipment
All sampling equipment including the tubing and glass collection jar will be acid washed with 1:1
nitric acid and rinsed with DI water immediately prior to use. Once on site, equipment blanks
will be collected from each ISCO unit and returned to the laboratory for metals analyses.
Shealy Environmental will collect all samples for the project.
3.2 Collection of Effluent and Stream Samples
All samples will be delivered to the laboratory for testing on wet ice. Effluent will be collected as
24-hour composite samples and stream water will be collected as grab samples. Stream water
will be collected at a suitable location upstream from the WWTP outfall on Twelve Mile Creek.
Samples will not be collected within 72 hours of a significant rain event. Field records will be
completed on the chain of custody forms at the time the samples are collected. Field records
will contain the following minimum information:
(a) Sample Description/Location
(b) Sample Identification Number
(c) Date/Time of Sample Collection
(d) Preservative Used
(e) Analyses Required
(f) Name of Sample Collector
(g) Signature of Sample Collector
J:\Union County\30873 7 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

Chain of Custody records for the effluent and receiving stream samples will be completed.
Each sample will be identified by affixing a pressure sensitive gummed label on the container(s).
The label will contain the sample number, source of sample, preservative used, and the
collector(s)' initials. Guidelines established in standard manuals for sample collection,
preservation and handling will be used (e.g., EPA, NPDES Compliance Sampling Inspection
Manual, MCD 51; Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater).
3.3 Sample Receiving
All incoming samples will be received by the custodian, who will indicate receipt by signing the
accompanying custody/control forms. The custodian maintains a permanent logbook to record
for each sample the person delivering the sample, the person receiving the sample, date and
time received, source of sample, date the sample is taken, sample identification, how
transported to the laboratory and condition received (sealed, unsealed, broken container, or
other pertinent remarks). The laboratory log -in area is maintained as a secured area, restricted
to authorized personnel only. Samples will be released from the sample custodian to the
laboratory analyst via an internal chain -of -custody system.
After arrival to the laboratory the samples will be maintained at or below 4°C until used for
testing. Sample arrival temperature will be recorded on the chain -of -custody record. Aliquots of
samples received for toxicity testing will be measured for receipt temperature and pH.
3.4 Test Chambers and Measuring Devices
Metal, galvanized material, rubber, brass and lead will not be allowed to come in contact with
effluent samples or test solutions. Acid cleaned and DI rinsed Class A graduated cylinders and
volumetric flasks will be used for preparation of all test solutions. The following steps will be
taken when preparing test chambers and measuring devices for testing:
a. Scrubbed with detergent (Baxter Scientific) in tap water.
b. Rinsed twice with tap water.
c. Rinsed once with full-strength acetone (Mallinckrodt) to remove organics.
d. Rinsed once with deionized water (DI).
e. Rinsed once with 1:1 hydrochloric acid (Mallinckrodt) to remove scale, metals and
bases.
J:\Union County\30873 8 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

f. Rinsed 3 times with DI water water.
After the final rinse a blank will be collected from the holding tanks, graduated cylinders,
beakers, pipettes and volumetric flasks by rinsing with DI water. The blank will be measured for
metal and results provided in the results section of the report.
Plastic disposable one -ounce test cups will be used as test vessels for the Ceriodaphnia dubia.
3.5 Clean Lab Techniques for Metal Analyses
The Interim Final Guidance document recommends that the Clean Lab Techniques be followed
including the use of a "clean room" environment and Class 100 benches. Although strict quality
control procedures will be used, Clean Lab Techniques will be not used for this study because
the use of such would be cost prohibitive and not practical. The appropriate matrix spikes,
duplicates and equipment blanks will be used to minimize the possibility of contamination. The
following quality control procedures will be utilized for this project:
• Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) and graphite furnace will be utilized for the metal analyses
The detection limits for copper and zinc will be 0.002 mg/I and 0.020 mg/I, respectively.
• Non -toxic and powder free latex gloves will be used.
• Metal -free acid will be used and each lot tested to verify purity.
• Fume hoods and benchtops will be cleaned before use to remove contamination.
• Beakers and other labware will be stored in closed containers.
• Chromic acid will not be used for cleaning glassware.
• Samples will be stored in the dark at 40 C +/- 20 C.
• Blanks will be analyzed with each batch of samples.
• Each calibration curve will have a correlation coefficient of >0.99.
• Each run contained at least one blind sample (standard).
• Matrix spikes and matrix spike duplicates will be analyzed on a 10% basis. The acceptance
criteria stated by published methods will be observed.
J:1Union County130873 9 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

3.6 Water Quality Analyses
The following table describes the water quality analyses which will be performed on all effluent
samples, receiving water and laboratory dilution water used for testing. These analyses will be
performed prior to any hardness adjustments or metal additions.
TABLE 3
Water Quality Analyses to be Performed
Parameter Simulated Stream Laboratory
(as mg/I) Effluent Stream Water Water Dilution Water
TSS X X X X
TOC X X X X
BOD X X X X
Hardness X X X X
Alkalinity X X X X
Conductivity X X X X
(umhos/cm)
Total Recoverable X X X X
Metals
Total Dissolved Metals X X X X
In order to obtain baseline data, during April and May 2003, hardness, copper and zinc will be
measured on twenty (20) samples of effluent and stream water.
3.7 Analyses of Test Treatments
Metal concentrations (as total recoverable and dissolved) will be measured in all test solutions
to obtain actual concentrations and these concentrations will be used in all statistical analyses
of data. Hardness concentrations will be measured on each batch of water used for testing.
3.8 Test Organisms
All test organisms used for toxicity testing will be disease -free and never exposed to pollutants
or other stress prior to testing. Cladocerans for use in acute bioassays will be from individual in-
house cultures only. The species for the study will be Ceriodaphnia dubia. Fathead minnows
J:1Union County130873 10 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

• will be obtained from Aquatic Biosystems. The sensitivity of fathead minnows will be
determined with a 48-hour definitive acute test (at 25°C).
3.9 Preparation of Dilution Water
In addition to a pre-treatment deionizer system, a Millipore Reverse Osmosis and an Ultra
filtration polishing system is used to bring water quality up to Type I ASTM standards for toxicity
testing. Reconstituted water will be used as the dilution water and will be prepared by adding a
sufficient volume of the standard EPA recipe to obtain hardness similar to the simulated stream
mixture. The hardness of the laboratory water test will be prepared to closely match the
simulated stream water hardness.
3.10 Hardness Adjustment of Simulated Stream Water
A standardized hardness of at least 40 mg/I will be used for all tests. The hardness used will
depend on the hardness of the original simulated stream mixture. If the hardness of the
simulated stream mixture is less than 40 mg/I the hardness will be raised as required by the
Interim Guidance Document. The LC50's will be standardized to an appropriate mixed -stream
using the following equations:
0.9422
Cu Adjusted LC50 = LC50 at measured hardness * (standardized hardness 1
measured hardness
0.8473
i standardized hardness 1
Zn Adjusted LC50 = LC50 at measured hardness *
measured hardness
The mixed -stream hardness will be determined using the results from the effluent and stream
hardness analyses performed during April and May 2003 as well as any data previously
performed.
3.11 Toxicity Test Procedures
Test methods will conform to those described in USEPA 600/4-85/013 "Methods for Measuring
the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine Organisms". A summary of test
conditions for the Ceriodaphnia dubia survival are given in Table 4 as follows.
J:\Union County130873 11 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

TABLE 4
Summary of Test Conditions for the Ceriodaphnia dubia 48 hour Survival Test
Test type:
Temperature:
Light Quality
Photoperiod
Test chamber:
Test solution volume:
Renewal of test solutions:
Source of test organisms
Age of test animals:
Number of treatments per
study:
Number of organisms per
chamber:
Number of replicate
chambers per treatment
Feeding regime:
Test Duration:
Effects Measured:
Static non -renewal
20°C + 1 °C
Ambient Laboratory Illumination
16h light:8h dark
1 ounce disposable plastic cups
25 mis
None
In House Cultures
<24 Hours
6 - 8 treatments and a control
five
four plus a surrogate for water
chemistry
None
48 hours
Survival
To initiate the tests, test solutions will be prepared using class 'A' graduated cylinders and
pipettes. Solutions will be warmed to 200C ±1. 25 mis of the test solution will be poured into
each test beaker containing five Ceriodaphnia dubia. The tests will be covered with Plexiglas
covers and placed in an incubator maintained at 20 + 1 oC and set with a 16 hour light/ 8 hour
dark cycle. Immobile organisms will be examined with a stereoscope (60x) for minor activity of
appendages. A test organism will be considered dead if no appendage activity is observed.
The tests will be terminated at 48 hours + 2 hours from test initiation time.
J:1Union County130873 12 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

For a valid test the following mandatory conditions will be met:
1. Control mortality did not exceed 10%,
2. Temperatures remained in -range (20 ± 1 0C),
3. Tests will be initiated within 36 hours of sample collection.
Dissolved oxygen, pH, and temperature will be determined in surrogate vessels of each
concentration and the control at the beginning and at 24-hour intervals during the tests.
3.12 Spiking Procedures
Copper and/or zinc will be added to the simulated stream mixture at the concentrations
estimated during a preliminary screening study. If a WER is performed for both copper and
zinc, the metals will be spiked together. Test concentrations will be initially based on a dilution
factor of 0.65 or as otherwise recommended by EPA guidelines. For the laboratory dilution
water spiking tests, the solutions will be prepared in the same manner as the simulated stream
tests except the concentrations will be much lower.
3.13 Toxicity Data Analyses
The Probit or Spearman-Karber Method will be used to determine LC50s for the WER tests.
Confidence limits for these tests will be 95% and 99%. The WER will be calculated by dividing
the LC50 of the laboratory water test into the LC50 of the simulated stream test. All calculations
will be made to four decimal places.
3.14 Calculation of FWER
The final water effect ratio (FWER) will be the lowest of the three primary water effect ratios for
copper, zinc and/or the copper/zinc combination.
J:\Union County130873 13 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

SECTION 4.0 - DERIVATION OF SITE SPECIFIC CRITERIA
4.1 Site Specific Criteria
The Final Water Effect Ratio (EWER) will be multiplied by the recalculated CMC and CCC for
copper and zinc to obtain an appropriate site specific NPDES permit limit. The following
equation will be utilized in determining the appropriate site specific NPDES permit limits for
copper and zinc.
Cm* (QE + Qs) — (Qs* Cs)
CE—
QE
where Qs is 7Q10 stream flow, Cs is the upstream concentration of the pollutant, QE is
design flow, and CM is the CCC or CMC.
J:\Union County\30873 14 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan

• REFERENCES
USEPA, 1993. Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents to Freshwater and Marine
Organisms, 4th edition, EPA/600/4-85/013.
USEPA, 1994. Interim Guidance on the Determination and Use of Water Effect Ratios for
Metals. EPA-823-B-94-001.
Stephan, C.E. et. al. 1985. Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria
for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses. National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA.
J:\Union County\30873 15 Union County Metal
Technical Study Plan •

Re: [Fwd: unionco.tox.2002data.xls]
Subject: Re: (Fwd: unionco.tox.2002data.xls)
From: "Michael Montebello"
<MONTEBMJ@COLUMB32. DHEC.STATE.SC. US>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 10:18:10 -0500
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "Jeff DeBessonet"<[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>
Jackie,
As I indicated earlier, I would expect both Copper & Zinc limits to be in place (after a period established
in a compliance schedule).
I was confused however, since the Reasonable Potential attachment said "NO" to limits for Copper & ZN. I
would assume that should be revised.
I would also like to see the revised NPDES permit draft for review.
Thank You,
Mike Montebello
»> Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]> 10/25/02 11:31AM »>
Hello Mike, per this earlier email. Just wanted to check on whether you
have finished your review. We still need to contact Union Co. to let
them know that Cu and Zn limits will probably be in the permit. We
would also like to start the permit finalization process so that Union
County can receive this permit by the end of 2002. Please contact me
If it is okay with you to proceed. Thank you
1 of 1 2/18/2004 11:00 AM

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
2 2 2a02
jei
Al n Klimek, Director
D vision of Water Quality
orth Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Review of Draft NPDES Permit No. NC0085359
Union County/Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Dear Mr. Klimek:
_ W..1itR QUALITY
:;1 S0L,tCE BRANCH
lArlar
4?
4UP, , ' 2002
DIV OF WATER
DIRECTOR'S OFFICE
q� E Y
The draft permit referenced above was received for review by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on May 24, 2002. In a letter dated June 24, 2002, we requested an
extension of our review period until August 22, 2002. Following receipt of our preliminary
concerns, in an August 14, 2002, email, Ms. Jackie Nowell of your staff indicated that EPA's
concerns would be addressed in a revised draft permit. However, due to the ongoing collection of
copper and zinc data, a revised draft permit has not yet been prepared nor sent to EPA for review.
Because EPA's 90-day review period ends on August 22, 2002, and because no revised draft
permit has been received, EPA is formally submitting this objection to the Union County/Twelve
Mile Creek WWTP draft permit.
EPA objects to the above referenced draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit based on the proposed fecal coliform limitations. This discharge,
although it is into the waters of the State of North Carolina, also affects waters in the State of
South Carolina. The draft permit contains monthly and weekly average fecal coliform limits
which comply with North Carolina's water quality standards; however, it fails to address the
water quality concerns of the downstream "affected" state, per 40 C.F.R. § 123.44(c).
South Carolina's freshwater quality standards for fecal coliform include a requirement that
no more than 10% of the total monthly samples exceed 400 colonies/100 ml. South Carolina
municipal NPDES permits typically implement this provision of their water quality standards
through a daily maximum fecal coliform limit of 400 colonies/100m1. The proposed fecal coliform
limits will not ensure compliance with South Carolina's fecal coliform water quality standards and
therefore, EPA objects to the draft NPDES permit, per 40 C.F.R. §§122.4(d) and 122.44(d)(4).
Internet Address (URL) • http:I/www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30' Postconsurner)

2
Additionally, EPA offers the following comments concerning weekly average ammonia
limits and monitoring for copper and zinc. First, all publicly owned treatment works are required
to include, unless impracticable, average weekly and average monthly discharge limitations per 40
C.F.R. §122.45(d)(2). The draft permit does not include average weekly ammonia limits,
although it does include a condition allowing the permit to be re -opened, if following a reasonable
potential evaluation, the State determines that there should be an average weekly ammonia limit.
EPA and North Carolina have discussed the need for an average weekly ammonia limit in all
municipal permits and have agreed that reasonable potential for inclusion of this limit in municipal
NPDES permits should be completed by September 2002. EPA requests that Item A.1., Note #3,
of the NPDES permit for this facility be expanded to reflect this time commitment for evaluation
of reasonable potential and inclusion of an average weekly ammonia limit if appropriate.
Second, the letter transmitting this draft permit references the addition of quarterly
monitoring for copper and zinc due to a recent failure of a quarterly chronic whole effluent
toxicity test and the lack of data for these parameters. The fact sheet further states that the
facility should monitor for copper and zinc and a reasonable potential analysis will be made at the
next permit renewal. EPA requests that a specific re -opener clause be added to the permit with
regard to these parameters requiring a reasonable potential determination and re -opening of the
permit and inclusion of appropriate limits, if necessary, after a reasonable amount of data are
collected. EPA suggests that two years of data collection is adequate, based on quarterly
monitoring, to determine if limits for copper or zinc are necessary. Additionally, since this facility
affects waters in South Carolina, which has specific hardness dependent numeric criteria for
copper and zinc, EPA requests that in -stream and effluent hardness be monitored as well. The
appropriate reasonable potential determination also should be made with respect to the South
Carolina numeric criteria for copper and zinc, per 40 C.F.R. §§122.4(d) and 122.44(d)(4).
This action is pursuant to Section III of the North Carolina/EPA Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) and federal regulations and will ensure that EPA's rights for review of the
revised draft permit, when prepared, are preserved. We request that you redraft the permit to
address the objection expressed above, as well as EPA's comments, and submit a revised draft
NPDES permit to EPA for review. If you have any further questions, please contact me or
Ms. Dee Stewart of my staff at 404/562-9334 or at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Lainti
Beverly H. Banister, Director
Water Management Division
cc: Mr. John C. Dyer
Union County Public Works
Alton Boozer, SCDHEC

DENR/DWQ
kk ( Cal [1 rE
i
FACT SHEET FOR NPDES PERMIT DEVELOPMENT
AUG - 6 2002
frl
I i
NPDES No. NC0085359
L
f`
Facility Information
1 ,
-
Applicant/Facility Name:
Union County Public Works/ Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Applicant Address:
400 North Church Street Monroe, N.C. 28112
Facility Address:
3104 Providence Road South
Permitted Flow
2.5 MGD
Type of Waste:
100% Domestic
Facility/Permit Status:
Renewal
Facility Classification
IV
County:
Union
Miscellaneous
Receiving Stream:
Twelve Mile Creek
Regional Office:
Mooresville
Stream Classification:
C
USGS Topo Quad:
H15NE/Catawba NE NC -SC
303(d) Listed?:
No
Permit Writer:
Jackie Nowell
Subbasin:
03-08-38
Date:
Drainage Area (mi2):
76.8
•
Summer 7Q10 (cfs)
0.0
Winter 7Q10 (cfs):
1.5
Average Flow (cfs):
69
IWC (%): .
90
Primary SIC Code:
4952
SUMMARY OF FACILITY INFORMATION AND WASTELOAD ALLOCATION
Union County has requested renewal and modification of the Twelve Mile Creek WWTP. The
existing WWTP with a design flow of 2.5 MGD discharges into Twelve Mile Creek, a class C
water, in CTB38 subbasin. (Twelve Mile Creek is formed downstream of the convergence of
West Fork Twelve Mile Creek and East Fork Twelve Mile Creek.) The stream has a 7Q 10 flow =0
and 30Q2>0 and tertiary limits have assigned for protection of water quality. The speculative
request is for limits for 6, 9, and 12 MGD. The facility receives no industrial flow. All
wasteflow is domestic and serves the Towns of Waxhaw, portions of Stallings and Indian Trail
for a total of 8000 accounts. With a current wasteflow average in 2001 of 0.855 MGD, that is
an average of 106 gal/acct.
Because Twelve Mile Creek flows into South Carolina, the renewal and proposed expansion has
to be considered with its potential effects in that state. South Carolina has complained
because permits for the nearby Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility Department (CMUD) wastewater
treatment plants have been renewed without phosphorus limits. The final agreement between
the states includes the terms of the limits for all three CMUD plants. This same strategy will
be used by DWQ to limit phosphorus in the Union County WWTP. Union County -Twelve Mile
Creek will have a mass limit equivalent to 1 mg/1 at the permitted flow of 2.5 MGD. This limit
of 20.85 lbs./day is to be judged as a rolling annual average. The facility will also have a
monthly average mass limit equivalent to 2 mg/1 of 41.70 lbs./day. It is also recommended/
that a special condition requiring a phosphorus optimization study be included in the permit.
This study will allow DWQ time to review the County's preparations for the impending
phosphorus total maximum daily load (TMDL) that will be effective within three to five years.
The phosphorus limit recommended by the TMDL could be as low as 0.1 mg/1.
Twelve Mile Creek is not listed on North Carolina's 2000 303(d) list. There is not a use support
rating for Twelve Mile Creek. The bioclassification rating has improved over time based on three
sampling events at NC Highway 16: 1) November 1983 - FAIR. 2) July 1989 - GOOD -FAIR. 3)
February 1990 - GOOD -FAIR. The fish community assessment located at the same station was
rated FAIR in June 11, 1997.
LITY
NCH
RECEIVED
JUL 1 12002
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 1
NC DEPT. OF EN'IIROMIENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

•
Existing Effluent Limits @, 2.5 MGD
Qw = 2.5 MGD
BOD5 = 5 mg/1 (summer)
BOD5 = 10 mg/1 (winter)
NH3 = 2 mg/1 (summer)
NH3 = 4 mg/1 (winter)
TSS = 30 mg/1
Dissolved Oxygen = 6 mg/1
Fecal Coliform = 200/ 100m1
pH = 6-9 SU
Chronic Toxicity P/F @ 90%; February May August November
Daily monitoring for temperature and conductivity.
Monthly monitoring for TP and TN
Instream monitoring for DO, fecal coliform, temperature, and conductivity.
TOXICITY TESTING:
Current Requirement: Chronic Toxicity P/F @ 90%; February May August November
The Twelve Mile Creek WWTP has consistently passed the tox test since it began May 1, 1996.
Two FAILs in May 1998 and February 2002, have occurred in 18 tests. A PASS followed the
May failure. Followup results on the February '02 test have not been received yet. (4 / 2 5 / 02 -
Conversation with WWTP engineer indicated that the tox test failure followed a plant upset
when some vegetative matter was dumped into the sewer system.) Recommend renewal of
existing tox test ® 90% at 2.5 MGD.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY:
Facility has maintained an excellent compliance record since 1998.
In 2001, Avg. Qw = 0.8548 MGD (approximately 34% of capacity), BOD5=0.615 mg/1,
NH3=0.225 mg/1, TSS=0.0 mg/1, TN=2.95 mg/ and TP=0.825 mg/1.
In 2000, Avg. Qw = 1.028 MGD (approximately 41% of capacity), BOD5=1.12 mg/1, NH3=0.06
mg/1, TSS=1.1 mg/1, TN=2.69 mg/ and TP=1.98 mg/1.
In 1999, Avg. Qw = 0.8499 MGD (approximately 51% of capacity), BOD5=1.31 mg/1, NH3=0.00
mg/1, TSS=0.0 mg/1, TN=2.7 mg/ and TP=2.048 mg/1.
In 1998, Avg. Qw = 0.7636 MGD (approximately 55% of capacity), BOD5=1.71 mg/1, NH3=0.00
mg/1, TSS=0.3 mg/1, TN=9.76 mg/ and TP=3.01 mg/1.
INSTREAM MONITORING:
Parameters: Dissolved Oxygen, Fecal Coliform, Temperature, Conductivity
Upstream: 50 ft above the outfall,
Downstream #1: One -quarter mile below the outfall, before the confluence with the first
tributary,
Downstream #2: at NCSR 1301
Review of instream monitoring data shows that Twelve Mile Creek upstream of WWTP has DO
problems in the summer months. In June to October 2001, the monthly average DO values
ranged from 2.62 mg/1 to 4.8 mg/1. Downstream values during the same period averaged
above 5 mg/1 DO, except for the month of August when the average DO was 4.99 mg/1 at
downstream site #1 and 4.80 mg/1 at site #2.
In June to October 2000, the monthly average DO values ranged from 3.87 mg/1 to 5.14 mg/1.
September 2000 was the only month when the upstream DO average was above the 5 mg/1
standard. Downstream values during the same period averaged above 5 mg/1 DO, except for
the month of June when the average DO was 4.05 mg/1 at downstream site #1 and 4.78 mg/1
at site #2.
In July to September 1999, the monthly average DO values ranged from 3.15 mg/1 to 4.70
mg/1. Downstream values during the same period averaged above 5 mg/1 DO, except for the
month of August when the average DO was 4.79 mg/1 at downstream site #1 and 4.65 mg/1 at
site #2.
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 2

Because of the low DO values that have occurred downstream, DWQ is recommending that
Union Co. conduct synoptic DO monitoring at every road crossing downstream and into SC to
see the downstream effect in Twelve Mile Creek. Facility should develop the study and submit
the data to DWQ.
PROPOSED CHANGES:
The following modifications have been made to the permit:
• The addition of a TP mass limit of 20.85 mg/1, the mass equivalent of 1 mg/1 based on
agreement with SCDHEC for protection of Catawba River lake system.
• The addition of quarterly monitoring for copper and zinc due to recent toxicity test
failure. As a major discharger, facility should monitor for Cu and Zn for data
collection and a reasonable potential analysis can be made at the next renewal.
PROPOSED WATER QUALITY BASED LIMITS
This permit contains water quality based limits for biochemical oxygen demand, total
suspended solids, ammonia, dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform, total residual chlorine, and
toxicity.
PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY BASED LIMITS
This permit contains technology based limits for pH and percent removal for biochemical
oxygen demand and total suspended solids.
PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT ISSUANCE:
Draft Permit to Public Notice: 05/22/2002
Permit Scheduled to Issue: 07/05/2002
Projected Effective Date: 08/01/2002
Administrative Procedures
15A NCAC 02H .0109 PUBLIC NOTICE
(a) Notice of Application
(1) Public notice of each complete individual NPDES permit application and each general
NPDES permit shall be circulated in the geographical areas of the proposed discharge by the
Director at least 45 days prior to any proposed final action:
(A) by publishing the notice one time in a newspaper having general circulation
in said county; and
(B) by mailing the notice to all persons or agencies listed in Subsection (c) of this
Rule.
(2) The notice shall set forth at least the following:
(A) name, address, and phone number of the agency issuing the public notice;
(B) name and address of each applicant;
(C) brief description of each applicant's activities or operations which result in
the discharge
described in the NPDES application;
(D) name of waterway to which each discharge is made and a short description
of the location of each discharge on the waterway indicating whether such
discharge is a new or an existing discharge;
(E). a statement of the tentative determination to issue or deny an NPDES permit
for the discharge described in the NPDES application;
(F) a brief description of the procedures for the formulation of final
determinations, including a 30-day comment period and any other means by
which interested persons may influence or
comment upon the determinations; and
(G) address and phone number of state agency premises at which interested
persons may obtain further information, request a copy of the draft permit,
request a copy of the fact sheet, and inspect and copy NPDES application forms
and related documents. Copies of the fact sheet shall be made available free
upon request. Copies of the information on file, other than fact sheets, will be
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 3

made available upon request and payment of the cost of reproduction.
• (3) Public notice for those activities covered by Certificates of Coverage issued pursuant
to a general permit and Authorizations to Construct shall not be required.
(b) Notice of Public Meeting
(1) Notice of public meeting on any NPDES permit application shall be circulated in the
geographical areas of the proposed discharge by the Director at least 30 days prior to the date
of the meeting:
(A) by publishing the notice one time in a newspaper having general circulation
in said county;
(B) by mailing the notice to all persons and government agencies which received
a copy of the notice or the fact sheet for the NPDES application; and
(C) by mailing the notice to any person or group upon request.
(2) The notice of any public meeting shall include at least the following:
(A) name, address, and phone number of agency holding the public meeting;
(B) name and address of each applicant whose application will be considered
at the meeting;
(C) name of waterway to which each discharge is made and a short
description of the location of each discharge on the waterway;
(D) a brief reference to the public notice issued for each NPDES application
including identification number and date of issuance;
(E) information regarding the time and location for the meeting;
(F) the purpose of the meeting;
(G) address and phone number of premises at which interested persons may
obtain further information, request a copy of each draft NPDES permit,
request a copy of each fact sheet, and inspect and copy NPDES forms and
related documents; and
(H) a brief description of the nature of the meeting including the rules and
procedures to be followed; The notice shall also state that additional
information is on file with the Division of Environmental Management,
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources at the Archdale
Building at 512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, and may be
inspected at any time during normal working hours. Copies of the
information on file will be made available upon request and payment of cost
of reproduction.
(c) Mailing Lists. Any person may request to receive copies of all notices required under this
Rule and the Director shall mail such notice to any such person. An annual charge of twenty-
five dollars ($25.00) may be charged for any person desiring to be placed and maintained on the
NPDES Permit mailing list. The Director shall also give notice to the following for NPDES
permits:
(1) State water pollution control agency for the States of Virginia, South Carolina, Tennessee,
and Georgia;
(2) Appropriate district engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
(3) Lead agency responsible for preparation of plan pursuant to Section 208(b) of the Clean
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq, in approved 208 areas;
(4) State agency responsible for the preparation of plans pursuant to Section 303(e) of the
Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq;
(5) North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Health; and
(6) Any other federal, state, or local agency upon request.
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-215.1(a)(1); 143-215.1(c); 143-215.4(a); 143-215.4(c); Eff.
February 1, 1976; Amended Eff. March 1, 1993; August 1, 1988; October 1, 1987; December 1,
1984.
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 4

15A NCAC 02H .0111 MEETINGS AND HEARINGS
(a) Public Meetings:
(1) The Director shall provide an opportunity for the applicant, any affected state, any
affected interstate agency, the regional administrator, or any interested agency, person,
or group of persons to request or petition for a public meeting with respect to NPDES
permit applications. Any person who desires a public meeting on any NPDES permit
application shall so request in writing to the Director within 30 days following the
publication date of the notice of application. Any such request or petition for public
meeting shall indicate the interest of the party filing such request and the reasons why
a meeting is warranted.
(2) The Director is delegated authority to determine if a public meeting shall be held in
accordance with G.S. 143-215.1(c) (3) and to issue public notice and conduct such
meeting for the Commission.
(3) All comments received within 30 days following the publication date of the notice of
NPDES permit application shall be made part of the application file and shall be
considered by the Director prior to taking final action on the application.
(4) Any meeting brought pursuant to this Subsection shall be held in the geographical
area of the proposed discharge or other appropriate area, in the discretion of the
Director, and may, as appropriate, consider related groups of permit applications.
(b) Adjudicatory Hearings and appeals shall be conducted in accordance with Article 3 of
Chapter 150B of the General Statutes.
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-215.3(a)(1); 143-215.1(c)(1); 143-215.3(a)(3); 143-215.3(a)(4);
143-215.5; 143-215.1(e); Eff. February 1, 1976;
Amended Eff. March 1, 1993; November 1, 1987.
15A NCAC 02H .0112 FINAL ACTION ON PERMIT APPLICATIONS
(a) The Director shall take final action on all NPDES applications not later than 60 days
following notice of intent to issue or deny, or, if a public meeting is held, within 90 days
following the closing of the record of the meeting or in the case of an Authorization to Construct
permit 90 days after the receipt of a complete application or, if a public meeting is held
concerning the Authorization to Construct, within 90 days following the closing of the record of
the meeting.
(b) The Director is authorized to:
(1) issue a permit containing such conditions as are necessary to effectuate the
purposes of G.S. 143-215.1 and G.S. 143-215.67;
(2) issue a permit containing time schedules for achieving compliance with applicable
effluent standards and limitations, water quality standards, and other legally applicable
requirements;
(3) modify or revoke any permit upon giving 60 days notice to the person affected
pursuant to Rule .0114(a) of this Section;
(4) suspend a permit pursuant to Rule .0114(a) of this Section;
(5) rescind a permit upon request by the permittee;
(6) deny a permit application:
(A) where necessary to effectuate the purposes of Article 21 Chapter 143,
(B) for a discharge prohibited by G.S. 143-214.2(a),
(C) where the Secretary of the Army finds the discharge would substantially
impair anchorage and navigation,
(D) for a discharge to which the regional administrator of EPA has objected
as provided in Section 402(d) of the Clean Water Act as amended, 33 U.S.C.
Section 1251 et seq,
(E) for any point discharge which conflicts with a plan approved pursuant to
Section 208(b) of the Clean Water Act as amended, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et
seq, effective February 4, 1987.
(c) The permit applicant has the burden of providing sufficient evidence to reasonably ensure
that the proposed system will comply with all applicable water quality standards and
requirements. No permit may be issued when the imposition of conditions cannot reasonably
ensure compliance with applicable water quality standards and regulations of all affected
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 5

states.
(d) Permits shall be issued or renewed for a period of time deemed reasonable by the Director
except in no case shall permits be issued for a period to exceed five years.
History Note: Authority G.S. 143-215.3(a)(1); 143-215.1(c)(4); 143-215.1(b); 143-215.3(a)(3);
143-215.3(a)(4); 143-215.1(c)(5); 143-214.2(a); 143-215; 143-215.2(a); Eff. February 1, 1976;
Amended Eff. March 1, 1993; October 1, 1987; September 1, 1986; December 1, 1984.
STATE CONTACT:
If you have any questions on any of the above information or on the attached permit, please
contact Jackie Nowell at [phone] ext. 512.
NAM e / 6u DATE:
i/ Iev/LG %3C COMMENT: -0 ; 5/Ce ,9 . 1r/6)1 T-orc /furll/OJT" SrU4y
REGIONA OFFICE N 1a 41 �0
1JEl,E U. iAc/-/ry /G¢S AiLi2 , AI ge,st vi}(.. Cirr�.t0/41i
NAME'
ce--1444-yte
.� DATE:
REGIONAL SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE:
NPDES SUPERVISOR COMMENT:
7
y ?4E-/4<1L, DATE: `7
NAME: DATE:
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 6

f •
•
•
ADDENDUM
HAVE RECEIVED COMMENTS ON DRAFT PERMIT FROM 1) PERMITTEE, 2) EPA, 3) SC, 4) WILDLIFE RESOURCES, 5)
ESB —MINIMAL ON TOXICITY LIMITS IN PERMITS, NO PROBLEM
CONVERSATION W/ DAVE ON TWELVE MILE CREEK WWTP. - WE HAVE TO PROTECT FOR SC STANDARDS FOR
FECAL, NH3, & COPPER. THE WWTP IS — 2.4 MILES FROM THE NC/SC STATE LINE.
CU NEVER RECOMMENDED BEFORE BECAUSE THE FACILITY IS 100% DOMESTIC. THE NEXT APPLICATION WILL BE
IN LESS THAN 2 % YEARS. PERMIT EXPIRES IN 6/30/05, WILL HAVE TO APPLY 160 DAYS BEFORE PERMIT EXPIRES,
NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE SPECIAL CONDITION.
NEED TO TALK TO UNION CO. ABOUT SAMPLING SITE FOR CU AND ZN NEAR SC STATELINE, IN ADDITION TO
UPSTREAM CONCENTRATIONS OF CU AND ZN. NEEDS TO BE CLEAN SAMPLING TECHNIQUES, MAY WANT TO
PROPOSE A WATER EFFECTS RATIO.
UNION CO. MAY WANT TO LOOK AT MONITORING RIGHT AT NC/SC STATELINE IF POSSIBLE.
UNION CO. TP LIMIT BASED ON SC TMDL. THEY MAY WANT TO BECOME A PART OF THE TMDL DEVELOPMENT
PROCESS.
CHECK ON HOW THE FECAL COLIFORM LIMIT FOR CMUD FACILITIES WAS DEVELOPED. MAY APPLY TO UNION CO.
CHECK TO SEE IF MONTHLY AVG. GEO. MEAN > 200/100ML AND IF 10% OF SAMPLES ARE ABOVE 400/100ML.
CONV. W/ DANIELLE PENDER OF WILDLIFE RESOURCES — COMMENT LETTER RECOMMENDED UV DISINFECTION
AND INCLUSION OF STANDBY POWER . SHE SAID THAT THE PUBLIC NOTICE LISTED TRC AS WATER QUALITY
LIMITED AND THEREFORE THOUGHT THAT FACILITY USED TRC. THE LETTER NOTED SENSITIVE SPECIES IN THE
TWELVE MILE CREEK WATERSHED. TOLD HER CL LIMIT IS IN PERMIT BUT FACILITY USES UV DISINFECTION,
LIMIT APPLIES ONLY IF CHLORINE USED. WWTP CURRENTLY HAS STANDBY POWER .
CONV. W/ MIKE MYERS — FECAL LIMIT FOR CMUD FACILITIES WAS 200- MONTHLY AVG., 400 — WEEKLY AVG., AND
1000. — DAILY MAX. BASED ON A FECAL TMDL DEVELOPED BY MECKLENBURG CO., STAKEHOLDERS, AND SC.
7/2/02 - CONV. W/ MICHELLE WOOLFOLK- SAID THAT FECAL TMDL APPLIED TO MECKLENBURG COUNTY MAY NOT
BE APPLICABLE TO THE UNION COUNTY. WE DON'T KNOW THE SOURCES, THE POINT SOURCES ARE NOT THE
SAME. TWELVE MILE CREEK IS NOT IMPAIRED FOR FECAL COLIFORM. REFERRED TO 303D LIST THAT DECRIBES
THE USE SUPPORT RATIONALE AND USES FOR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RECREATION. RECOMMEND THAT
UNION COUNTY CALL HER, FOR SOME GUIDANCE AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THEIR UPSTREAM AND
DOWNSTREAM SAMPLING SITES.
7/2/02 - CONV. W/ MIKE PARKER, MRO — ASKED ABOUT UPSTREAM ACTIVITIES. GETTING SOME DEVELOPMENTAL
PRESSURE. NOT AWARE OF UPSTREAM DISCHARGERS ABOVE TWELVE MILE CREEK. FAIRLY RURAL, SOME
AGRICULTURAL, DENSE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, MAY BE A COLLECTION SYSTEM PROBLEM
THAT IS CAUSING THE HIGH FECAL COLIFORM UPSTREAM OF THE WWTP . COULD SEND NOTE TO REX IF MRO IS
NEEDED TO DO ADDITIONAL SAMPLING UPSTREAM, IF THERE IS A CONCERN WITH THE FECAL.
7/2/02 - CONV. W/ SUSAN GALE, ESB — SHE WILL DO A DATA RETRIEVAL FOR THE TWELVE MILE CREEK STATION,
FOR ALL PARAMETERS FOR 1998 — PRESENT. SAID THAT HARDNESS DATA HAD BEEN DISCONTINUED IN 2001, DUE
TO A NEW MORE COSTLY ANALYTICAL METHOD BEING USED BY OUR LAB AND DATA WAS NOT THAT HELPFUL IN
MODELING.
7/2/02 — TELECON W/ DEE STEWART, EPA - CONCERNING HER COMMENTS, AND REQUEST FOR EXTENSION FOR
COMMENTS.
1) EPA RECOMMENDS A FECAL COLIFORM DAILY MAX. LIMIT OF 400 AND MONTHLY AVG. LIMIT OF 200 TO
PROTECT SC STANDARD. TALKED TO HER ABOUT LIMIT DAILY MAX. LIMIT OF 1000 RECOMMENDED FOR
CMUD PLANTS. SHE SAID THERE WAS AN APPROVED TMDL IN PLACE FOR THAT STREAM AND NOT SURE THAT
SC WOULD CONCUR WITH THE SAME LIMITS FOR THE UNION CO. STREAM. IF SC WILL CONCUR, THEN EPA
WILL ALSO.
2) EPA RECOMMENDS THAT WEEKLY AVG LIMIT FOR NH3 BE GIVEN AT DATE AGREED ON AND THAT THE DATE
OF SEPTEMBER 2002 BE SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT.
3) WITH ADDITIONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS UNION CO. PERMIT WILL EXPIRE ON 6/30/05, AND WILL ONLY BE
FOR ABOUT 2 '/2 YEARS, THE REQUEST FOR RPA DONE FOR CU AND ZN BEFORE 5 YEAR PERIOD, WAS
WITHDRAWN. ALSO RECOMMENDS THAT UNION CO. MONITOR FOR HARDNESS, SINCE IT IS NEEDED IN
DETERMINING THE CU AND ZN LIMITS PER SC STANDARD. IF NO DATA, THE SC DEFAULT IS 25 MG/L. ALSO
SAID THAT WE MAY ADVISE UNION CO. TO SAMPLE FOR CU AND ZN INSTREAM, IF THEY WANT TO SHOW
THAT METAL DOES NOT TRANSPORT DOWNSTREAM.
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 6

` , 7/12/02 - TELECON W/ JON DYER
7/16/02 - TELECON W/ CURTIS WEAVER OF USGS. HAD MAILED REQUEST TO CURTIS FOR FLOWS ON TWELVE MILE
CREEK AT THE GAGING STATION AND AT THE NC/SC STATELINE. CURTIS HAD NOT RECEIVED MY REQUEST BUT
HAD WORKED ON REQUEST FROM MCKIM AND CREED FOR UNION CO. HE WILL FAX ME A COPY OF FINISHED
REPORT.
DATA FOR TWELVE MILE CREEK AT GAGING STATION AT HIGHWAY 16. FULL PERIOD OF RECORD, 1961-2000
CLIMATIC YEARS.
DA=76.5 MI2
QA= 72.7 CFS
7Q 10 = 0.1 CFS
30Q2 = 3.2 CFS
W7Q10 = 1.5 CFS
7Q2 = 1.4 CFS
DA AT NEXT ROAD CROSSING = 80.4 M12
DA AT STATELINE IN THE RANGE OF 83-85 MI2, NOT SURE OF EXACT DA
AT 2500 FT DOWN OF THE GAGE, THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT TRIBS. THEREFORE, NUMBERS AT THE GAGE APPLY
TO DISCHARGE SITE. ZERO FLOW HAS OCCURRED ON OCCASION, OCCURRENCES IN 1968, 1970, 1954. MAY STILL
HAVE A 7Q10 > 0. IN THE LATE 80'S, THE FULL PERIOD OF RECORD, 7Q10=0.03 CFS. IN 1994, THE FULL PERIOD OF
RECORD, 7Q10=0.07 CFS.
YIELDS FROM THE GAGING STATION:
QA YIELD = 72.7 CFS/76.5 MI2 = 0.95 CFS/MI2
S7Q10 YIELD = 0.1 CFS/76.5 MI2 = 0.0013 CFS/MI2
W7Q10 YIELD = 1.5 CFS/76.5 MI2 = 0.0196 CFS/MI2
30Q2 YIELD = 3.2 CFS/76.5 MI2 = 0.0418 CFS/MI2
ESTIMATED FLOWS AT THE STATELINE, USING DRAINAGE AREAS IN THE RANGE OF 83-85 MI2
@ 83 MI2
QA FLOW = 83 MI2 * 0.95 CFS/MI2 = 78.85 CFS
S7Q10 FLOW = 83 MI2 * 0.0013 CFS/MI2 = 0.1079 CFS
W7Q10 FLOW = 83 MI2 * 0.0196 CFS/MI2 = 1.627 CFS
30Q2 FLOW = 83 MI2 * 0.0418 CFS/MI2 = 3.469 CFS
@ 84 MI2
QA FLOW = 84 MI2 * 0.95 CFS/MI2 = 79.8 CFS
S7Q10 FLOW = 84 MI2 * 0.0013 CFS/MI2 = 0.1092 CFS
W7Q10 FLOW = 84 MI2 * 0.0196 CFS/MI2 = 1.646 CFS
30Q2 FLOW = 84 MI2 * 0.0418 CFS/MI2 = 3.511 CFS
@ 85 MI2
QA FLOW = 85 MI2 * 0.95 CFS/MI2 = 80.75 CFS
S7Q10 FLOW = 85 MI2 * 0.0013 CFS/MI2 = 0.1105 CFS
W7Q10 FLOW = 85 MI2 * 0.0196 CFS/MI2 = 1.66 CFS
30Q2 FLOW = 85 MI2 * 0.0418 CFS/MI2 = 3.55 CFS
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Fact Sheet
NPDES Renewal
Page 7

Draft Permit Review -Union Co. 12 Mile Cr-NC0085359
t
•
•
Subject: Draft Permit Review -Union Co. 12 Mile Cr-NC0085359
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 14:48:36 -0400
From: Matt Matthews <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Jackie,
Please forgive my tardy review of the subject permit. Everything associated with WET monitoring and
limitations looks good.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment,
Matt
Matt Matthews
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality
Aquatic Toxicology Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
v-[phone]
f-[phone]
MailTo:[e-mail]
A few observations and much reasoning lead to error;
many observations and a little reasoning to truth.
--Alexis Carrel
1 of 1
7/2/02 8:38 AM

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960
June 24, 2002
Alan Klimek, Director
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
SUBJ: Review of Draft Permit NPDES Permit
Union City/Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
NC0085359
Dear Mr. Klimek:
J U L 1 6 2002
SICA2t
JUN 2 7 ?00P oI�
OF kVA ry
olRFc RrF = QU,q i
J
CENR - WATER QUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
We request an extension of our review period for the draft National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit dated May 22, 2002, for the Union City/Twelve Mile Creek
facility, NC0085359, which was received by EPA Region 4 on May 24, 2002. In accordance
with the North Carolina/EPA Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and federal regulations,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 requests an extension for this NPDES draft
permit review to ninety (90) days from receipt by EPA.
EPA's initial concerns are with the fecal colifom limits, weekly average ammonia limits,
and metals monitoring, which have been discussed with your staff. EPA will be drafting formal
detailed comments regarding these issues within our review period. If you have any further
questions please contact Ms. Dee Stewart of my staff at 404/562-9334 or [e-mail].
cc: Mr. John C. Dyer
Union County Public Works
Alton Boozer, SCDHEC
Sincerely,
tv
Beverly H. Banister, Director
Water Management Division
Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed wflh Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)

[Fwd: Initial comments on Union County 12 Mile Creek , NC0085359]
Subject: [Fwd: Initial comments on Union County 12 Mile Creek , NC0085359]
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:16:30 -0400
From: Mike Myers <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR MAIL
To: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Original Message
Subject: Initial comments on Union County 12 Mile Creek , NC0085359
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:38:31.-0400
From: [e-mail]
To: Mike Myers <[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail],
[e-mail], Michael Montebello
<[e-mail]>
Mike,
I have attached EPA's initial comments concerning the Union County - 12
Mile Creek WWTP, NC0085359 permit. Since this facility affects South
Carolina, these comments have also been sent to SCDHEC, Mike Montebello.
We are required to write formal objection letters within the 30 day
review period. We received this permit on May 24, 2002, and a comment
letter is due by June 24, 2002. Hopefully we can touch base this week
to discuss these initial comments before I prepare a formal letter.
Thank you
Dee Stewart
404/562-9334
(See attached file: 12 mile creek comments.wpd)
D12 mile creek comments.wpd
Name: 12 mile creek comments.wpd
Type: WordPerfect Document (application/wordperfect5.1)
Encoding: base64
1 of 1 6/19/02 8:31 AM

•
Comments on Union County - 12 Mile Creek WWTP
NC0085359
3)
June 18, 2002
The draft permit's monthly and weekly average limits do comply with North Carolina's
water quality standards. However, South Carolina's freshwater water quality standards
for fecal coliform include a requirement that no more than 10% of the total monthly
samples exceed 400/100 ml. South Carolina municipal permits typically protect this
provision through a daily maximum fecal coliform limit of 400/100 ml. Because the draft
permit's fecal coliform limits do not reflect South Carolina's fecal coliform standards,
EPA would object to this permit per 40 C.F.R. 122.44(d)(1) and 40 C.F.R. 122.44(d)(4).
All POTW's, unless impracticable, are required to include average weekly and average
monthly discharge limitations, per 40 C.F.R. 122.45(d)(2). The draft permit does not
include weekly average ammonia limits, but does include a condition for the department
to re-evaluate the reasonable potential (RP) for inclusion of a weekly average ammonia
limit and re -open the permit to include this limit if necessary. Per EPA and NC's
agreement, this evaluation should be completed by S� eptember, 2002/EPA requests that
Item A.1. (Note #3) be expanded to reflect this time commitmeriffor evaluation of RP for
a weekl a limit.
The letter transmitting this draft permit references the addition of quarterly monitoring for
copper and zinc due to a recent failure of a quarterly chronic whole effluent toxicity test
and the lack of data for these parameters. The fact sheet further states that the facility
should monitor for Cu and Zn and a RP analysis can be made at the next renewal. EPA
requests that a specific re -opener clause be added to the permit with regard to these
parameters requiring a RP determination and re -opening of the permit and inclusion of
appropriate limits if necessary after a reasonable amount of data is collected, but prior to
a 5 year permit term. EPA suggests that 2 years of data collection is adequate based on
quarterly monitoring to determine if a limit is needed for Cu and Zn. Additionally, since
this facility affects South Carolina and Cu and Zn have specific hardness dependent
numeric criteria in this State, EPA recommends that hardness be monitored as well. The
appropriate RP determination should also be with respect to the South Carolina numeric
criteria for Cu and Zn per 40 C.F.R. 122.4(d)(1) and 40 C.F.R. 122.44(d)(4).
7„, / J4 iiv Q CA
s (1ji,,%' o
i
jAvti F'ivfdf+rbtiln,
i
�(� rt4
f
t

Comments on NCDraft Permit NC0085359/Twelve Mile Creek WWTF
•
Subject: Comments on NCDraft Permit NC0085359/Twelve Mile Creek WWTF
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 18:25:41 -0400
From: "Michael Montebello"<[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>
Dear Ms. Nowell,
We have the following comments on the NC Permit for the Twelve Mile Creek WWTF. The following permit conditions do not appear to insure compliance
with SC Water Quality Standards:
1. The proposed weekly average fecal coliform limits. A daily maximum limit of 400/I00m1(rather than a weekly limit) would insure this.
2. A weekly ammonia limit would appear to be necessary to be consistent with our standards. Additional information on the stream 7Q10 or other flows
available would be needed to calculate an appropriate limit. If the proposed monthly average limit (of 2 mg/I) is based on chronic ammonia toxicity, a
weekly average of 2.5 times the monthly average would be approximately the value expected.
3. Considering the toxicity testing concentration of 90%, we would typically expect that copper limits (and possibly other metals limits) would be
appropriate to meet SC standards. Please identify how these limits were derived. If you have any additional information on other pollutant data, please email
this information.
4. When would the phosphorus limits go into effect? The wording on Part (A)(3) Nutient Study does not seem to fit in with other conditions. We don't
disagree with a study, but the study states "this condition should not be construed to be a permit limit". Sounds like the original CMUD McAlpine permit.
Some of these issues are being worked on with Mike Myers related to CMUD permits. You may want to discuss these items and what process we agreed to
on those permits.
If you have questions, please contact me or Jeff deBessonet at [phone].
Thank You,
Mike Montebello, Manager
Domestic Wastewater Permitting Section
803-898-4228
QM 7
ffJL IZ1,1f. Ubck- Ii N �, T ehr/6r a$4 7Fe cfC AIL M�✓j
W P d/3'ol
NAB L-'''fik11 '49..*'"44''.
KW IAou / /Lei
6.) ituitc Ai-Leyte-0-4d_
'AG 779////, / - 7 "1cs ,6g?. �°/°2
T4{, sue,
thml
,
/Lek /
i7
r Oit v CO , 71
1of1
(- /6 � � "4J-
w w EJ S uti
zAi
C, sc -6k bAj E
mdif
citru
�,
vt-
c., n(«t
sc ottpc.
�! '7mD .-
6/19/02 8:13 AM

•
SUMMARY OF CMUD/DWQ/SCDHEC
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
INTRODUCTION
In the summer of 2001, the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental
Control (SCDHEC) filed a Petition for a Contested Case in the North Carolina Office of
Administrative Hearings regarding the renewal of NPDES Permit No. NC0024970, the Charlotte
Mecklenburg Utilities Department (CMUD) McAlpine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. The
primary complaint on the part of SCDHEC has been that the permit was renewed without a
phosphorus limit. Nearly all of South Carolina's municipal dischargers to the mainstem Catawba
(upstream of Lake Wateree) have been given phosphorus limits, generally equivalent to 1 mg/L.
The McAlpine Creek WWTP permit had a phosphorus optimization study special condition that
stipulated preparatory requirements for the facility to ready itself for the upcoming phosphorus
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMD).
Since the summer, SCDHEC, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
and CMUD have been working towards achieving consensus on an appropriate phosphorus limit
for the McAlpine Creek WWTP. The understanding has been that this decision will also affect
DWQ's permitting strategy for three additional municipal permits: CMUD - Irwin Creek WWTP,
CMUD - Sugar Creek WWTP, and Union County - 12-Mile Creek WWTP.
The final settlement agreement includes the terms of the limits for all three CMUD
plants. A similar strategy will be used by DWQ to limit phosphorus in the Union County permit.
SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Limits at McAlpine Creek WWTP
Based upon a construction schedule provided by CMUD during the settlement
proceedings, the compliance date for the total phosphorus limit at the McAlpine Creek WWTP is
set for February 28, 2006. At this time, the McAlpine Creek WWTP must meet a 534 lbs./day
total phosphorus limit. This limit is to be calculated as a 12-month rolling average. It
corresponds to a 1 mg/L limit at McAlpine Creek's permitted flow of 64 MGD.
This limit, as well as the monthly mass cap described below, shall be incorporated into a
major modification to NPDES Permit NC0024970 with special condition language to be included
with reference to the Irwin and Sugar Creek WWTPs. Since SCDHEC's stipulation was that any
limit come into effect prior to the expiration date of the permit, the permit expiration date will
also be modified to February 28th, 2006 (instead of June 30, 2005). This puts the permit out of
sync with the Basinwide schedule, but is within the five years allowable for a permit term under
federal regulations.
Bubble Limit
A major point of the settlement agreement is the idea of a bubble limit. This refers to a
mass limit for total phosphorus that applies to discharge at the three CMUD plants combined.
This type of a limit would give CMUD more operational flexibility with regard to phosphorus
removal.
The bubble limit, to be calculated as a 12-month rolling average, is 826 lbs./day of total
phosphorus from all three CMUD plants. This corresponds to a 1 mg/L phosphorus limit at
permitted discharge for the three plants. If CMUD conducts construction activities at either the
Sugar or Irwin Creek plants, the compliance date for this bubble limit will be February 28, 2007.

If CMUD decides not to conduct construction activities at either plant in order to achieve
compliance, the bubble limit will come into effect on February 28, 2006. This is identical to the
compliance date at the McAlpine Creek plant.
Special condition language will be included in the Irwin and Sugar Creek WWTP permits
regarding the compliance date.
Mass cap
In order to be protective of the water quality at the downstream lakes in South Carolina,
SCHEC requested that monthly mass caps also be included as part of the total phosphorus limits
at the three CMUD plants. This would also ensure optimized operation of the plants at all times.
The mass caps at the three plants take the form of a monthly average mass limit and
correspond to a concentration limit of 2 mg/L at maximum permitted flow. At McAlpine Creek,
this limit is 1,0671bs. /day of total phosphorus beginning February 29, 2006. At the Sugar and
Irwin Creek plants, the mass caps only come into effect if construction activities are pursued at
each plant. At Sugar Creek WWTP, the limit is 334 lbs./day with compliance commencing on
February 28, 2007. At Irwin Creek WWTP, the limit is 250 lbs./day with compliance
commencing on February 28, 2007.
TMDL
As part of the settlement agreement DWQ requested a provision for full inclusion in the
TMDL process for both DWQ and all affected NC entities (to be provided in a list by DWQ).
APPLICABILITY TO PERMITTING PROCESS
The three CMUD permits will have the bubble limit included as a special condition.
Monitoring for phosphorus will be included in the regular effluent limit pages. Mass caps will
also be included in the effluent limit pages, with a footnote specifying applicability (for Sugar and
Irwin Creek plants) and compliance dates.
The Union County - 12 Mile Creek WWTP shall have a mass limit equivalent to 1 mg/L
at the permitted flow. As with the three CMUD plants, compliance for this limit is to be judged
as a rolling annual average. Special monitoring language is being developed for this situation. It
is also recommended that the phosphorus optimization study special condition from the original
McAlpine Creek WWTP permit be included in this permit to allow DWQ time to review the
County's preparations for the impending phosphorus TMDL.

/£lJ[ /li/L. Ci6k e
STATION
SAMPLING
DATE
ALUMINUM
TOTAL
(UG/L AS AL)
ARSENIC
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
AS)
CADMIUM
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
CD)
CARBON
TOTAL
ORGANIC
(MG/L AS C)
CHROMIUM
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
CR)
CLOUD
COVER
(PERCENT)
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500 07/21/98'13000
C9819500 08/06/98 1400
C9819500 09/15/98 180
C9819500 10/13/98 200
C9819500 11/05/98 65
C9819500 12/08/98 130
C9819500 01/05/991700
C9819500 02/04/99 1100
C9819500 03/04/99 270
C9819500 04/06/99 310
C9819500 05/11/99 440
C9819500 06/28/99 7800
C9819500 07/21/99 230
C9819500 08/19/99 140
C9819500 09/13/99 82
C9819500 10/18/99 660
C9819500 11/18/99 100
C9819500 12/14/99 490
C9819500 01/19/00 1300
C9819500 02/03/00 2900
C9819500 03/06/00 910
C9819500 04/04/00 260
C9819500 05/10/00 490
C9819500 06/22/00 330
G9819500 07/25/00 920
C9819500 08/14/00 2000
C9819500 09/11/00 520
C9819500 10/17/00
C9819500' 11/20/00
C9819500 12/12/00 560
C9819500 01/04/01
C9819500 02/07/01
C9819500 04/05/01 1300
C9819500 05/03/01
C9819500 06/12/01 1800
C9819500 07/10/01
C9819500 08/06/01
C9819500 09/06/01 14000
C9819500 10/02/01
C9819500 11/07/01
C9819500 12/10/01 120
C9819500 01/07/02
C9819500 02/11/02
C9819500 03/06/02
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
,10K
110K
10K
10K
10K
110U
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K..
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2K
2U
10U 2U
..y
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
j25K
'25K
25K
'25K
j25K
25K
,25K
25K 0
;25K 0
125K 0
125K 0
'25K 0
25K
j25K 50
25K 0
25K 0
j25K 100
25K 40
25K 10
25K 100
25K 0
25K 0
0
20
90
0
10
30
20
0
0
100
0
10
6
0
100
10
10
0
25K 60
0
0
25U 50
25U 100
i10
01/20/98 860
02/18/98 2500
03/12/98 1200
04/27/98 590
05/20/98 300
06/15/98 1100
10U
2U 110
10U
2U
10
25U 20
0
0
25U 100
30
0
10

STATION
SAMPLING
DATE
COPPER
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
CU)
FFCAI FLOW
COLIFORM
MEMBR
FILTER M-
FC BROTH
44_5 C
STRM 1DRY
2LOW
3NORM
4FLOOD
5ABOVE
HARDNESS
TOTAL
(MG/L AS
CACO3)
IRON
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
FE)
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
01/20/98 2.5
02/18/98 4.5
03/12/98 4.4
04/27/98 2.2
05/20/98 2.6
06/15/98 5.
07/21/9
08/06/98 4
09/15/98 2K
10/13/98 10
11/05/98 2K
12/08/98 3.5
01/05/99 5
02/04/99 2.1
03/04/99 2.3
04/06/99 2K
05/11/99 2K
06/28/99
07/21/99 2K
08/19/99 3.3
09/13/99 2K
10/18/99 3.5
11/18/99 2K
12/14/99 2K
01/19/00 2K
02/03/00 3.6
03/06/00 2.9
04/04/00 5.4
05/10/00 2K
06/22/00 2K
07/25/00 2K
08/14/00 3.9
09/11/00 2K
10/17/00
11/20/00
12/12/00 2K
01/04/01
02/07/01
04/05/01 2.7
05/03/01
06/12/01 2.4
07/10/01
08/06/01
09/06/01
10/02/01
11/07/01
12/10/01 2U
01/07/02
02/11/02
03/06/02
36
210
330
140 2
140 2
790 2
5400 3
280 2
200 2
120 2
230 2
160 2
410 2
210 2
140 2
130 2
270 2
470 2
150 2
36 1
310 2
320A 2
210 2
600L
200 2
570 3
43 2
0 2
120 2
330 2
210 3
560 2
830 2
260A 2
830
320A
71
290A
170 2
90Q,B4 2
440Q
260Q
21000
340Q
830B4,Q
150061,Q
440Q
3
3-
2
30
20
78
36
40
50
34
32 1700
1400
2300
1800
1200
1100
1400
21000
54 850
42 860
49 430
52 610
39 12600
36.72 `;1600
42 (910
69.3 '1000
48 '1100
43.56 6800
54 1300
84.46 1600
74.2 1000
58.58 1200
52.085 470
36.72 1000
42.42
34.68
64
47
44
78
74
40
55
r.
1600
2600
1600
1100
1400
1300
2000
2500
1700
2
2
2
2
j3
179
1000
40 1900
61 2600
38
8000
_.....-..
1400

STATION
SAMPLING
DATE
LEAD
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
PB)
MERCURY
TOTAL
(UG/L AS
HG)
NICKEL
TOTAL
(UG/L AS NI)
NITRITE
PLUS
NITRATE
TOTAL 1
DET_ (MG/L
AS N)
NITROGEN
AMMONIA
TOTAL
(MG/L AS N)
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
01/20/98 10K
02/18/98 10K
03/12/98 10K
04/27/98 10K
05/20/98 10K
06/15/98 10K
07/21/98 11
08/06/98 10K
09/15/98 10K
10/13/98.10K
11/05/98 10K
12/08/98 10K
01/05/99 10K
02/04/99 10K
03/04/99 10K
04/06/99;10K
05/11/99 10K
06/28/99 10K
07/21/99 10K
08/19/99 10K
09/13/99 10K
10/18/99 10K
11/18/99 10K
12/14/99 10K
01/19/00 10K
02/03/00 10K
03/06/00 10K
04/04/00,10K
05/10/00 10K
06/22/00 10K
07/25/00 10K
08/14/00 10K
09/11/00 10K
10/17/00
11/20/00
12/12/00 10K
01/04/01
02/07/01
04/05/01 10U
05/03/01
06/12/01 10U
07/10/01
08/06/01
09/06/01 10U
10/02/01
11/07/01 --
12/10/0110U
01/07/02
02/11/02
03/06/02
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
0.2K
1
10 K 0.34
1 OK 0.3
10K 3
10K 0.48
10K 0.5
10K 0.53
10K 1 0.07
10K 0.43 0.06
10K 0.35 0.01
10K 0.3 0.01K
0.03 0.01 K
0.01K 0.01
0.64 0.07
0.52 0.03
0.21 0.01
0.01
0.01K
0.59
0.06
0.08
0.06
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K 0.05 10.01K
10K 0.03 10.23
10K 0.34 10.01 K
10K 0.01K _10.02
10K 0.01K 10.01K
10K 0.39 10.33
10K 0.9 10.6
10K 0.51 [0.09
10K 0.05 10.01 K
10K 0.52 !0.02
10K 0.28 10.21
10K 0.44 10.01 K
10K 0.29 10.04
10K 0.29 :0.02
0.01 i0.01 K
0.03 10.13
0.2K 10K 0.09 10.17
0.41 10.15
0.5K 10.5K
0.2U ' 10U 1
0.53 10.2U
0.2U 10U 0.32 0.17
0.36 -0.3
0.14 0.12
0.2U 10U 0.59 :0.27
0.12 0.11
0.01 U 0.02
0.2U ! 10U 0.01 U 0.07
H
0.04
0.45
0.36
0.24
0.1
0.01K
0.08
;0.08

NITROGEN
KJELDAHL
SAMPLING TOTAL
STATION DATE (MG/L AS N)
C9819500 01/20/98 0.4
C9819500 •02/18/98 0.3
C9819500 03/12/98 1
C9819500 04/27/98 0.2
__
C9819500 05/20/98 0.1
C9819500 06/15/98 0.3
C9819500 f 07/21/98 0.8
C9819500 08/06/98'0.2
C9819500 09/15/98 0.2
C9819500 10/13/980.3
C9819500- 11/05/98 0.2
C9819500 )� 12/08/98'0.2
C9819500 j 01/05/99 0.4
C9819500 • 02/04/99 0.3
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
OXYGEN
DISSOLVED
MG/L
PH PHOSPHOR
(STANDARD US TOTAL
UNITS) (MG!L AS P)
11.5 6.8 0.18
10.2 6.6 0.18
12.3 6.9 0.97
7.6
7.8
0.07
0.04
6 7 0.06
5.8 I 6.4 0.35
6.7 _ '6.7 0.07
8.1 7.4 0.05
8.4 I7.1 0.09
8.4 i7.5 0.04
6 17.3 '0.06
11.6 16.3 0.12
9.9 17.2 0.08
03/04/99 0.2 11.8 7.5 0.03
04/06/99 0.2 8.1 7.5 0.06
05/11/99 0.2 8.7 7.5 0.06
06/28/99 0.5 6.7 7.2 0.08
07/21/99 0.2 5.5 7.2 0.07
�2 27t 08/19/99`0.4 7.1 0.03
09/13/99 0.5 L:.4 7 0.05
10/18/99 ! 0.5 6.3 .6.8 0.1
11/18/99 0.5 .6 7.1 0.05
C9819500 12/14/99 0.2
C9819500 i 01/19/00 0.7
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
0.04
10.9 7.1 0.06
02/03/001.1 12.3 7.3 0.21
03/06/00 0.4 10.2 7 0.11
04/04/00 0.3 7.2 7 0.04
05/10/00 0.3 7 6.8 0.08
C9819500 06/22/00 0.8
C9819500 07/25/00 0.3
C9819500 i 08/14/001
C9819500 09/11/00 0.4
C9819500 I 10/17/00 0.6
C9819500 11/20/00 0.2
C9819500 12/12/00 0.2
C9819500 L� 01/04/01 1.5
C9819500 i 02/07/01 1K
C9819500 04/05/01
C9819500� 05/03/01 0.6U
C9819500 06/12/01
C9819500 07/10/01 0.58
C9819500 08/06/01 0.53
C9819500 09/06/01 0.81
C9819500 10/02/01 0.49
C9819500 11/07/01 1
C9819500 12/10/01 0.35
C9819500 01/07/02
C9819500 02/11/02
C9819500 03/06/02
6.2 7.3 0.07
7.1 7.3 0.06
5.9 7.1 0.06
5.9 I 7.1 0.08
7.1 7.1 0.04
9.2 7.3 0.07
9.6 7 0.04
13.4 7.6 0.04
11.7 7.1 0.5K
9.8 7.6
6.9 7.2
4. 6.9
5.3
5.5
1-
r
0.1 U
0.15
7 0.12U
6.8 0.09
6.9 0.2
6.9 0.06
7 0.16
2.47` 7.2 0.04
2.8 7.1
12 7.2
11.3 7.3

SPECIFIC
TEMPERATU
TEMPERATU
PRECIPITAT
RESIDUE
CONDUCTA
RE AIR
RE WATER
ION TOTAL
TOTAL
NCE HELD
(DEGREES
(DEGREES
SAMPLING
(INCHES
NONFILTRA
(UMHOS/CM
CENTIGRAD
CENTIGRAD
STATION
DATE
PER DAY)
BLE (MG/L)
@ 25C)
E)
E)
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
01/20/98 0.5
02/18/98 1
03/12/98 0
04/27/98 0
05/20/98 0
06/15/98 0
07/21/98 1
08/06/98 0
09/15/98 0
10/13/98 0
11/05/98 0
12/08/98 0
01/05/99 0
02/04/99 0
03/04/99 0
04/06/99 0
05/11/99 0
06/28/99 0
07/21/99 0
08/19/99 0
09/13/99 0
10/18/99 0
11/18/99 0
12/14/99
01/19/00 0.2
02/03/00 0
03/06/00 0
..._........
04/04/00 1
05/10/00 0
06/22/00 0
07/25/00.1
08/14/00 0
09/11/00 0
10/17/00
11/20/00 0.5
12/12/00 0
01/04/01 0
02/07/01 0
04/05/01 0
05/03/01 0
06/12/01 0
07/10/01 0
08/06/01 0
09/06/01 0
10/02/01 0
11/07/01 0
12/10/01 0.1
01/07/02 1
02/11/02 0
03/06/02 0
38
30
21
9
68
65
84
98
..........
7 118
6 113
530 83
5 104
1 120
1 113 _
1K 130 14 111.7
1 128 2 114.2
13 99 -1 12.4
5 100 16 19.4
3 122 10 18.5
6 131 18 `16.8
1 117 26 18.7
18 106 25 ;22
1 78 28 23.8
2 143 32 ;23.8
1 132 24 118.2
2 122 19 16.3
1K 153 14 6.7
7
1
7
3
7
4
132
105
131
127
134
149
127
119
119
118
131
4 130
121
146
8 128
158
12 145
139
132
22 90
98
216
3 188
126
141
j116
8
16
5
20
25
28
30
21
25
20
5
7
19
16
25
29
21
29
26
21
10
12
7
15
16
23
25
28
25
24
20
20
6
12
14
12
19
116
(19
23
21
20
(20
f14
;5
6
10.8
69
.15.3
19.2
122.8
23.8
120.9
20.9
[15.4
0.6
.4.5
13.4
17
121.2
23.1
123.2
' 21.2
13.2
10
10.6
2.4
6.4
5.8

STATION
SAMPLING
DATE
TURBIDITY
(SEVERITY)
TURBIDITY WIN
LAB
NEPHELOM
ETRIC
TURBIDITY
UNITS NTU
DIRECTION
IN DEGREES
FROM TRUE
N
(CLOCKWIS
WIND
VELOCITY
(MILES PER
HOUR)
ZINC TOTAL
(UG/L AS
ZN)
C9819500 01/20/98 3
C9819500 02/18/98 3
C9819500 03/12/98 3
C9819500 _ 04/27/98 2
C9819500 05/20/981
C9819500 06/15/98 2
C9819500 07/21/98 4
C9819500 08/06/98 2
C9819500 _ 09/15/98 1
C9819500 10/13/98 1
C9819500 11 /05/98 1
C9819500 J 12/08/98 1
C9819500 01/05/99 3
C9819500 02/04/99 3
03/04/99 1
04/06/99 1
05/11/99 1
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500 06/28/99 3
C9819500 07/21 /99 1
C9819500 08/19/9911
C9819500 09/13/991
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
10/18/99 1
11/18/99 1
12/14/99
01/19/00 2
02/03/00 3
C9819500 ! 03/06/00,2
C9819500 04/04/00 1
C9819500 _ 05/10/00,1
C9819500 06/22/001
C9819500 07/25/00 2
C98195007, 08/14/00 3
C9819500 09/11/00 2
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
10/17/00 1
11/20/00
12/12/00
01/04/01
02/07/01
04/05/01
05/03/01
06/12/01
07/10/01
08/06/01
09/06/01
10/02/01
11/07/01
12/10/01
01/07/02
02/11/02
03/06/02
40
50
27
12
7.5
15
500
19
6.1
14
2.7
4.5
65
32
7.3
6.2
8.3
85
10
8.8
5.4
12
3.6
10
20
36
.19
7.1
11
8.7
23
36
,18
17
7.7
11
9.1
28
0
7.1
60
50
34
120
60
30
7.6
360
270
290
80
260
240
310
240
270
260
270
280
170
290
300
150
170
290
350
300
160
280
300
8
13
12
2
7
11_..
3
3 18
10K
11
24
10K
10
41
3 31
4 10K
10 22
7 10K
5 _ 10K
10 10K
7 10K
3 10K
4 10K
4 10K
1 10K
2
5
7
310 3
270 4
260 3
190 4
260 6
260 2
360 5
270 2
270 3
1320 1
270 7
180 7
260 4
30 1
180 4
270 2
280 1
0 1
260 2
270 3
270 3
150 4
30 4
290 5
270 3
320 3
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
15
16
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10K
10U
10U
10U
10U

STORET REMARK CODES
A Value reported is the mean of two or more determinations.
B Results based upon colony counts outside the acceptable range.
C Value calculated. (Also see "$")
D Indicates field measurement.
E Indicates extra samples taken at composite stations.
F In the case of species, F indicates female sex.
G Value reported is the maximum of two or more determinations.
H Value based on field kit determination; results may or may not be accurate.
J Estimated value; value not accurate.
K Actual value is known to be less than value given.
L Actual value is known to be greater than value given.
M Presence of material verified but not quantified. In the case of temperature or oxygen reduction potential, M indicates a negative value. In the case of species, M indicates male sex.
N Presumptive evidence of presence of material.
O Sampled, but analysis lost or not performed.
P Too numerous to count.
Q Sample held beyond normal holding time.
R Significant rain in the past 48 hours.
S Laboratory test.
T Value reported is less than criteria of detection.
U Indicates material was analyzed for, but not detected. In case of species, U indicates undetermined sex.
✓ Indicates the analyte was detected in the sample and associated blank method.
W Value observed is Tess than the lowest value reportable under "T' code.
X Value is quasi vertically integrated sample.
Y Laboratory analysis from unpreserved data may not be accurate.
Z Too many colonies were present to count (TMTC), the numeric value represents the filtration volume.
$ Calculated value. (also see "C")

STATION
DATE
DEPTH_M
DO (mg/L)
C9819500
_C9819500 02/18/1998j
C9819500 03/12/1998
C9819500 04/27/1998
C9819500 05/20/1998
C9819500 06/15/1998
C9819500 _ 07/21/1998
C9819500 08/06/1998
C9819500 09/15/1998
C9819500 10/13/1998
C9819500 11/05/1998
C9819500 12/08/1998
C9819500 01/05/1999
C9819500 02/04/1999
C9819500 03/04/1999
C9819500 04/06/1999
09819500 05/11/1999
C9819500 06/28/1999
C9819500 07/21/1999
'C9819500 08/19/1999
C9819500 09/13/1999
C9819500 10/18/1999
C9819500 11/18/1999
C9819500 01/19/2000
C9819500 02/03/2000
C9819500 03/06/2000
01/20/1998
09819500 04/04/2000
C9819500 05/10/2000
IC9819500 06/22/2000
C9819500 07/25/2000
C9819500 08/14/2000
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
09/11/2000
10/17/2000
11/20/2000
12/12/2000
01/04/2001
02/07/2001
04/05/2001
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
0.1 11.5
10.2
0.1 12.3
0.1 7.6
0.1 7.8
0.1 6.0
5.8
0.1---- 6.7
0.1 8.1
0.1 8.4
0.1 8.4
0.1 6.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
11.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
9.9
11.8
8.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
8.7
6.7
5.5'
2.2 jf"
3.4 7\f'
6.3
6.0
10.9
7.2
7
6.2 i-
7.1 -X-
5.9 4-
5.9
7.19f'
9.2
9.6
13.4
11.7
05/03/2001 . 0.1
06/12/2001 0.1
07/10/2001 0.1
08/06/2001 0.1
09/06/2001 0.1
10/02/2001 I ._-..__.___..._.- 0.1
12/10/2001 j Y 0.1
9.8
6.9
4.5
4.6 k
2.8 X-
5.3X.
5.5 it
04
h^0kS
'11. Sirmlu-e-T-1:4-) CO: knIZ. 715:h4114 00,_
1 a }-�
���,,� GCE�-r„ t,^It
viaoT r °�s
y63-Pie -YOGb jjr«L,

0
•

Screening level model results
• 10/22/01
5 CS hndllr
/16 nC
ywG4C-
: CEN 1RIO TOTAL PHOSPHORUS
. „•;: a, CONC+;NTRA'1'ION RAN
IN FISHING; CREEK
RESERVOIR
1
1
TP = 1 mglL for all NC and SC 0.11
discharges
No non -point source reductions
�O
TP =0 mg/L for all NC discharges 0.08
TP =1 mg/L for all SC discharges
No non -point source reductions
TP =0 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.06
discharges
No non -point source reductions
TP = 1 mg/L for all NC and SC
0. 10 nil- - 1 mg/L
discharges
Non -point sources eliminated SC = 1 mg/L
TP = 1 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.06 NC = 1 mg/L
discharges
Non -point sources eliminated SC = 1 mg/L
Background phosphorus levels
set to zero
TP= 0.5 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.08 NC = 0.5 mg/L
discharges (BAT)
BMPs implemented for 25% SC = 0.5 mg/L
reduction in non -point source
contribution
TP= 0.5 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.09 NC = 0.5 mg/L
discharges (BAT) SC - 0.5 mg/L
No non -point source reductions g
TP= 0.18 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.07 NC = 0.18 mg/L
discharges
No non -point source reductions SC = 0.18 mg/L
TP= 0.18 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.06 NC = 0.18 mg/L
discharges
BMPs implemented for 25%, SC = 0.18 mg/L
reduction in non -point source
contribution
TP= 0.31 mg/L for all NC and SC 0.08 NC = 0.31 mg/L
discharges
No non -point source reductions SC = 0.31 mg/L
TP= 0.31mg/L for all NC and SC 0.06 NC = 0.31 mg/L
discharges
BMPs implemented for 50 % SC = 0.31 mg/L
reduction in non -point source
contribution
Table 1. Possible scenarios for phosphorus contributions to Fishing Creek Reservoir. Phosphorus
concentrations in Fishing Creek are based on Jim Bowen's screening model (10/9/01 version)

FACILITY
NAME/ PERMIT
NUMBER
PHASED
PERMIT?
FLOW
LIMIT
(MGD)
COMPLIANCE
SCHEDULE
PHOSPHORUS
LIMITS:
(mg/L)
PHOSPHORUS
LIMITS:
Monthly Average
(ppd)
MASS LOADING -
BASED TP LIMIT AT
Qw (mg/L)
The Chester Sewer
District -
Manetta Lando)
WWTP
SC0001741
Yes -
Compliance
schedule given
0.50
10/1/00 -
2/28/03
Weekly 24 hour
composite mon.
Weekly 24 hour
composite mon.
3/1/01 - 9/30/05
2 (monthly ave.)
3 (weekly ave.)
4.2 (monthly ave.)
6.3 (weekly ave.)
1.01 (monthly ave.)
1.51 (weekly ave.)
Town of Fort Mill-
Fort Mill WWTP
SC0020371
Yes -
Scheduled
Expansion
1.5
12/1/99 -
2/28/01 OR exp.
to 2.0 MGD
(whichever is first)
Weekly 24 hour
composite mon.
Weekly 24 hour
composite mon.
2.0 ,
2 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
12.5 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
0.75 (monthlyave.)
Town of Great
Falls - NC Childers
Plant
SC0021211
No
1.40
None given
2 (monthly ave.)
3 (weekly ave.)
12 (monthly ave.)
18 (weekly ave.)
1.02 (monthly ave.)
1.54 (weekly ave.)
City of Lancaster
Catawba River
WWTP
SC0046892
Yes -
Compliance
schedule given
5.75
12/1/99 -
2/28/02
Weekday 24 hour
composite mon.
Weekday 24 hour
composite mon.
5.75
3/1/02 - exp. to
7.5 MGD
2 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
48 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
1.0 (monthly ave.)
7.5
Upon exp. to 7.5-
MGD -11/30/04
2 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
48 (monthly ave.)
No weekly limit
0.77 (monthly ave)
Lancaster County
Water & Sewer -
Indian Land
p
SC0047864
Yes -
Scheduled
Expansion
1.2
3/1/98 - exp. to
2.0 MGD
2 (monthly ave)
No weekly limit
16.7 (monthly and
weekly average)
1.67 (monthly and weekly
average)
1.0
Exp to 2 MGD-
4.0 MGD
2 (monthly ave)
No weekly limit
16.7 (monthly and
weekly average)
1;:00 (monthly and weekly
average)
1.(1
Exp to 4 MGD-
2/28/03
2 (monthly ave)
No weekly limit
16.7 (monthly and
weekly average)
0.5 (monthly and weekly
average)
City of Rock Hill
Manchester Creek
Plant
SC0020443
Yes -
Compliance
schedule given
P limits are
only on
001B - no
flow limit
4/1/00 - 2/28/03
11.000 (monthly limit)
28200 (quarterly limit)
73200 (yearly limit)
3/1/03 - 4/30/03
2 (monthly ave)
5100 (monthly ave.)
45500 (yearly limit)
City of York -
Fishing Creek
WWTP
SC0038156
No
1. !()
None given
1 (monthly ave.)
17 (monthly ave)
1.02 (monthly ave)

Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing Self -Monitoring Summary
FACILITY REQUIREMENT
April 23, 2002.
YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SUP OCT NOV DEC
Unlmin Corp. Penn chr lim: I 1 %
NC0000175/001 Begin:3/1/1997 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr lid Oct
County: Mitchell Region: ARO Subbasin: FRB06
PF: 3.61 Special
7Q10: 45.0 IWC(%): I 1 Order-
+ NonComp:Single
Y 1998 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass — —
1999 Pass — — Pass — — Pass — — Pass —
2000 Foil 28.3 >40 Pass — NR/Pass -• — Pass — —
2001 Pass — -- Pass — — Pass — Pass — —
2002 Pass —
Unimin Corp. Red !fill Plant Perm chr lim: 1.2% 1998 Pass — Pass -- — Pass — — lass Pass —
NC0085839/001 Begin:2/1/1997 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:Single 1999 Pass — Pass •-• -• Pass — Pass
County: Mitchell Region: ARO Subbasin: FRB06 2000 Pass -- Pass Pass Pass
PF: 0.682 Special 2001 Pass — — Pass -- — Pass -- — NR/Pass — —
7QI0:90.7 IWC(%):1.2 Order: 2002 Pass —
Unimin Corp. -Crystal Operation Perm chr lim: 1.3%
NC0084620/001 I1egin:5/1/1997 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct
County: Mitchell Region: ARO Subbasin: FR1306
PF: 0.36 Special
7Q10: 41 IWC(%):I.3 Order:
+ NonComp:Single
1998 N — --- N -- -- N -- — N — —
1999 N — .-- N --- — N — — N -_
2000 N — --- N --- N — N
2001 N ... N -_ H — — H
2002 —
Union County WWTP (12 Penn chr lim: 90% 1998 — Pass --- -- Pass -- Pass
NC0069841/001 Begin:4/1/2000 Frequency: Q Feb May Aug Nov + NonComp:Single 1999 — Pass -- -- Pass — Pass
County: Union Region: MRO Subbasin: YADI4 2000 — Pass --- -- NRIPess -- Pass
PF: 1.9 Spccut 2001 — Pass --- -- Pass -- -- Pass
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%):100 Order. 2002 — Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Union County -Six Mlle Creek Perm chr lim: 90% 1998 — Pass --- Fall Fail Pass Pass
NC0066559/001 Begin:12/1/1996 Frequency: Q P/F + Ftb May Aug Nov NonComp:Single 1999 — Pass --- -- Pass -- -- H
County: Union Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB38 2000 — H --- H H
PF: 1.0 Special 2001 — H --- H H
7QI0: 0.0 IWC(%):100 Order: 2002 — H
Pass
H
H
H
Union County -Twelve Mlle Creek WWTP Penn chr lim: 90% 1998 Pass --- -- -- Cal...)
NC0085359/001 Begin:5/1/1996 Frequency: Q P/F + Feb May Aug Nov + NonComp:Single 1999 -- Pass --- — Pass
County: Union Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB38 2000 — Pass -- -- NR/Pass
PF: 2.5 Special 2001 — Pass -- Pass
7(310: 0.0 IWC(%):IO0 Order. 2002 — Fai )
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Pass
Unocal Corp-Rhom and Haas Facility Pem1 chr lim: 90% 1998 H --- Pass
NC0085057/00I Begin:3/1/1996 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct NonComp:Single 1999 Pass — -- Pass
County. Mecklenburg Region: MRO Subbasin: CTB34 2000 Pass -- -- Pass
PF: 0.0432 Special 2001 Pass — --- Fail
7Q10: 0.0 IWC(%):100 order. 2002 Fad >100
<45
Pass — H H
— Pass — — Pass
Pass -- -- Pass
97- .5 Pass -- Pass
H Fail
US Coast Guard/002 Perm: 241tr LC50 ac monit epis nhd (grab) 1998 —
NC0079499l002 Begin:8/1/1993 Frequency: A NonComp: 1999 — — — >100 —
County: Pasquorank Region: WARO Subbasin: PAS50 2000 — — — — >100 — — — —
PF: NA Special 2001 —
7Q10: TIDAL IWC(%):NA Order. 2002 —
NR/ol
USMC Camp LeJeune Hadnot Pt WWTP 001 Penn chr lim: 42%; ifexp 15.OMOD chr km 5% 1998 Pass -- Pass Pass
NC0063029/001 Begin:4/1/1998 Frequency: QPIE + Jan Apr Jul Oct + NonComp:Single 1999 I 1 -- — I — —
County: Onslow Region: WIRO Subbasin: WOK02 2000 I 1 — 1 -•
PF: 8.0 Special 2001
7Q10: TIDAL 1WC(%):42 Order: 2002 --
USMC Camp Lcjeune Hadnot Pt WWTP 002 Perm chr lim: 5% mysid
NC0063U29/002 Begin:2/10/1999 Frequency: Q P/F + Jan Apr Jul Oct
County Onslow Region: WIRO Subbasin: WOK02
PF: 15.0 Special
7Q10: TIDAL IWC(%):NA Order:
+ NonComp:Single
1998 Pass --- -- Pass Pass Pass --• -- Pass
1999 Pass — -- Pass — Pass -- -- Passmy
2000 BI — -• Passmy Pass -- Pass
2001 Pass -- Pass — Pass -- -- Pass
2002 Pass —
USMC Cherry Point Perm chr Iim: 14%
NC0003816/001 Begin:10/1/2000 Frequency: Q Mar Jun Sep Dec
County: Craven Region: WARO Subbasin: NEU10
PF: 3.5 Special
7Q10: TIDAL 1WC(%):14.0 Order:
+ NonComp:Single
1998 Pass — Late Pass — Pass — -- Pass — -- Pass
1999 — — Pass — -• Late Fail >58.>80 Pass — — Pass
2000 — — Pass — -- Pass — — Pass — — Pass
2001 — — Pass — NR/Pass — — Late Pass Pass
2002 — —
Y Pre 1998 Data Available
LEGEND:
PERM = Permit Requirement LET = Administrative Letter - Target Frequency = Monitoring frequency: Q. Quarterly; M- Monthly; BM- Bimonthly; SA- Semiannually; A- Annually OWD- Only when discharging; D- Discontinued monitoring requirement
Begin = First month required 7QI0 = Receiving stream low now criterion (cfs) += quarterly monitoring increases to monthly upon failure or NR Months that testing must occur - ex. Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct NonComp = Current Compliance Requirement
PF = Permitted flow (MUD) 1WC %= Inslream waste concentration P/F = Pass/Fail test AC = Acute CHR = Chronic
Data Notation: f - Fathead Minnow; • - Ceriodaphnia sp.; my - Mysid shrimp; ChV - Chronic value; P - Morality of stated percentage at highest concentration; at - Performed by DWQ Aquatic Tot Unit; bt - Bad test
Reporting Notation: -- = Data not required; NR - Not reported Facility Activity Status: I - Inactive, N. Newly lssued(To construct); H - Active but not discharging; t-More data available for month in question; • = ORC signature needed
46

i d1
�� ( ..f,2i w4 ti //I/% /Z. '
..,
. //,14 Jc/
v/ r,
(iv
tdv 6 T oQ
a.//
r ,+
6, Yo (y 919
S: Qo
s:67
6, Zo (rf• sj
57
') /5;0 7,/57 &J
6 7,;`'
0,> G oY (S°3 /`�• 6,o6 (s,
6 c,) U "6
_Z 3, y , C', z3,7 3' 07(
6, S; 3 9' y.,)uJ cz),/, 7 /(777,a/
0 8.9� U7.J-8, g>
7.65 82,3 7,�
2.4, r 6,0 3() z3
0 22, 8
Z3, o",
Zo, Z. 5;f7( yy
s 7,IC-
";:i4c,. /7, aliCi.., rth. 414 )0 i/r-tite„et,
1, .O hi/ C. , �„',rft/<„441 p_r_ `-
9.7 (fi A 6.8/ 4//
1.60 / r r/xt, „.. () A , ),; f vo i ,di 4 i/;., s r,,,
.?
f�'f.�-„ pc „v, r..�.sc.•�C �, o r" - 6, 0 !
0%. L S ; 7v
1{
/6,5- 7 6J
41,1

f) 357 ),iii - 1ZLL L ,- 72
7/4)4/ 7eitA4 0./ Aye,
O./ 77€ F,3y- /yGd Sod 90 i _
/ r o', 3 ,(` 9' ,/ ty( % sz 40-
/ //e �` d,; i f * /L /%2 J /0, og4//i(,
v V
AVS = iltj E (zirw0+c✓)- /0 /,Q (c,)/ ./
NI/ 3 2 nide (m9 1 L'(w1
�0 0j/-C� (2; S� s�+� / ( )
a)- G/ q / Z /iG0
Xmj/Z CO; /o n c.w)
af/3 / /,e (S); /. 8 •�Jze (w)
�Z�
)u - l Al/ , s y// l/)

Effluent Monitoring Data*
MONTH
NPDES # NAME PARAMETER NAME UNITS CODE Item
NC0085359 Total
NC0085359 UNION CO. PWD - TWELVE MILE CR. W FLOW MGD 50050 Avg.
Max.
Min.
BOD, 5-DAY (20C) MG/L 00310 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS MG/L 00530 Avg.
Max.
Min.
AMMONIA (AS N) MG/L 00610 Avg.
Max.
Min.
FECAL COLIFORM #/100ML 31616 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL NITROGEN (AS N) MG/L 00600 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (AS P) MG/L 00665 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TEMPERATURE (C) DEG.0 00010 Avg.
Max.
Min.
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE uMHOS/CM 00095 Avg.
Max.
Min.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (DO) MG/L 00300 Avg.
Max.
Min.
Oct 1999 Nov 1999 Dec 1999 Jan 2000 Feb 2000 Mar 2000 Apr 2000 May 2000 Jun 2000 Jul 2000 Aug 2000 Sep 2000 12-Month
Summary
0.9214 0.8426 0.8344 1.0316 1.3041 1.0548 1.0242 0.9532 0.919 0.8919 0.9867 1.0753 0.987
1.67 0.916 0.985 2.316 2.14 1.9 1.23 1.19 1.7 1.12 1.16 2.2 2.316
0.798 0.732 0.651 0.721 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.27 0.79 0.67 0.83 0.84 027
1.55 1.42 0 2.81 2.37 2.34 0 0.28 3.41 0.44 0.6 0.34 1.297
2.4 3.21 0 57 30.8 49.7 0 2.13 13.5 2.57 3.75 2.56 57
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5.4 4 3.8 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 0 1.125
0 0 0 108.9 73.1 89 0 0 42 0 6.2 0 108.9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.3 0 0 0 0.031
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 3.13 0 0 0 3.13
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 15.1 11.8 12.4 15.1 38.8 27.3 4.6 43.3 7.242
3 2 37 340 535 176 420 110 730 270 470 1950 1950
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 0
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 2.512
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 5.023
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 1.206
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 1.2 0.14 1.5 42 6 2.5 3.9 2.073
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 12 0.14 1.5 42 6 2.5 3.9 6
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 1.2 0.14 1.5 42 6 2.5 3.9 0.14
20.09 18.19 15.67 13.86 13.53 16.47 17.05 19.15 21.77 23.09 23.77 22.84 18.790
21.7 19.9 17.1 16.5 16 18 19 20.5 23.3 24.6 25.4 24.8 25.4
18.1 16.7 13.7 11 11.8 14 15 17 19.9 22.2 23.2 21.3 11
476.7 499.6 494.4 458.9 399.8 425.3 418.6 440.8 460 1.5 498.3 494.9 422.400
514 518 512 515 456 465 448 486 495 1.5 517 541 541
407 484 450 350 340 334 356 420 413 1.5 477 424 1.5
8.13 8.43 8.68 9.22 9.65 8.9 8.44 8.33 7.83 7.63 7.45 7.49 8.348
8.61 9.1 9.27 10.41 10.23 9.47 8.98 8.83 8.62 7.93 7.83 8.19 10.41
7.44 8.03 8.25 7.69 9.02 8.19 7.64 7.87 6.25 7.16 7.03 7.09 6.25
' See separate sheets for pH and toxicity data.
effiuentdalal .xls,DataSumm
12/19/2001

Effluent Monitoring Data*
MONTH
NPDES # NAME PARAMETER NAME UNITS CODE Item
NC0085359 Total
NC0085359 UNION CO. PWD - TWELVE MILE CR. W FLOW MGD 50050 Avg.
Max.
Min.
BOD, 5-DAY (20C) MG/L 00310 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS MG/L 00530 Avg.
Max.
Min.
AMMONIA (AS N) MG/L 00610 Avg.
Max.
Min.
FECAL COLIFORM A/100ML 31616 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL NITROGEN (AS N) MG/L 00600 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (AS P) MG/L 00665 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TEMPERATURE (C) DEG.0 00010 Avg.
Max.
Min.
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE uMHOS/CM 00095 Avg.
Max.
Min.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (DO) MG/L 00300 Avg.
Max.
Min.
Oct 1999 Nov 1999 Dec 1999 Jan 2000 Feb 2000 Mar 2000 Apr 2000 May 2000 Jun 2000 Jul 2000 Aug 2000 Sep 2000 12-Month
Summary
0.9214 0.8426 0.8344 1.0316 1.3041 1.0548 1.0242 0.9532 0.919 0.8919 0.9867 1.0753 0.987
1.67 0.916 0.985 2.316 2.14 1.9 1.23 1.19 1.7 1.12 1.16 2.2 2.316
0.798 0.732 0.651 0.721 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.27 0.79 0.67 0.83 0.84 0.27
1.55 1.42 0 2.81 2.37 2.34 0 0.28 3.41 0.44 0.6 0.34 1.297
2.4 3.21 0 57 30.8 49.7 0 2.13 13.5 2.57 3.75 2.56 57
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5.4 4 3.8 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 0 1.125
0 0 0 108.9 73.1 89 0 0 4.2 0 6.2 0 108.9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.07 0.3 0 0 0 0.031
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 3.13 0 0 0 3.13
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1.4 1.1 1.2 1.6 15.1 11.8 12.4 15.1 38.8 27.3 4.6 43.3 7.242
3 2 37 340 535 176 420 110 730 270 470 1950 1950
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 6 0
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 2.512
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 5.023
2.005 1.314 1.821 4.227 5.023 2.13 2.316 2.316 4.516 1.55 1.72 1.206 1.206
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 1.2 0.14 1.5 4.2 6 2.5 3.9 2.073
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 1.2 0.14 1.5 4.2 6 2.5 3.9 6
1.8 1 1.3 0.34 1 1.2 0.14 1.5 4.2 6 2.5 3.9 0.14
20.09 18.19 15.67 13.86 13.53 16.47 17.05 19.15 21.77 23.09 23.77 22.84 18.790
21.7 19.9 17.1 16.5 16 18 19 20.5 23.3 24.6 25.4 24.8 25.4
18.1 16.7 13.7 11 11.8 14 15 17 19.9 22.2 23.2 21.3 11
476.7 499.6 494.4 458.9 399.8 425.3 418.6 440.8 460 1.5 498.3 494.9 422.400
514 518 512 515 456 465 448 486 495 1.5 517 541 541
407 484 450 350 340 334 356 420 413 1.5 477 424 1.5
8.13 8.43 8.68 9.22 9.65 8.9 8.44 8.33 7.83 7.63 7.45 7.49 8.348
8.61 9.1 9.27 10.41 10.23 9.47 8.98 8.83 8.62 7.93 7.83 8.19 10.41
7.44 8.03 8.25 7.69 9.02 8.19 7.64 7.87 6.25 7.16 7.03 7.09 6.25
' See separate sheets for pH and toxicity data.
effluentdatal .xls,DataSumm
12/19/2001

•
Effluent Monitoring Data*
MONTH
NPDES # NAME PARAMETER NAME UNITS CODE Item
NC0085359 Total
NC0085359 UNION CO. PWD - TWELVE MILE CR. W FLOW MGD 50050 Avg.
Max.
Min.
BOO, 5-DAY (20C) MG/L 00310 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS MG/L 00530 Avg.
Max.
Min.
AMMONIA (AS N) MG/L 00610 Avg.
Max.
Min.
FECAL COUFORM #/100ML 31616 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL NITROGEN (AS N) MG/L 00600 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS (AS P) MG/L 00665 Avg.
Max.
Min.
TEMPERATURE (C) DEG.0 00010 Avg.
Max.
Min.
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE uMHOS/CM 00095 Avg.
Max.
Min.
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (DO) MG/L 00300 Avg.
Max.
Min.
Oct 2000 Nov 2000 Dec 2000 Jan 2001 Feb 2001 Mar 2001 Apr 2001 May 2001 Jun 2001 Jul 2001 Aug 2001 Sep 2001 Summary
12-Month
0.913
0.9887 1.0316 1.0735 1.1158 0.8392 1.0019 0.8593 0.809 0.7826 0.7767 0.8187 0.8566 0.913
1.12 1.44 1.36 1.69 1.2 1.69 1.04 0.91 1.07 0.92 0.88 1.21 1.69
0.84 0.95 0.93 0.73 0.69 0.75 0.73 0.67 0.68 0.64 0.72 0.73 0.64
0 0.2 0.69 1.73 0.1 0.45 0 1.22 0.1 1.75 0.54 0.46 0.603
0 2.08 323 2.89 2 3.16 0 2.74 226 4.44 3.91 2.39 4.44
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.017
0 0 0 4.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4.2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0.35 0.06 0.24 0 0.28 0 1.15 0 0 0.43 0.21 0.227
0 1.7 1.3 2.1 0 2 0 3.9 0 0 3.3 2.9 3.9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5.4 1 1 1.3 1.2 1.6 6.1 2 2.3 2 42 3.8 2.189
100 2 1 5 78 40 700 640 11 12 1170 710 1170
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1.48 2.3 3.5 3.87 3.53 5.52 2.6 2 2.4 2.6 2.27 3.3 2.948
1.48 2.3 3.5 3.87 3.53 5.52 2.6 2 2.4 2.6 2.27 3.3 5.52
1.48 2.3 3.5 3.87 3.53 5.52 2.6 2 2.4 2.6 2.27 3.3 1.48
2.1 0.51 0.4 0.2 2.4 1.8 1.4 0.69 2.3 0.18 0.19 0.39 1.047
2.1 0.51 0.4 0.2 2.4 1.8 1.4 0.69 2.3 0.18 0.19 0.39 2.4
2.1 0.51 0.4 0.2 2.4 1.8 1.4 0.69 2.3 0.18 0.19 0.39 0.18
20.64 18.5 15.06 13.71 14.21 14.34 16.61 19.01 21.71 22.75 23.95 22.94 18.619
22.1 20.6 16.5 14.7 15 15.6 18.7 20.3 22.4 23.1 24.6 24.1 24.6
19.4 16 13.6 12.7 13.7 13.3 14.6 18 20.4 22.3 22.8 21.3 12.7
512.5 514.5 508.2 490.3 478.3 446.5 460.3 492.5 472.4 469.5 485.8 476.3 483.925
540 534 527 526 523 494 486 532 493 487 533 577 577
490 491 479 444 443 352 427 466 444 445 452 436 352
7.82 7.5 8.65 8.98 8.99 8.25 8.02 6.88 7.4 6.92 6.6 6.8 7.734
8.18 8.46 9.24 9.96 9.66 9.7 9.11 8.9 9.11 7.44 7.58 7.95 9.96
7.37 6.86 8.01 7.95 8.08 7.04 6.62 6.18 6.14 6.26 6.02 6.14 6.02
• See separate sheets for pH and toxicity data
eftluentdatal .xls,DataSumm
12/19/2001

< < - Effluent Monitoring Data - Toxicity
NPDES # FACILITY NAME
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK
NC0085359 Total
PARAMETER NAME
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
CHRONIC TOX,
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
P/F 7DAY CERIODAPHNIA
CODE UNITS MONTH RESULT
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 199910 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 199911 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 199912 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200001 NO DATA
TGP3B PASSIFAIL 200002 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200003 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200004 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200005 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200006 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200007 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200008 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200009 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200010 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200011 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200012 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200101 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200102 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200103 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200104 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200105 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200106 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200107 NO DATA
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200108 PASS
TGP3B PASS/FAIL 200109 NO DATA
effluentdata1.xls,Toxicity
12/19/2001

• Effluent Monitoring Data - pH
c
0
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 199910 7.53 7.33
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 199911 7.52 7.37
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 199912 7.51 7.28
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200001 7.48 7.26
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200002 7.43 7.2
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200003 7.41 7.22
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200004 7.53 7.23
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200005 8.14 7.28
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200006 7.63 7.22
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200007 7.6 7.35
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200008 7.54 7.28
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200009 7.85 7.23
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200010 7.43 7.24
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200011 7.34 7.09
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200012 7.36 7.17
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200101 7.42 7.14
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200102 7.7 7.08
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200103 7.41 7.04
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200104 7.36 7.02
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200105 7.27 7.11
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200106 7.87 7.07
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200107 7.48 7.22
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200108 7.35 7.03
NC0085359 UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK pH 00400 SU 200109 7.47 7.16
NC0085359 Count 24
effluentdatal .xls,pH
12/19/2001

Vo
iL�rh.-4
iefir4Y ecr ofeht/t /L.,, /(4,, if? v(544-,--
(44-, wk.-ea r e??,),,c(,)?
/ 4 Z.S'tit�
6 Nc-P- 4er/96,7.(ef) fifi Lel—) :
4, x purm 7‘ jr/4._./ sceiAztes ,/
J/ (/rig
(;`(‘ke ,u , k ,tee 1,SrkrcGr aI1/4—
6/4,,- ,� , ae 7?1,6- /( ,2g/4, . , r
( Wr 1�‘t c '
;u k stz -FCE,g6 ,l;
,6-z„,‘, ,,i,,e „__ /4 /76;1(7, hilcoi„. ,,,,, *el) -
( ii(gt,(/t .->7-� ,. /,s �,:,4
t„,ti}- 443,j, r ): ci.4.1 /mil /' we iw l�«
/ro4iitc. si,,,,,,,' di dm.,' j ipt (//// /,cf
o (, ,... ( ,l �/ n)/m✓4 7- �- /mil! O ,^—,
JC;11lu1,
04is i vyf '
rC, -emu A .00,16
5,47-4- fi £ i0,i4/ 7)/F cf
o- (Ai nt1M C / y F' 12.717- cc
4441(44. ` . CO I ✓L' ( /(
t Art l h
kt“
L

oik ikr, dc4...t. , ÷-e ,71/t.e
,Pfi41& 5
of
p-rti-- kt5a ccel
fit 2c1c& r 4' kr, itt 4/aer-P
6-1 mot- / 4,1 I7 n
7,,,,x) z
' /6,
l 1 f,06 , dice, A d e,
,,-ab,r�f
a
/1f
/La J
cJ
/n,,6f/f 4/4
trd-Lt 0 c 6e
c a'

(3 - i.lx4tf tiet3Z) -fck,u.
klive
— / �., d / �� �vcv..,,L ��
A. �! ` J,rc4
4 Jar v9k.
liht L (4,t 1
I4w�
cru,.tr Mior- ff—
/vs,
AkS
i 104-/ pit t(-hdy,L/L
l
,,„
'�,�, c, tic wi Z(�
(,sue
yifiL94--
crc

f 4 Sc
fov
z(i'estY-72
J4 /m
�D
a
/10-y
ujut 04":3
�
2
( "^41+1 (Z4i16- 11 c;✓ (dh,41, c/
CSC/al- is-
L,pri( fe--#
, ,t_ 4.1 kL- t ��, ,

5- At 6-0 /i/xt ; a
i ,y 1, d" --? /CT -4-d -� 6 /cc1
(c)4( fag <<
of
W �-1 wtl 2 i 66 10 IL
Yv c utsvutA,Q(1-4-
1
i
lit AfrV
1,,vi , L 2,14619,
i af' J - 1 C7 knots. _I ) 164Sk V "f
SRA c:� -7)3 , w6
4<</l 4tc Q2n- wit' 5 t
A / /4 `mkt f / 0' • r " ,
0

141ri c445 0011/11-,-- 2-644, (1 (t 1,i0f Cid ur144-A
ll�)
2. 11 ro�i �W
1
\COltkuirw )
-..e w ( u,
w/J'M1/40-116-
ow.4 36d .

//ou
z//3/o
00 .1,)7
v'V6'U1,1
L:t I G
0, 0 2,?
1447 4o,00Z
/0/o 7 6, 01.?
� i I
��—
cc/ /9t
D,0.5L
3j6 v 0,0 g
oc,t 5-"'"
0,
,00 23 , v rG
a
ZAJ
6,cSZ g
0, 0 (i.z. triL
ti 0,0 vc, 7
5A/a-
I
0
3

-I-i
f--f f t
i-r-j i-- I
• I I
51S L VJHod SdOS
■_
■■■■■■■ I ■r
Avarmatbneriansamo ummummo
aim simmummi
■ IN
• ■■
as NE
111111111111111111 Anal- III N1111111111111111111111N
■■■■■■MIM■■ ■■
■■■ I ■■■■■■■■ ■■
WASZWiliViiii
■■■■lir/!INVOINIMIENDINIIIIIMMINNEMEN
IllalriatiMINIAIN■Ei■MENEM
own ••
••
is =Ea MI
■111■ IWII , ■■■
Ell=11111111M1111111111 • NM
■■,�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■ ■■■■IIIIII JNI M om■■■■■ ■■
EN 11•611111111 • NM
• ■■■■■nem.,. ■■■■o■■■■
•Il mifigora ••••••vm
MMENIMINIWAIMMIENII III
■ ■NEMAIN■■■■r►1■■■UM■■■■■■■
■■ ■■■■■■■tom■ ■■
■■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■
■■■ ■■■■■■■■r■■■
• ■■■■■ ■■■■■■■
ME MINNININIIN • MN
li="111"
■■ ■■■■■■i■i■�ii■■■i■■ii MN
MN
H
■
■r■■
■■■ . ■■
■■■■■RIM
■
••
•
• MAE •
•
•••••
■■
III

i
1 l�
f i i
/7.
491/

■ ■Awn-
■■
••• , 111 ONWAGIftk
■■■■■■r IMMIMMEM
rr.■■
MINI■■■.■■■A�!!I■MIMINEMEMENENUMMEINIIIIM■■■! ■an■ som
Eir�i'■'�■■'(�iii�i/�rlfil " _ -! - "'■Ili■'�Ilii' ■■■■■
11111111111111111111111.1 ! a : i ! 11■■■■■■
IPMJELM
■■■■■■■■■■WI
■■■■ IEURIE�■EM
MMIRENIIIEHRI
■■ ! - ■ I
MUMIN
■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■IMECERillkiiiiiiMME ----_;■■■■■■■■■■■ a■i
■■ % MUM
■■■ ■E
qtry
IN■■■■�■■■
MEM
-.0
c
%roc
, i I , Tr.�R! _ ■■■NEM
•
■■•■r�■■�■sar■■■ •
■ ■■■MEMN■■! ■=■■
■aillai it i llif ii rilii■■
■■■ ■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/�■M!■I�■-
ISM= 1 MiINiAE-iil-
■■ ■i■■�■�__■■ice■■'
■•
■■■■■■■_■■■■■■ ■■�
■■■■■■■■
■■■■�■■
■■■■ ■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■
�Y■■■■■
■
I I
TOPS FORM 33 15
MEM= MN
EIIIMIIIII
MEE
MIEINNINIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIN
II
■

I-I-
�ii11I•U$Pi , �E... .U.
11111miumm5rm Ii11 �� 111prAi
%LE€ V) O J Sd•
01.
�1(
it
111111111111111 11111111111111 I 11111

•
Twelve Mile Creek VWVTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data 't
DS1 DS1 DS1 DS2 DS2 DS2 UPS
Total # #>400 % > 400 Total # #>400 % > 400 >400
Jan-01 5 1 20% 5 1 20% yes
Feb-01 4 1 25% 4 1 25% yes
Mar-01 4 1 25% 4 1 25% yes
4/1/01 5 0 0% 5 0 0%
5/1/01 4 1 25% 4 1 25% yes
6/1/01 12 1 16% 12 1 8% • yes
7/1/01 14 2 14% 14 3 21% y&n
8/1/01 13 0 0% 13 1 8% no
9/1/01 12 5 42% 12 5 42% yes
10/1/01 5 1 20% 5 1 20% yes
11 /1 /01 4 1 25% 4 0 0%
12/1/01 5 0 0% 5 0 0%
1/1/02 4 2 50% 4 2 50% yes
2/1/02 4 2 50% 4 1 25% y&n
3/1/02 4 2 50% 4 2 50% yes
4/1/02 5 1 20% 5 1 20% yes
104 21 104 21
20% 20%
# mos. > NC std of 20%+ # mos. > NC std of 20%+
8 9
# mos. >SC std of 10%+ # mos. >SC std of 10%+
13 11
DS1 = 1/4 mi below VWVfP, -2.2 miles from NC/SC state line
DS2 = SR1301 brdg, 0.7 miles b/I VW TP, -1.7 miles from NC/SC state line
jmn 7/3/02

Date UPS
(50 ft. above)
1/2/01 80
1/8/01 115
1/15/01 360
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
% > 400 Effluent
1/22/01 500 5
1/29/01 210
Avg. 253 20% 228 20% 212 20%
2/5/01 165
2/13/01 280
2/19/01 2400
2/26/01 160
Avg. 365 50%
3/5/01 4100
3/12/01 130
3/19/01 145
3/26/01 165
Avg. 336 25%
4/2/01 120
4/9/01 105
4/16/01 130
4/23/01 74
4/30/01 147
Avg. 112 0%
5/7/01 163
5/14/01 190
5/21/01 43
5/29/01 520
Avg. 162 25%
Date UPS
6/4/01 210
<1
DS1 % > 400 DS2 % > 400
Fecal (1/4 mi. below) (SR1301 bridge)
74 60
86 51
297 340
547 507
135 100
86 31
110 125
1531 1594
130 120
208 25% 165 25%
2900 3700
91 86
125 86
130 71
256 25% 210
165
135
77
23
71
78
0%
109
86
31
17
51
48
25%
0%
29 10
100 31
20 17
513 700
74 25% 44 25%
DS1 % > 400 DS2 % > 400
210 181
jmn 7/2/02

6/6/01 533
6/7/01 433
6/11/01 120
6/12/01 34
6/14/01 553
6/18/01 143
6/20/01 100
6/21/01 97
6/25/01 205
6/27/01 115
6/28/01 115
Avg. 165 41%
Date UPS (50 ft. above)
7/2/01 20
7/3/01 46
7/4/01 4000
7/9/01 110
7/11/01 46
7/12/01 89
7/16/01 190
7/18/01 31
7/19/01 20
7/23/01 23
7/25/01 500
7/26/01 400
7/30/01 50
7/31/01 37
Avg. 88
Date UPS (50 ft. above)
8/1/01 51
8/6/01 26
8/7/01 11
jmn
21%
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
91
37
26
3
453
77
48
130
66
100
60
64
16%
40
17
49
60
400
63
48
130
63
100
43
71
8%
DS1 (1/4 mi. below) DS2 (SR1301 bridge)
9 453
1060 620
2600 2300
40 26
29 37
37 29
46 34
34 26
34 26
20 46
360 210
260 75
72 31
23 120
75 14% 86 21%
DS1 (1/4 mi. below) DS2 (SR1301 bridge)
14 760
14 9
34 9

Avg. 392 60%
11/5/01 410
11/12/01 277
11/19/01 190
11/26/01 273
Avg. 277 75%
12/3/01 34
12/10/01 51
12/17/01 277
12/27/01 250
12/31 /01 320
Avg. 131 60%
1/7/02 4500
1/14/02 270
1/22/02 1160
1/28/02 266
Avg. 782 50%
2/4/02 433
2/12/02 387
2/18/02 220
2/25/02 183
Avg. 287 25%
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
220'.
189 20% 157 20%
71
40
170
410
119
100
105
86 110
<1 115
10 105
107
35560.
5100
360
1200
223
837
25%
0%
50%
37
77
51
100
62
29
40
46
260
60
61
0%
0%
4300
330
1040
250
779 50%
410 240
700 760
177 - 167
180 115
309 50% 243
25%
Date UPS (50 ft. above) Effluent DS1 (1/4 mi. below) DS2 (SR1301 bridge)
3/4/02 1867 367 1667 2100
3/11/02 300 210 131
3/18/02 1160 600 '; 960 1020
3/25/02 105 110 77
Avg. 511 50% 438 50% 383 50%
4/1/02 5100 1 3700 4000
jmn 7/2/02

8/9/01 <1.0
8/13/01 74
8/14/01 9
8/16/01 6
8/20/01 14
8/21/01 6
8/23/01 <1.0
8/27/01 26
8/28/01 <1.0
8/30/01 <1.0
Avg. 7
0%
9/4/01 3200
9/5/01 7500
9/6/01 473
9/10/01 29
9/11/01 54
9/13/01 11
9/17/01 920
9/18/01 349
9/20/01 507
9/24/01 20200
9/25/01 11700
9/27/01 460
Avg. 624 75%
Date UPS (50 ft. above)
10/2/01 317
10/8/01 447
10/15/01 12700
10/22/01 60
10/29/01 86
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
83
14
100
135
23
14
34
20
20
20
29
2100
3700
290
97
57
77
115
49
3140
11500
11900
210
530
0%
42%
46
40
66
29
140
20
20
103
37
43
43
5900
6400
150
43
427
31
60
89
613
13300
9600
135
488
DS1 (1/4 mi. below) DS2 (SR1301 bridge)
86 46
80 54
6900 11300
63 49
80 69
7.7%
42%
jmn 7/2/0g

•
4/8/02 91
4/15/02 49
4/22/02 40
4/29/02 49
Avg. 135 20%
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
69
23
14
10
61
20%
43
40
9
20
66
20%
jmn 7/2/02

Twelve Mile Creek VWVTP Instream Fecal Coliform Data
Date UPS (50 ft. above) DS1 (1/4 mi. below)
5/7/01 163 29
5/14/01 190 100
5/21/01 43 20
5/29/01 520 513
Avg. 162 74
4/2/01 120 165
4/9/01 105 135
4/16/01 130 77
4/23/01 74 23
4/30/01 147 71
Avg. 112 78
3/5/01 4100 2900
3/12/01 130 91
3/19/01 145 125
3/26/01 165 130
Avg. 336 256
Ftc&e. 0 2 '1
DS2 (SR1301 bridge)
10
31
17
700
44
109
86
31
17
51
48
3700
86
86
71
210
6.11C2L.A. /arec- 4464-" Oks
0 d A f E eoct play-
PvIL"
r7:40,4K - f0-0
tnael
jmn
l5,6
� l'`�,
"elf
6/27/02

AMB STATION
DATE
DO (mg/L)
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
C9819500
04/06/1999
05/11/1999
06/28/1999
07/21/1999
08/19/1999
09/13/1999
10/18/1999
11/18/1999
01/19/2000
02/03/2000
03/06/2000
04/04/2000
05/10/2000
06/22/2000
C9819500 07/25/2000
C9819500 08/14/2000
C9819500 09/11/2000
C9819500 10/17/2000
C9819500 11/20/2000 9.2
C9819500 12/12/2000 9.6
C9819500 01/04/2001 13.4
C9819500 02/07/2001 11.7
UPSTRM DATE
Twelve Mile Creek Instream DO data
DO_(mg/L)
DWN1 DO (mg/L) DWN2
DO (mg/L)
SC DWN DATE
DO (mg/L)
8.1
8.7
6.7
5.5
2.2 UPSTRM 8/18/99 2.1 DWN1 4.36 DWN2 4.77 CW-083 8/19/99 3.4
3.4 UPSTRM 9/13/99 3.31 DWN1 5.3 DWN2 6.25 CW-083 9/23/99 6.6
6.3
6.0
10.9
12.3,
10.2
7.2
7 UPSTRM 5/10/00 6.46 DWN1 5.4 DWN2 6.65 CW-083 5/8/00 8.3
6.2 UPSTRM 6/22/00 4.47 DWN1 3.79 DWN2 4.46
UPSTRM 6/14/00 4.49 DWN1 3.78 DWN2 4.67 CW-083 6/14/00 5.2
7.1 UPSTRM 7/24/00 3.85 DWN1 4.84 DWN2 4.83
UPSTRM 7/26/00 4.77 DWN1 5.44 DWN2 5.5
UPSTRM 7/17/00 4.06 DWN1 5.36 DWN2 5.33 CW-083 7/18/00 4.7
UPSTRM 7/19/00 3.32 DWN1 5.1 DWN2 5.15 CW-083 7/18/00 4.7
5.9 UPSTRM 8/14/00 4.75 DWN1 6.1 DWN2 6.33 CW-083 8/16/00 4.7
UPSTRM 8/16/00 3.75 DWN1 5.5 DWN2 5.8 CW-083 8/16/00 4.7
5.9 UPSTRM 9/11/00 3.55 DWN1 5.42 DWN2 5.53
UPSTRM 9/6/00 6.16 DWN1 6.46 DWN2 6.5 CW-083 9/6/00 5.8
7.1 UPSTRM 10/16/00 5.42 DWN1 6.81 DWN2 6.62
UPSTRM 10/9/00 4.87 DWN1 6.69 DWN2 6.94 CW-083 10/11/00 8.3
C9819500 04/05/2001 9.8 UPSTRM 4/2/01 10.2 DWN1 10.1 DWN2 10.08
C9819500 05/03/2001 6.9 UPSTRM 5/7/01 6.18 DWN1 6.74 DWN2 6.96
C9819500 06/12/2001 4.5 UPSTRM 6/12/01 3.73 DWN1 5.33 DWN2 5.84
C9819500 07/10/2001 4.6 UPSTRM 7/9/01 4.39 DWN1 5.9 DWN2 5.78
7/11/01 3.35 5.23 5.25
C9819500 08/06/2001 2.8 UPSTRM 8/6/01 3 DWN1 5.5 DWN2 5.16
C9819500 09/06/2001 5.3 UPSTRM 9/9/01 5.5 DWN1 5.86 DWN2 5.96
C9819500 10/02/2001 5.5 UPSTRM 10/2/01 4.71 DWN1 6.85 DWN2 6.88
C9819500 12/10/2001 24
C9819500-Twelve Mi. Creek @ Hwy 16 nr Waxhaw
Upstrm- 50 ft above WWTP
Dwn1-1/4 mi. below WWTP
Dwn2 - @ NCSR1301
SC Dwn- @ SC State Road 55

6,7
A/L
pwi1)
0Capt--.61) Ast_ ef Ge-4490//) D_Cz. "
z6o Z .� Iraz- 7 . o
/Y z 7°
3690
z L / f v /fig- ' / 2 0 0 sc-
zZ3 Z 66 -) 70 Z }z z 3 317 zSti -� &j. 777
/(.L'f% U17 ��% iu-/�✓ /7/f� WE-c L. //2(/DZ. - 1/450 Zi EXG c.-1 W L I/,a+ 1 t
/ Au 7.07/iS c r / !4 / jU /7e /j'r5V-
I viit-71 5-75•7'h 4`VA-
, ,C7"- /, id,
f rem bL mq7 i7 ,;1, ram,&
s WrYf cJjzj "� 4 %.fi. ., `I Jf y7v-✓ f�olf' /fi /�
Z:v ht /,y�r��,c Ai) .sue ;'%Pro -le/wic. /wt.-44,
e
L/vl 3 ry 760
fv 5-/
7 77
7 )SD
3Zo
/3/
li/ol S /v
fz Z77
/9 /90
z G 73
,77
/ 7 ( 2 71 7
8 Yv7
!� /Z700
zz �o
39Z
/o
/0 7
//f
L/7
Y6
(oJ
yu sy
f/f 30D
�3 Y7
o
,:.✓.ss

SCDHEC Ammonia Toxicity Calculation
Based on 1999 EPA Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia as adopted by S.C. DHEC R.61-68
promulgated December 14, 2000 pending approval by S.C. General Assembly and U.S. EPA
Division of Water Quality
April 23, 2001
Discharger Name:
Receiving Stream:
Date:
Analyst:
Union County Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Twelve Mile Creek
July 3, 2002
Jackie Nowell
Input Data
Upstream Flow (cfs):
Upstream Total Ammonia Concentration (mg N/L):
Stream Temperature, Summer (deg. C):
Stream Temperature, Winter (deg. C):
Stream pH:
Discharge Flow (mgd):
Are Salmonids Present? (yes/no):
Are Fish ELS Present? (yes/no):
0
0.22
26
13
7.5
2.5
No
Yes
Instream Total Ammonia Toxicity Results
Season:
Criterion Maximum Concentration, CMC (mg N/L):
Criterion Continuous Concentration, CCC (mg N/L):
Summer
19.890
2.082
Winter
19.890
4.364
Discharge Total Ammonia Results
Season:
Max. Conc. Protecting Against Acute Toxicity (mg N/L):
Max. Conc. Protecting Against Chronic Toxicity (mg N/L):
Summer
Winter
19.89 19.89
2.08 4.36
5,2. tilt.1.

`137-19-2002 02:42pm From-USGS 9195714041 T-217 P.001/003 F-553
science for a changing world
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Geological Survey
391d Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607-6416
[phone]/Fax [phone]
FAX COVER SHEET
DATE:
-7//c?
TO: de-,..(. 1 e A/ e//
Office ______4 /) 6
Fax No s.� `ell `7/
Phone No.
FROM: en e
Office
Phone No. j -7 / — qv Y 3
Email
MESSAGE:
c3J3
e.b/e
thie
M irnher. of pages (inchvl ng cover sheet):

'0T-19-2002 02:42pm From-USGS
9195714041 T-217 P.002/003 F-553
United States Department of the Interior
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
3916 Sunset Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
July 15, 2002
Mr. W.S. Riddick, Jr., PE, Senior Project Manager
McKim & Creed Engineers
2300 Sardis Road North, Suite A
Charlotte, North Carolina 25277
Dear Mr. Riddickc
In response to your request for low -flow data, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides the following
low -flow characteristics for the continuous -record gaging station at Twelve Mile Creek near Waxhaw, NC
(station id 02146900, drainage area 76.5 mi2). The low -flow data that are provided on the attached sheet
have boon computed based ou techniques used by the USGS for assessing the low -flow characteristics at
continuous -record gaging stations having 10 or more years of record. Please note that the flow estimates
only account for the effects of any upstream diversions or regulation that have occurred during the period
of record at the gaging station.
The gaging station on '1\uelve Mile Creek has been in operation since October 1960. The available full
period of record through the most recent water year of published data (2001) was used in the analyses. The
7-day, 10-year (7Q10) low -flow discharge based on this period is 0.10 ft3ls, or 0.0013 ft3/s/mi2 of drainage
area (termed as the 7Q10 yield). A 7Q10 yield of this magnitude indicates fairly low potentials for sustained
base flows relative to other areas in parrs of North Carolina. The basin upstream of the gaging station is
underlain by the geologic units of the Carolina Slate Belt, which has historically been correlated with rela-
tively low potentials for sustained bases flows at many streams within this belt. Thi: 30-day, 2-year (30Q2)
low -flow discharge based on this period is 3.2 ft3/s. or a 30Q2 yield of 0.0412 ft3/s/rni2_
You identified the actual location of the discharge point as being approximately 2,500 feet downstream of
the gaging station. An examination of the topographical quad map showing the location of the. gaging sta-
tion and the downstream reach indicates that no tributaries enter into Twelve Mile Creek between the station
and the discharge point. Thus, the low -flow characteristics at the gaging station can be considered applica-
ble to the discharge point.
A charge for accessing and processing information has been assessed to partially offset these casts. Your
requested data and an invoice covering processing costs for these data are enclosed. Please forward the
original bill with your check to the U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 271, Reston,
Virginia 20192.
These data are preliminary and subject to revision pending approval for publication by the Director of the
U.S. Geological Survey, and arc made available through our cooperative program of water -resources inves-
tigations with the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact us at [phone].
Enclosures
Sincerely,
i
J. Curtis Weaver
Hydrologist
[phone] • FAX [phone]

`P7-.19-2002 02:42pm From-USGS 9195714041 7-217 P.003/003 F-553
SUMMARY OF LOW -FLOW ESTIMATES IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST
REQUEST NO: 9161 •; SITE NO: of DATE: 07/15/2002
SOURCE: Consulting ACTION: Existing
STATION NUMBER: 0214690Q STATION TYPE,: Continuous -record (01)
STATION NAME: Twelve Mile Creel( near Waxhaw, NC
LOCATION: At NC Highw;:y 16. and 2.5 miles north of Waxhaw
LATITUDE: 35'57'08" LONGITUDE: 80'45'21 "
QUANDRANGLE NAME AND NUMBER: Catawba NE 1-4-i 5-1\TF1
COUNTY CODE: Union [1791 STATE CODE: NC [37) DISTRICT CODE: NC [371
HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODE: 03050103 ENR BASIN CODE: 03-08-38
DRAINAGE AREA: 76.5 mi2
Flow statistics as follows:
AVERAGE FLOW: Estimated using 0.95 t't3/s/iu12 72.7 ft3/s see note [ A 1
ANNUAL 7Q10 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.0013 ft3/s/mi2 0.1 ft3/s see note [ A
ANNUAL 30Q2 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.0412 ft3/s/mi2 3.2 ft3/s see note []
WINTER 7010 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.0200 ft3/s/m 2 1.5 ft3/s see note rA ]
ANNUAL 7Q2 MINIMUM FLOW: 0.0183 ft3/s/mi2 1.4 ft3/s see note [ A ]
NOTES:
[Al Estimate is based on records collected at or near the request site.
[B] Estimate is based entirely on runoff characteristics observed at nearby streams.
[C]Estimate based on procedures given in USGS Water Supply Paper 2403 "Low -flow Characteristics
of Streams in North Carolina" (Giese and Mason, 1993).
[1)] Estimate based on procedures given in USGS Water Supply Paper 2403 and in conjunction with
streamflow records collected at or near the request site.
[E] See remark,..
These data are considered provisional and subject to revision pending approval by the Director, USGS,
REMARKS:
• Low -now estimates based on discharge records collected at gaging station during 1961--2000 climatic years
(12-month period from April 1 through March 31 and designated by the year in which the period begins,
used in low -flow analyses at continuous -record gaging stations)
• Requested by Mr. Sid Riddick, McKim & Creed Engineers
ENTERED BY: JCW FEE CHARGED: $ 150

Date_7/2/2002
USGS Flow Data Request
Requested by Jacquelyn M. Nowell
DENR/DWQ/NPDES Unit
919 —733-5083 ext. 512
Site No. 1 County Union River Basin _Catawba
NRCD Sub Basin _030838_ Map No. or Name _H15NE/Catawba N.E., SC - NC_
Station No. Secondary or Primary Rd
Stream Name Twelve Mile Creek
Data Requested: Drainage Area X Average Flow _X
Summer 7Q10 _ X_ Winter 7Q10 X 30Q2 _X_
Site at the North Carolina/ South Carolina State line
Site No. 2 County Union River Basin Catawba
NRCD Sub Basin 030838 Map No. or Name H15NE/Catawba N.E., SC - NC _
Station No. Secondary or Primary Rd
Stream Name Twelve Mile Creek
Data Requested: Drainage Area _ X Average Flow _ X
Summer 7Q 10 _ X Winter 7Q10 _ X 30Q2 X
Site approximately 0.3 miles downstream of NC Highway 16
Site No. 3 County River Basin
NRCD Sub Basin Map No. or Name
Station No. Secondary or Primary Rd
Stream Name
Data Requested: Drainage Area Average Flow
Summer 7Q10 Winter 7Q10 30Q2

[Fwd: Union County (copper)]
•
Subject: [Fwd: Union County (copper)]
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2002 15:59:33 -0400
From: Dave Goodrich <[e-mail]>
To: Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Here's what the man from SC said...
Subject: Union County (copper)
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 14:57:36 -0400
From: "Jeff DeBessonet"<[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
missed you at 2:30pm .... so:
Dave, we can't imagine that there wouldn't be reasonable potential on copper, given
that there is essentially no dilution. The limit would be 0.0097 mg/1 (monthly
average) and .0127 (daily max). We see domestic stuff above 0.02 mg/1.
If they ran a couple of samples this week and got got any above detection, wouldn't
that justify "reasonable potential". If they didn't exceed the detection (.010
mg/1), we would concur with a monitor and open the permit after, say a year`""`
Call me if you want to discuss.
1 of 1 7/16/02 4:04 PM

JUN.19.22@2 9:_26AM DHEC BUREAU OF WATE NO.982�.�P.1/1�._
e& ' e = essonet - Comments on D af{"Perm t NC0085359/Twe ve i e Creek , Page
From:
Date:
Subject:
Dear Ms. Nowell,
rAdvie— NduJtL---
Michael Montebello 41 Ali6C
intemet,jackie.nowell(cncmail.net
6/18/02 6:26PM ytt 0 �Gr4''�
Comments on NCDraft Permit NC00883591Twelve Mile Creek WWTF
We have the following comments on the NC Permit for the Twelve Mile Creek WWTF. The following
permit conditions do not appear to insure compliance with SC Water Quality Standards:
1. The proposed weekly average fecal coliform limits, A daily maximum limit of 400/100m1(rather than a
weekly limit) would insure this,
2. A weekly ammonia limit would appear to be necessary to be consistent with our standards, Additional
information on the stream 7Q10 or other flows available would be needed to calculate an appropriate limit
If the proposed monthly average limit (of 2 mg/I) is based on chronic ammonia toxicity, a weekly average
of 2.5 times the monthly average would be approximately the value expected.
3. Considering the toxicity testing concentration of 90%, we would typica y expect that copper limits (and
possibly other metals limits) would be appropriate to meet SC standards Please identify how these limits
were derived. if you have any additional information on other pollutant da a, please email this information.
4. When would the phosphorus limits go into effect? The wording on Part (A)(3) Nutient Study does not
seem to fit in with other conditions. We don't disagree with a study, but t1 �e study states "this condition
should not be construed to be a permit limit'. Sounds like the original CMUD McAlpine permit,
p ! p
Some ofthese issues are being worked on with Mike Myers related to C UD permits. You may want to
discuss these items and what process we agreed to on those permits.
CD
lease contact me or Jeff deBessonet at 803 898-4157.
if you have questions, p ( )
Thank You,
Mike Montebello, Manager
Domestic Wastewater Permitting Section
803-898-4228
CC:
5 41Mr,/
Internet:[e-mail]
,
*It
S/e i_"° .
- 9 ")16'.
"'A ,
Da
ze_
/o(f/e

lariC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone]
Jun 11 ' 02 10:46 INo . 001 P.02
•
M North Carolina TIM1ifeResources Commission
Charles R. Pullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Joe R. Corporon, NPDES Unit
vision of 1 ater Qtptlity
on FROM: Danielle R. Pender, Piedmont RegionegCoordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: 11 June 2002
SUBJECT: Proposed Permit Renewal for Union County Public Works Department, Union County,
NPDES Permit No. NC0085359
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
application for impacts to fish and wildlife, Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C:. 661-667d), and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S, 113-131 et seq.),
Union County Public Works Department has submitted a request for a permit renewal to
discharge treated wastewater into Twelve Mile Creek in the Catawaba River basin. It is our
understanding that this plant utilizes chlorine in their treatment system. Chlorine is acutely toxic to
aquatic organisms and forms secondary compounds that are also detrimental to aquatic 1 ife. In addition,
the dechlorination agent, hydrogen disulfide, is also very toxic to aquatic life. We are especially
concerned with impacts of this project on the sensitive species that are found in this system. We have
records for the existence of the federal species of concern and state special concern Carolina darter
(Etheastama calks) and Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughanlana) and the state significantly rare notched
rainbow (Villasa conctricta) in the Twelve Mile Creek watershed.
We recommend that the following conditions be incorporated into the permit to reduce impacts to
fish and wildlife resources and in particular to listed species.
1. We request that ozone or ultraviolet light systems replace the chlorine systems. These
disinfectants also provide an additional benefit of removing a hazardous material from the
workplace.
2. If not already in place, we suggest the installation of a stand-by power system.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input during the planning stages for this project. If we
can be of further assistance, please contact our office at [phone].
cc: Mark Cantrell, USFWS
E-mail: Stephen Hall, NHP
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC:27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext, 281 • Fax: [phone]

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Jon C. Dyer, P.E., Director
June 10, 2002
Mr. David Goodrich
NPDES Coordinator
NC DENR — Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: Draft Permit No. NC0085359
Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
Union County
Dear Mr. Goodrich,
JUN 1 2 2002
U •+R - WATER QUALITY
PO'":T se.,.C,E BRANCH
We appreciate the time you, Jackie Nowell, Mike Myers, and Milt Rhodes spent with Sid Riddick
and me on April 25, 2002 to discuss Union County's plans to re -rate and expand the Twelve Mile
Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (TMCWWTP). The time and assistance you and your staff
provided, explaining issues of concern related to the permit modification procedures, will be
extremely helpful in resolving the many hurdles we may face.
One of the issues discussed at our meeting was related to the dissolved oxygen (DO) profile in
Twelve Mile Creek above and below the wastewater treatment plant. Data currently available
suggest that there are some contraventions of the DO levels in the stream upstream from the
treatment plant, as well as downstream at the South Carolina sampling stations. To provide a more
reliable database and eliminate any errors in combining data from various un-coordinated sampling
events, Union County has initiated a sampling program to confirm the DO profile in the creek
beginning with an upstream sampling station at NC Route 16, and including the normal upstream
discharge and downstream sites the County currently samples as well as a sampling station in South
Carolina. These data will become a part of the SEPA document which we will prepare in support of
the County's desire to expand the treatment plant. (See attached schedule and parameters being
tested.)
The discussions regarding phosphorous limits anticipated for the Twelve Mile Creek site were also
very informative in light of the recent draft permit received for the 2.5 MGD TMCWWTP. Our
understanding is that a TMDL for phosphorous will allow Union County to discharge 20.85 pounds
per day, which is equivalent to a 1.0 mg/1 concentration at a flow of 2.5 MGD. As Union County
expands the plant from its current capacity of 2.5 MGD to its next incremental capacity of 6 MGD
(currently in design and permitting), the concentration value associated with the TMDL will drop to
0.41 mg/1. As the County's permitted capacity continues to increase, concentration values will be
reduced proportionally. Unless the basin -wide TMDL for phosphorous is reallocated among all
dischargers into the Catawba basin at the next five-year permitting cycle, Union County will
certainly face a disproportionate burden of removing phosphorous from the Catawba Lake chain.
Union County objects to any permit limitations for phosphorous or any other parameters that are not
400 North Church St. . Monroe, North Carolina 28112-4804 . Phone: [phone] . Fax: [phone]

thoroughly and fairly reviewed at each permit renewal cycle. We request the following be
considered until a more equitable and supported TMDL is developed for the basin:
> Delete optimization study requirement for Total Phosphorous in the draft permit (TMCWWTP
is currently designed for TP removal — BNR facility).
> Assign a phosphorous limit of 1 mg/1 at the buildout of Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater
Treatment Plant at 15 MGD.
- Union County proposes to maintain a maximum discharge concentration of 1.0 mg/1 TP
at 2.5 MGD (twelve month average) as well as through the buildout of 15 MGD.
Union County also requests that the proposed requirement for quarterly testing of copper and zinc
be eliminated for the following reasons:
Union County has a State approved Industrial Pretreatment Program and Sewer Use Ordinance.
Program mechanisms have not identified any user that has the potential to discharge copper or
zinc in quantities that could passthrough or interfere with the treatment works or otherwise
render any product or by product of the treatment works unsuitable for it's intended use.
D Since facility start-up in December 1997, three (3) selective metal scans have been run on the
WWTP influent and effluent. These scans were run in May 2002, October 2000 and January
2000. Scan results indicate that copper and zinc are not pollutants of concern.
A Since facility start-up in December 1997, twenty-one (21) bioessays have been performed.
Since December 1997, bioessay failures only occurred in May 1998, February 2002 and March
2002.
Again, let me express my sincere thanks to you and your staff for the assistance you continue to
provide as Union County works to re -permit, re -rate, and expand its Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater
Treatment Facility. We are available to discuss our request for the aforementioned comments as
they pertain to our draft NDPES permit.
Respectfully,
C. Dyer,
'rector of Union County Public Works
cc: Mike Shalati, County Manager
David Powell, Assistant County Manager
William S. Riddick, Jr., PE, McKim & Creed
Jackie Nowell, Mike Myers and Milt Rhodes, DWQ
Attachment

UCPW TWELVE MILE CREEK
STREAM SAMPLING STRATEGY
LOCATION
PARAMETER
SUMMER
FREQUENCY
WINTER
FREQUENCY
COMMENTS
US 1
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
BRIDGE © HWY 16
Fecal
3XWK
1 X WK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
3 X WK
1 X WK
US
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
IN ACCORDANCE W/ NPDES NC0085359
Fecal
3XWK
1 XWK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
N/A
N/A
EFFLUENT
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
IN ACCORDANCE W/ NPDES NC0085359
Fecal
3XWK
1 X WK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
3 X WK
1 X WK
DS 1
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
IN ACCORDANCE W/ NPDES NC0085359
Fecal
3XWK
1 XWK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
N/A
N/A
DS 2
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
IN ACCORDANCE W/ NPDES NC0085359
Fecal
3XWK
1 X WK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
3 X WK
1 X WK
SC DS
DO
3 X WK
1 X WK
SOUTH CAROLINA - SR 529-93 -
BETWEEN WVVTP & HWY 521
Fecal
3XWK
1 X WK
Specific Conduct.
3 X WK
1 X WK
Total Phosphorous
3 X WK
1 X WK

PUBLIC NOTICE •
STATE OF
NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT
COMMISSION/NPOES UNIT
1617 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT
TO ISSUE A NPOES
WASTEWATER PERMIT
On the basis of thorough
staff review and application
of NC General Statute
143.21, Public law 92-500
and other lawful standards
and regulations, the North
Carolina Environmental Man-
agement Commission pro-
poses to issue a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System (NPDES) waste-
water discharge permft to the
person(s) listed below effec-
tive 45 days from the publish
date of this notice.
Written comments regarding
the proposed permit will be
accepted until 30 days after
the pubfish date of this no-
tice. All comments received
prior to that date are consid-
ered in the final determina-
tions regarding the proposed
permit. The Director of the
NC Division of Water Quality
may decide to hold a public
meeting for the proposed
permit should the Division re-
ceive a significant degree of
public interest.
Copies of the draft perrhit
and other supporting infor-
mation on file used to deter-
mine conditions present in
the draft permit are available
upon request and payment of
the costs of reproduction.
Mail comments and/or re-
quests for information to the
NC Division of Water Quality
at the above address or call
Ms. Christie Jackson at (919)
733-5083, extension 538.
Please include the NPDES
permit number (attached) in
any communication. Interest-
ed persons may also visit the
Division of Water Quality at
512 N. Salisbury Street, Ra-
leigh, NC 27604-1148 be-
tween the hours of 8:00 a.m.
and 5:00 p.m. to review infor-
mation on file.
NPDES Permit Number
NC0085359. Union County
Public Works Department,
400 North Church Street,
Monroe, NC 28112 has ap-
plied for a permit renewal for
a facility Located in Union
aCounty discharging treated
wastewater into Twelve Mile
Creek in the Catawba River
Basin. Currently 8005. NH3
dissolved oxygen, total resid-
ual chlorine, fecal coliform
and total phosphorus are wa-
N1 ter quality limited. This dis-
charge may affect future allo-
cations in this portion of the
receiving stream.
May 18,2002
NORTH CAROLINA,
UNION COUNTY.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
L `JVL
Before the undersigned, a Notary Public of said County and State, duly
commissioned, qualified, and authorized by law to administer oaths,
personally appeared Pat Deese
who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: that he is
Principal Clerk . . - . engaged in the publication
of a newspaper known as The Enquirer -Journal, published, issued, and
entered as second class mail in the City of Monroe in said County and
State; that he is authorized to make this affidavit and sworn statement;
that the notice or other legal advertisement, a true copy of which is
attached hereto, was published in The Enquirer -Journal on the following
dates:
11741, l er
and that the said newspaper in which such notice, paper, document, or
legal advertisement was published was, at the time of each and every such
publication, a newspaper meeting all the requirements and qualifications
of Section 1-597 of the General Statutes of North Carolina and was a
qualified newspaper within the meaning of Section 1-597 of the General
Statutes of North Carolina.
This .
/9
day of
1.
..2002
Sworn to and subscribed before me, this lb. . day of .'1!/4) 2002
Ach
My Commission expires: . - Nlay 11 , 2003
Notary Public
�NPDes
Inches : /14
MONROE, N.C.
Chi.&, o3
4Y1,4 10
Ad/1
ACCOUNT 4:
2002
03/oo131
COST: $ 6 7. 2,
i<ret,411- .1)c a 7699- /G / 7
—IN ACCOUNT WITH —
ale IEnquirEr-3h1urnat
P.O. Box 5040
500 W. Jefferson St.
Monroe, N.C. 28111-5040
Important Legal Document, Please Retain

A/002-
llow eeag
Jed ° rn zr -Iwof / wp`/c f. ecrvt. ,e/,ef
/-�� s112-40, eta t (a c4,$)
41 4.Agoi amoo,f' swwT s
1 V Ti',7 i� I* /w 4 /24/k 04. ',C /m�7
his ,ri// 4//ow eAni S,,,
FAck € lam' _add. ve o A / 6, _In %kaf' 91
rs h,i - ti (rZ• ) mob/'`4- 7�'C
-/-1(4-6/dliatIt L.,_Ce,0145e-
M,14-, (
:
y' Co, i /QEk'if at 4411
arm, •'y 4- ff{ 2A-1 ', %.

•
•
P (41/2/71c/4—.
j1fr/t
Iv1cJ
1) Introductions
Union County -Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Meeting
April 25, 2002
10:30 am
Raleigh, NC � F
ac
Agenda
L 2"" Afte;O__
///Afki ate. 1 p
Speculative effluent limits, including total "P", for a permitted flow
f 6 mgd 7-04,6 or --rr
cife: ify45,
Potential effluent limits or requirements not in the current NPDES
permit
Information that will be required to support the request for an 544- 64„444,) c
expanded permit (engineering analysis of alternatives, etc.)
pecific requirements of the E/A for the WWTP
6) Requirements of the County to hold public hearings v‘/ cs
6)1
7) Timeline for the NPDES permit process L./ j fr A--4)3
Any additional information McKim & Creed/or Union County can
supply in support of the new permit 035 . T'kif 1 c. ‘.
9) Review the procedures for re -rating the existing 12 Mile Creek
WWTP from 2.5 to approximately 3.0 mgd
10) Since the County's NPDES Permit renewal is past due, does
DENR prefer to renew the existing permit or process a new permit
with new limits, including phosphorous, at a new flow of around
6.0 mgd? 54u'
11) Miscellaneous/Closing
5I4iav-'( Pe, (L/wJ(/ t . &
r
9
- /-$4.674, it
Y
", 1, y. 7, ', 7
5W 0C'
tei P

Re: rp for 2/02
Subject: Re: rp for 2/02
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 16:58:28 -0400
From: Susan A Wilson <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: Kevin Bowden <[e-mail]>,
Jackie Nowell <[e-mail]>
Kevin - could you check union county again? I'm not seeing any effluent
data for them for copper or zinc (saw some influent data but no effluent
data).
Jackie - if they are not required to monitor copper and zinc right now,
if they're up for renewal I'd recommend quarterly copper and zinc
monitoring since 1) they've had a tox failure and 2) they're a major at
2.5 mgd..
Kevin Bowden wrote:
> Hey Susan, below are facilities for RP analysis for 2/02 compliance
> evaluation.
> 1. buncombe county nc0024911
> 2. union county -12 mile creek nc0085359
> 3. hillsborough nc0026433
> 4. glen touch yarns nc0003913
> thanks, kevin.
1 of 1 4/16/02 8:29 AM

RE: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
Subject: RE: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 09:28:47 -0400
From: "Sid Riddick" <[e-mail]>
To: "Jackie Nowell" <[e-mail]>
I spoke with Jon Dyer this AM and he confirmed he is available for the 25th. There
will be just the two of us. In addition to the agenda items noted in my earlier
e-mail, I'd also like to review the procedures for rerating the existing 12 Mile
Creek WWTP from 2.5 to approximately 3.0 mgd. Rerating is based on historic
wastewater loading data and the performance history. Since the County's NPDES Permit
renewal is past due, does DENR prefer to renew the existing permit or process a new
permit with new limits, including phosphorous, at a new flow of around 6.0 mgd?
Original Message
From: Jackie Nowell [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:34 AM
To: Sid Riddick
Subject: Re: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
Hello Sid, we have tentatively scheduled the meeting for Thursday, April 25th at
10:30 am. Please confirm that this date and time are okay and also let me know how
many people will be coming from Union Co. so I can get an appropriate conference
room. Thanks.
Sid Riddick wrote:
> Jackie, yes we assumed the meeting would be in Raleigh. Prefer not to start before
10 AM to facilitate travel.
> Original Message
> From: Jackie Nowell imailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 11:15 AM
> To: Sid Riddick
> Subject: Re: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
> Hello Sid, thanks for the email. I'm in the process of coordinating a date for the
meeting and who should attend and will email you back with a final date. The agenda
items that you suggested are fine and we'll address those items.
> Please confirm that this meeting is to be held in Raleigh, this is my assumption,
but I want to be sure. Thanks.
> Sid Riddick wrote:
> > Jackie, this will confirm our conversations last week about setting up a meeting
between appropriate staff w/NC DEM, Union Co and McKim & Creed to review procedures,
requirements, timelines, issues and any other items regarding the request from Union
Co for speculative limits for the expansion of the Twelve mile Creek WWTP and a new
NPDES Permit for this WWTP. I met with Jon Dyer, Union Co Public works director and
the following dates are available for us:
> > 1) April 16, 23, 25 and 30
> > 2) May 1 and 2
> >
> > From our perspective, we are interested in the following:
> > 1) speculative effluent limits, including total "P", for a permitted flow of 6
mgd
> > 2) any other effluent limits or requirements not in the current NPDES permit
> > 3) information that will be required to support the request fot an expanded
permit (engineering analysis of alternatives, etc)
> > 4) specific requirements of the E/A for the WWTP
> > 5) requirements of the County to hold public hearings
> > 6) timeline for the NPDES permit process
1 of 2 4/22/02 1:43 PM

RE: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
> > 7) any additional information we or the County can supply in support of the new
permit
> >
> > We will do our best to hold these dates open as long as we can. Please look at
these issues and decide who from the Division you feel should be involved and which
date(s) will work best for your group. I look forward to hearing from you in the
near future.
> >
> > Thanks , Sid Riddick
> >
> >
> > William S. Riddick, P.E.
> >
> > McKim & Creed, P.A.
> > 2300 Sardis Road North
> > Suite A
> > Charlotte, NC 28227
> > 704.841.2588
> > www.mckimcreed.com
2 of 2 4/22/02 1:43 PM

Union.Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
Subject: Union Co Twelve Mile Creek WWTP Permit
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 09:3 5 :23 -0400
From: "Sid Riddick" <[e-mail]>
To: "Jackie Nowell (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>
Jackie, this will confirm our conversations last week about setting up a meeting
between appropriate staff w/NC DEM, Union Co and McKim & Creed to review procedures,
requirements, timelines, issues and any other items regarding the request from Union
Co for speculative limits for the expansion of the Twelve mile Creek WWTP and a new
NPDES Permit for this WWTP. I met with Jon Dyer, Union Co Public works director and
the following dates are available for us:
1) April 16, 23, 25 and 30
2) May 1 and 2
From our perspective, we are interested in the following:
1) speculative effluent limits, including total "P", for a permitted flow of 6 mgd
2) any other effluent limits or requirements not in the current NPDES permit
3) information that will be required to support the request fot an expanded permit
(engineering analysis of alternatives, etc)
4) specific requirements of the E/A for the WWTP
5) requirements of the County to hold public hearings
6) timeline for the NPDES permit process
7) any additional information we or the County can supply in support of the new
permit
We will do our best to hold these dates open as long as we can. Please look at these
issues and decide who from the Division you feel should be involved and which
date(s) will work best for your group. I look forward to hearing from you in the
near future.
Thanks , Sid Riddick
William S. Riddick, P.E.
McKim & Creed, P.A.
2300 Sardis Road North
Suite A
Charlotte, NC 28227
704.841.2588
www.mckimcreed.com
1 of 1 4/8/02 10:29 AM

' .,
0
ddon C. j7,iii, L 4_ `-''f t is
% l/Mfg ,
hief- ; SM /e (S vM eti t )' /4 M f{/Af 6.) )
/Vi1i : z .°/,€ (" 2 yfrria ( 2
.1)0 :- 6 V ( '' ) 5- frhs/i ( 2
ZOo//coo .
. .4)61 Zo*6
SJM,t, , ays^ sMile 44 4351 Ag. z.sefi'a = /64/, zf ogot
4,4,4, 160 = ibotea 3,5y 1 2-, s,N6 = Zoe.. 44/c�
Pimp, /V 3 2 mia' A4 ,,..?Y * Z„rioso ' J.: y #/d.
'4N4/ 416 = yla *I:3Y ersr#0 = /6 ,S -/at
(a Y, zS= A Y -= CA/(1) y 2,4 i%; ''esr(r)
40 L.ro -I- ay -. 6, Ag-e = y/ 7 7 // Rovr id)
f
4{.; (s-) - 23, Y .18,3y T 6 Id1(e - ', &c, 47 /e.,
f)16 (14 = l“, ' 1-g5)'; (str-o, -• 3,3Z mj
'' t2
,.3 1.2:/o/.zr;'Xif
;iz1/l1) /, Yw41%
/3 CIO a:
2c) ,.S 1 fly - /4 gee- hog w► /
f
411//
- if3.Y,' f,P1r/2 ,yam: 0.13 M f/,2

— /Z /1/ /-f lc
(AA-Jr/0
(E L-- 5.m,. ,„ /3ci?9 = to ` , Z r xeld_
arc-, /o v ©, a, Jrc✓ ,was = Zdro /ac
,
AI/ 3 - 43,1
/gyros w� � 2°8• ro °_ 2, 3 y 5'til/ = 2. 7e
Al/13 (i.)»,M w) , 3r 9.$1= /, (/
/v1/2 w, /66, a 1,3 y ;/ � /161 = Z ZZ ,K /,
1 �JD 64 _%/7 A.tde
,id 6 2 9 .eG0' / Z NG-a
/, 37 "Al /.dV /P
'2, 7 ft-,f /C 20,91
/,GG Alf /2 /. // 'I�� o. 83 n, l
1, 7Z "s'L "" �_2, ��� /,66 74e

11,) dot /Or l£ W(LL J 1 /
At#? �W
ine
Zoo°
Z oo /
0,761 /4„049
/, o z78 A/6i
a 599 4?6-0
. aS/ .2. •(Mf& 2
GM,i✓ 5-/z/6, (5)
/6/y/r (c)
7a/zlzo-
Z)
R. (4 d
�/,wo e0 ,
/L (7C, (7/ /7EL4 `� L 6J r/‘7:r£
697,1A
nf£dGQ ZGos.
1 G/o/fdo y )4,6) 9f /2 / J
200o
ooS-
A/ Z2
Zu/p ��4-titj
Zo co/ ' '2 �,r, ✓ ,,
a s 141,E r �, J-1 /7-/e C >4 £.-,f 71.J,
in g /6/%9 di4‘/O, 9✓F/ ` ,
Ai„f� c�
t/L 61
7's 12W(
o 6,/ 07(e
f,31lr 6 �/l� So, ayAgt
any lie * f 3 9, 9 /060 7s. ° G ��-j
I lhfl A` 3 f ," /z Ax J /00, Ov tfoe_

aAts, /%1
Zwo
atlio•A' Co •
C,4.1144c c/ .. /, 9 c-0
/r
mrf / C (SG� '� < 0, Z SAf r
7,4// o .5 /q6o
7
0, J$ Q ir/Ge
- kL - 7 0./0 6 /%4.4
3 ,�i ✓% ww 17'
D3 Af(o _ + dam
• G 7,#6� .04u--
.yam - Moo / ►e„,/ / Zd ��, 42 "Id
L9
111;•c/*4 — 3,o4l612CCi
i;,)iiuL *h. 44tk- (4fv,s
77 .
Z oz.) �.��/ ZZ Co 8 �a
vti1A,. ,.
GJ /reit 4
/�17sti. wog ,v c/Filr c .
323 Uc, ZoLo,
i.3 ,efifo

. .
. .
ff/i,,, 6, • Alam A,�,,..,
`ic,6 / '�'r(6)4-
11r-L_
c.416,4,_ 4 cmc,a
w ^- S /1__
/DX,/4.✓
Zr d 2p0 J^
ZO/U
Al/f cx_ G. 3 f 6, S f 0,fy /, 3 4.
o, 7z
1, u o
-26 /J—
0,,/ 2,?7
„., 3- xteola 72,/a,c_ fi(is c,,,4,4_7- era_ 1-mi c.----,1,1z-f.1
i
,v Lo / a
77A✓Vic /7, , Cud GZc 61 2"r�ev

sta�c% Miff
/"(iJ `I J £. AO, (i1i �`C @ 56- 53--(11,Y

• .' 17:Ai (1 & itil I i-
ri.64. 0 L) I , 3 /0610
f 7/ W 4rildk/
46- , /VC 7,3---
wi l I it&iliri:g4._ -AA) < , Ai A, 1
sew El/ ,it.",70 c/z.
(./. /2- i'i, '
-44/7.7--ic,tid,._. /7/
54- Air/pi. X 3, 6
—
1 ---- •
Z_ A Anit.s 47,1) 4-•".24-
/
Ati--7iv 1-W- 4411

To: Permits and Engineering Unit
Water Quality Section
Attention: Christie Jackson
SOC PRIORITY PROJECT: No
Date: July 12, 2001
NPDES STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
County: Union
NPDES Permit No.: NC0085359
MRO No.: 01-11
PART I - GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Facility and address: Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
Union County Public Works Department
400 North Church Street
Monroe, N.C. 28112
2. Date of investigation: June 11, 2001
3. Report prepared by: Michael L. Parker, Environ. Engr. II
4. Person contacted and telephone number: Mark Tye, [phone].
5. Directions to site: From the jct. of Hwy. 16 and New Town Rd. (SR 1315) just south of
the Town of Weddington in western Union County, travel south on Hwy. 16 2.4 miles
and turn right into the entrance road that leads to the WWTP.
6. Discharge point(s), List for all discharge points: -
Latitude: 80° 45' 44"
Longitude: 34 ° 57' 01"
Attach a USGS Map Extract and indicate treatment plant site and discharge point on map.
USGS Quad No.: H 15 NE
7. Site size and expansion area consistent with application: Yes. There is sufficient area
available for expansion, if necessary,
8. Topography (relationship to flood plain included): The site has gently rolling topography
(3-5% slopes) and is not located in a flood plain.
9. Location ofpearest dwelling: Approx. 500+ feet from the WWTP site.
J U L 1 8 2001
NR - .'r; Tr_R CUALITY
Pvf�:T SCUMCE %i:M Cii

Page Two
10. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
a. Classification: C
b. River Basin and Subbasin No.: Catawba 030838
c. Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The receiving
stream appears to be 20-25 feet across and 2-3 feet deep with a sandy bottom.
Good flow observed during the site inspection. No other known dischargers exist
on this channel below the point of discharge before the stream enters South
Carolina.
PART II - DESCRIPTION OF DISCHARGE AND TREATMENT WORKS
1. a. Volume of wastewater: 2.5 MGD (Design Capacity)
b. What is the current permitted capacity: 2.5 MGD
c. Actual treatment capacity of current facility (current design capacity): 2.5 MGD
d. Date(s) and construction activities allowed by previous ATCs issued in the
previous two years: ATC No. 085359ACA was issued November 15, 2000 for
the construction of a 1.0 MG digester, blowers, diffusers, and related equipment.
e. Description of existing or substantially constructed WWT facilities: The existing
WWT facilities consist of an influent pump station followed by an automatic self-
cleaning influent filter screen, a vortex grit chamber, pH adjustment (caustic
feed), two (2) carrousel type oxidation ditch systems (each basin has a
fermentation basin with two mixers and an anoxic basin with one mixer), two (2)
final clarifiers, dual tertiary sand. fitters, ultra -violet disinfection, cascade post
aeration, two sludge storage tanks with diffused aeration, a 1.0 MG sludge
digester, alum and polymer feed systems, and a stand-by power generator.
f. Description of proposed WWT facilities: There are no proposed facilities at this
time.
g•
Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: This facility has a consistent compliance
record with respect to toxicity testing.
h. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): Not needed at the present time.
2. Residual handling and utilization/disposal scheme:
a. If residuals are being land applied specify DWQ Permit No. WQ0007486
Residuals Contractor: Synagro
3. Treatment plant classification: Class IV (no change from previous rating).
4. SIC Code(s): 4952 Wastewater Code(s): 01 MTU Code(s): 10103

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
PART IV - EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Union County Public Works Department has requested renewal of the subject permit.
Changes to the existing WWT facilities that should be included in the permit upon renewal are
listed in Part II, No. (e) above. There are no changes and/or additions requested by the permittee
in this renewal.
Pending receipt and approval of the WI,A and Fact Sheet, it is recommended that the
permit be renewed as requested.
Signature of Re : • rt Preparer
/?_
Date
Water Quality egional Supervisor Date
h:\dsr\dsr01\ 12milecrk.dsr

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Jon C. Dyer, P.E., Director
February 12, 2001
Department of Environmental Management — NPDES Permits Section
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Attn: Mr. Michael Myers
1617 Mail Service Center Room 925C
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
RE: Request for NPDES Permit Modifications and Revisions
Permit No. NC 0085359
Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Union County, North Carolina
Gentlemen:
20 f 1^+1
S-bb„kd
I sincerely appreciate the time you spent with me and McKim & Creed on
February 6, 2001, to discuss re -rating and NPDES Permit Revisions for the
County's Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility. As discussed at that
time, Union County will request that the NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources consider two amendments to NPDES Permit No. NC 0085359,
as follows:
1. The first amendment will be to re -rate the wastewater treatment facility,
based on an engineering evaluation of ail unit operations and processes,
and current waste loading criteria. Union County expects to initiate the
study immediately following completion of our Digester Improvements
Project. The new capacity analysis could be available for review in
approximately four -five months.
2. Union County further requests that the current NPDES Permit be modified
for increased flows, up to approximately 12 MGD, which we believe to be
reasonably representative of our total 20-year needs.
With regards to increase in capacity, the County is in the process of completing
an update of its Master Sewer Study. On the basis of this study, and the
400 North Church St. . Monroe, North Carolina 28112-4804 . Phone: [phone] . Fax: [phone]

attached Resolution and the need to provide for non-residential growth, it has
been determined that the capacity of the Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater
Treatment Facility will need to be doubled during the time interval 2005 to 2010.
Based on current flows and commitments for service which have been made, it is
probable that the expanded capacity will be needed by 2005. Further, our
engineering analysis suggests that an overall flow capacity of at least 10 MGD
will be needed to carry us through a 20-year planning window. To be
conservative, we will request that the NPDES Permit Renewal process consider
increasing our total allowable flow to 12 MGD; and that effluent limits be
established for flows of 6, 9, and 12 MGD, accordingly.
We further understand that it will be necessary for the County to submit an
engineering justification for the increased flows and an analysis of non -discharge
alternatives as part of the overall review process. We will initiate these activities
in the immediate future. In the meanwhile, however, in order that we may
understand the requirements for plant expansion to meet higher flow levels, we
would sincerely appreciate your reviewing this request and identifying
speculative effluent limits that would be applicable for each of the flow
conditions stated above.
Again, I appreciate the time you spent discussing the situation with us. If we
can be of any assistance or provide additional information in support of this
request, prior to the submittal of the engineering justification, please feel free to
contact me at 704-296-4212.
Very truly yours,
ei
n C. Dyer
irector of P blic Works
cc: County Manager
McKim & Creed
Attachment

Twelve Mile Creek VWVTP -
Selected 2001 DMR data
Date BOD5 TSS TN NH3-N TP FLOW
(mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mgd)
1 - 01 1.73 0.1 3.87 0.24 0.2 1.116
2 - 01 0.1 0 3.53 0 2.4 0.839
3 - 01 0.45 0 5.52 0.28 1.8 1.002
4 - 01 0 0 2.6 0 1.4 0.859
5 - 01 1.22 0 2 1.15 0.69 0.809
6-01 0.1 0 2.4 0 2.3 0.783
7 - 01 1.75 0 2.6 0 0.18 0.777
8-01 0.54 0.1 2.27 0.43 0.19 0.819
9 - 01 0.46 0 3.3 0.21 0.39 0.857
10-01 0.69 0 2.5 0.16 7.3 0.865
11-01 1.38 0 22.4 1.10 0.96 0.853
12-01 1.82 0 7.5 2.36 0.52 0.897
Average 0.615 0 2.95 0.225 0.825 0.8548

♦
'GKEX88/MP
<
PERMIT--NC008
FACILITY --UNION CO
LOCATION--MONROE
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT
02/20/2001
PAGE 1
5359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 0001-0012 LOC-
PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000
REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
00310 00530
MONTH BOD RES/TSS
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F
00/01 1.0316 2.81 5.4
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F
00/02 1.3041 2.37 4.0
50050
Q/MGD
00/03 1.0548 2.34
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 5.00 F
00/04 1.0242 .00
00/05 .9532 .28
00/06 .9190 3.41
00/07 .8919 .44
00/08 .9867 .60
00/09 1.0753 .34
00/10 .9887 .00
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F
00/11 1.0316 .20
00/12 1.0735 .69
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
UNIT
3.8
30.0 F
.0
00610 31616 00300 TGP3B
NH3-N FEC COLI DO CERI7DPF
4.00 F
.00
4.00 F
.00
200.0 F
1.6
200.0 F
15.1
.00 11.8
2.00 F 200.0 F
.00 12.4
.0 .07 15.1
.1
.0
.2
.0
.0
30.0 F
.0
5.00
9.22
5.00
9.65
NOL
1
8.90
6.00 NOL
8.44
8.33 1
.30 38.8 7.83
.00 27.3 7.63
.00 4.6 7.45
.00 43.3 7.49
.00 5.4 7.82
4.00 F 200.0 F 5.00
.35 1.0 7.50
.0 .06 1.0 8.65
1.0278 1.12 1.1 .06 14.7
2.3160 57.00 108.9 3.13 1950.0
.2700 LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN
MGD MG/L MG/L MG/L #/100ML
1
NOL
1
8.24 1
10.41 1
6.25 1
MG/L PASS/FAI
--E
CLASS--
00010
TEMP
NOL
13.86
NOL
13.53
16.47
NOL
17.05
19.15
21.77
23.09
23.77
22.84
20.64
NOL
18.50
15.06
18.81
25.40
11.00
DEG.0

GKEX88/MP
.
02/20/2001
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT PAGE 2
PERMIT--NC0085359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 0001-0012 LOC---E
FACILITY --UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000 CLASS--
LOCATION--MONROE REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
00095 00400 00600 00665
MONTH CNDUCTVY PH TOTAL N PHOS-TOT
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
00/01 458.9 7.4-7.2 4.227 .3400
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
00/02 399.8 7.4-7.2 5.023 1.0000
00/03 425.3 7.4-7.2 2.130 1.2000
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
00/04 418.6 7.5-7.2 2.316 .1400
00/05 440.8 8.1-7.2 2.316 1.5000
00/06 460.0 7.6-7.2 4.516 4.2000
00/07 1.5 7.6-7.3 1.550 6.0000
00/08 498.3 7.5-7.2 1.720 2.5000
00/09 494.9 7.8-7.2 1.206 3.9000
00/10 512.5 7.4-7.2 1.480 2.1000
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
00/11 514.5 7.3-7.0 2.300 .5100
00/12 508.2 7.3-7.1 3.500 .4000
AVERAGE 427.7 2.690 1.9825
MAXIMUM 541.0 8.140 5.023 6.0000
MINIMUM 1.5 7.090 1.206 .1400
UNIT UMHOS/CM SU MG/L MG/L

GKEX88/MP
4.
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT
PERMIT--NC0085359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9901-9912 LOC
FACILITY --UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000
LOCATION--MONROE REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
50050
MONTH Q/MGD
LIMIT F 2.5000 F
99/01 1.0081
00310 00530 00610 31616 00300 TGP3B
BOD RES/TSS NH3-N FEC COLI DO CERI7DPF
10.00 F 30.0 F 4.00 F 200.0 F
.86 .3 .00 .0
99/02 .9383 .93 .0
99/03 .9040 1.50 .0
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 5.00 F 30.0 F 2.00 F 200.0 F
99/04 .8245 1.65 .2 .06 1.1
99/05 .8503 1.27 .4
99/06 .7573 1.83 .2
99/07 .7342 1.35 .0
99/08 .7607 1.65 .0
99/09 .8235 1.80 .0
99/10 .9214 1.55 .0
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F
99/11 .8426 1.42 .0
99/12 .8344 .00 .0
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
MINIMUM
UNIT
.00 4.2
.00 1.0
5.00 NOL
9.66
9.59 1
.00 .0 9.30
6.00 NOL
8.45
8.60 1
.00 1.5 7.86
.00 3.6 7.90
.00 2.9 7.60 1
.00 3.1 7.88
.00 1.4 8.13
4.00 F 200.0 F
.00 1.1
5.00 NOL
8.43 1
.00 1.2 8.68
.8499 1.31 .0 .00 1.7
2.3830 4.32 5.4 1.46 199.0
.4690 LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN
MGD MG/L MG/L MG/L #/100ML
8.50 1
10.64 1
7.24 1
MG/L PASS/FAI
02/20/2001
PAGE 1
---E
CLASS--
00010
TEMP
NOL
14.25
14.17
14.13
NOL
17.33
19.10
21.59
23.95
23.97
22.00
20.09
NOL
18.19
15.67
18.70
25.00
11.00
DEG.0

GKEX88/MP
•
201
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT 02PAGE2002
PERMIT--NC0085359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9901-9912 LOC---E
FACILITY --UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000 CLASS--
LOCATION--MONROE REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
00095 00400 00600 00665
MONTH CNDUCTVY PH TOTAL N PHOS-TOT
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
99/01 421.8 7.5-7.1 3.230 .4800
99/02 426.7 7.6-7.1 5.229 2.6000
99/03 403.8 7.6-7.0 2.600 2.9000
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
99/04 436.1 7.5-7.3 4.470 2.6000
99/05 446.3 7.8-7.4 2.224 2.3000
99/06 472.6 7.4-7.3 3.232 3.0000
99/07 476.7 7.5-7.4 4.680 3.2000
99/08 485.7 7.7-7.4 .087 1.7000
99/09 479.9 7.5-7.4 1.711 1.7000
99/10 476.7 7.5-7.3 2.005 1.8000
LIMIT NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
99/11 499.6 7.5-7.3 1.314 1.0000
99/12 494.4 7.5-7.2 1.821 1.3000
AVERAGE 460.0 2.716 2.0483
MAXIMUM 531.0 7.800 5.229 3.2000
MINIMUM 298.0 7.030 .087 .4800
UNIT UMHOS/CM SU MG/L MG/L

GKEX88/MP
02/20/2001
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT PAGE 1
PERMIT--NC0085359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9801-9812 LOC---E
FACILITY --UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000 CLASS--
LOCATION--MONROE REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
50050 00310 00530 00610 31616 50060 00300 TGP3B
MONTH Q/MGD BOD RES/TSS NH3-N FEC COLI CHLORINE DO CERI7DPF
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F 4.00 F 200.0 F 6.00 NOL
98/01 .8448 1.83 .0 .00 1.1 9.36 1
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F 4.00 F 200.0 F 5.00 NOL
98/02 .8353 2.32 .2 .00 .0 9.79
98/03 .8033 2.04 2.0 .10 .0 9.67
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 5.00 F 30.0 F 2.00 F 200.0 F 6.00 NOL
98/04 .7931 1.88 • .1 .00 1.2 9.17
98/05 .6608 1.96 .0 .00 1.4 8.56
98/06 .5999 2.43 .4 .00 1.2 7.93 1
98/07 .7145 2.20 .0 .00 2.1 7.78
98/08 .7676 1.31 .1 .00 4.7 7.62 1
98/09 .8358 1.48 .4 .00 18.9 7.90
98/10 .7467 1.85 .3 .00 11.3 8.26
LIMIT F 2.5000 F 10.00 F 30.0 F 4.00 F 200.0 F 5.00 NOL
98/11 .7724 .98 .5 .00 1.2 8.76 1
98/12 .7894 .28 .0 .00 .0 9.20
AVERAGE .7636 1.71 .3 .00 3.5 8.66 1
MAXIMUM 2.2010 6.51 24.3 2.35 4000.0 10.98 1
MINIMUM .1650 LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN LESSTHAN 7.24 1
UNIT MGD MG/L MG/L MG/L #/100ML UG/L MG/L PASS/FAI

GKEX88/MP 02/20/2001
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT PAGE 2
PERMIT--NC0085359 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9801-9812 LOC---E
FACILITY --UNION CO PWD-TWELVE MILE CRK DESIGN FLOW-- 2.5000 CLASS--
LOCATION--MONROE REGION/COUNTY--03 UNION
00010 00095 00400 00600 00665
MONTH TEMP CNDUCTVY PH TOTAL N PHOS-TOT
LIMIT NOL NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
98/01 12.23 409.3 7.5-7.0 14.570 1.0000
LIMIT NOL NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
98/02 12.20 392.9 7.3-7.1 11.500 2.0000
98/03 13.50 402.6 7.5-7.1 20.230 3.0000
LIMIT NOL NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
98/04 16.57 395.2 7.3-7.1
98/05 20.00 416.5 7.3-7.0 6.940 2.9000
98/06 23.40 498.2 7.5-7.1 14.071 4.0000
98/07 25.27 494.0 7.4-7.1 11.500 3.4000
98/08 24.42 430.0 7.8-7.1 7.200 3.0000
98/09 23.87 447.5 7.5-7.1 12.140 3.9000
98/10 20.22 507.7 7.6-7.2 2.130 4.1000
LIMIT NOL NOL 9.0 6.0 NOL NOL
98/11 17.52 518.0 7.6-7.1 .717 2.4000
98/12 16.66 513.0 7.4-7.2 6.340 3.4000
AVERAGE 18.82 452.0 9.758 3.0090
MAXIMUM 27.00 876.0 7.810 20.230 4.1000
MINIMUM 9.00 290.0 7.000 .717 1.0000
UNIT DEG.0 UMHOS/CM SU MG/L MG/L

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Jon C. Dyer, P.E., Director
December 5, 2000
Mr. Charles H. Weaver, Jr.
NCDENR DWQ
NPDES Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
SUBJECT: NPDES Permit No. NC0085359 Renewal Application
Dear Mr. Weaver:
DEC -- 7 2000
Gf !fP - V ;1 ER CUALlrPC'!..T SOURCE BRANCH
-
As per our telephone conversation on today's date I inadvertently submitted an
incomplete application renewal package for the above referenced facility. Please find
enclosed the following:
• Two signed copies of the application package.
• One original and two signed copies of the Residuals Management Plan.
Please insert these items in the original application package submitted to your department
on December 1, 2000.
The only modification to the facility since the issuance of the last permit is the ongoing
addition of a 1.0 MGD aerobic digester as mentioned in section 6 of the application.
Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience these matters have afforded you.
Should you require additional information please contact me at [phone].
Respectfully,
ia4J
Mark E1Tye
Assistant Public Works Director
Attachments
400 North Church St. . Monroe, North Carolina 28112-4804 . Phone: [phone] . Fax: [phone]

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Jon C. Dyer, P.E., Director
November 30, 2000
SUBJECT: Union County Public Works Department
NPDES Permit NC0085359 Renewal Application
Section I, Part 6
• Current Operations- Raw wastewater is pumped to the headworks structure where
screening and grit removal occur. After screening and grit removal the wastewater
flows by gravity to an anaerobic reactor. From the anaerobic reactor the water flows
by gravity to an anoxic reactor. From the anoxic reactor the water flows by gravity to
an oxidation ditch. Effluent from the ditch flows by gravity to secondary clarifiers
and then to tertiary sand filters. Filtered effluent is disinfected via UV. The
disinfected water flows over a cascade and is discharged to Twelve Mile Creek.
Waste Activated Sludge is aerobically digested in a pair of 250,000 gallon diffused —
air aerobic digesters. Twelve Mile Creek WWTP is a 2.5 MGD dual train system.
Currently flow is averaging 1.0 MGD and the facility is operating on a single train.
• Components — Major WWTP components are listed in ATTACHMENTS 1,2 & 3.
• Potential Facility Changes — The addition of a 1 MGD aerobic digester is underway.
Completion is scheduled for January 2001. The digester ATC Number is
085359ACA. Complete emergency stand-by power is scheduled to be added in the
spring of 2001. Currently, only the influent lift -station is equipped with a generator.
Consultant selection for this task is currently underway.
• Flow Schematic — See ATTACHMENT 4.
• Location Map- See ATTACHMENT 5.
400 North Church St. . Monroe, North Carolina 28112-4804 . Phone: [phone] . Fax: [phone]

- Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
Appendix A
Design Criteria
UNION COUNTY, NC
NPDES NO. NC0085359
OXIDATION DITCHES
Description
Design
Future
Number of Ditches
2
4
Total Number of Aerators
2
4
Total Number Fermentation Mixers
4
8
Total Number of First Anoxic Mixers
2
4
Total Operating Volume, M.G.
Fermentation basin
0.208
0.416
First Anoxic Basin
0.46
0.92
Aeration Basin
1.82
3.64
Organic Loading
Oxygen Demand LBS./DAY
5,176
10,352
Detention Time, Hours
Return Sludge Flow, Gal/Day
312,350
624,700
Sludge Age, Day
15
15
F/M Ratio
.06 -.07
.06-.07
Solids Production, LBS/DAY
4,087
8,174
Waste Sludge Volume, GAL/DAY
• 61,250
122,500
RAW SEWAGE PUMP STATION
Description
Design
Future
Type
Submersible
Submersible
Number of Pumps
4
4
Pump Horse Power
100
270
ATTACHMENT # 1
Professional Plant Operations a Division of McKim & Creed Engineers, P.A.

Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
UNION COUNTY, NC
NPDES No. NC0085359
INFLUENT LOADINGS
Description
Design
Future -
Average Flow, MGD
2.5
5 ,
Max. Daily Flow
6.25
12.5 • ;-'�-
BOD, MG/L
250
250 =s� i-;�
BOD, LBS/DAY
5,212.5
1,425 " d.:
TSS,MG/L
250
250
TSS, LBS/DAY
5,212.5
10,425 .. :
TKN, MG/L
40
40
TKN,LBS/DAY
834
1,668
SECONDARY CLARIFIERS
Description
Design
Future
Number of Clarifiers
2
4
Diameter, Feet
70
70
Total Area, SF
7,697
15,394
Total Operating Volume, Gal
806,020
1,612,040
Detention Time, Hours
7.7
7.7
Weir Loading, GAUDAY/LF
1,200 •
1,200
Overflow Rate, GPD/SF
325
325
ATTACHMENT 1 2
Professional Plant Operations a Division of McKim & Creed Engineers, P.A.

Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
UNION COUNTY, NC
NPDES No. NC0085359
EFFLUENT CRITERIA
Description
Design
BOD, MG/L
5
TSS, MG/L
5•
DO, MG/L
5
Fecal Coliform, #/100 ML
<10
TKN
3
Organics
<2.5
NH3
<0.5
pH
7+ 0.5
Turbidity
<1.0 ntu
Chlorine
<0.01
NO3
6.5
TERTIARY FILTERS
Description
Design
Future
Number of Filters
2
4
Filter Area, SF
864
1,728
Backwash Pump Type
Submersible
Submersible
Number of Backwash Pumps
2
4
Backwash Capacity, GPD/Pump
185
185
Backwash Consumption, Total/GPD
22,629
45,258
Average Filter Rate, GPM/SF
2
2
Peak Filter Rate, GPM/SF
5
5
Backwash Volume Per Wash, Gal
1,690.9
1,690.9
Waste backwash Recycle Rate, GAL
185
185
ATTACHMENT # 3
Professional Plant Operations a Division of McKim & Creed Engineers, P.A.

C
Twelve Mile Creek Wastewater Treatment Facility
INFLUENT
INFLUENT
PUMP
STATION
INFLUENT
STRUCTURE
FERM ENTATION
ANOXIC
OXIDATION
FUTURE
CLARIFIERS
FILTRATION
UV DISINFECTION C
SECOND
ANOX IC
REAERATION
UNION COUNTY, NC
NPDES No. NC0085359
RAS
SLUDGE
CASCADE HOLDING
AERATION
EFFLUENT OUTFALL
U
FIGURE 3-2
OVERALL PROCESS TRAIN
ATTACHMENT # 4
WAS
THICKENED SLUDGE
TO DISPOSAL SITE
Professional Plant Operations a Division of McKim & Creed Engineers, P.A. 3-3

Twelve Mile WW1P Vicinity Map
Union County, North Carolina
NPDES No. NC0085359
900
Date: December 1. 2000
900
•
Streams -�
Lakes
/V Roads
Treatment Facility
1800 Feet

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Jon C. Dyer, P.E., Director
RESIDUALS MANAGEMENT PLAN
Twelve Mile Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0085359
Union County, North Carolina
i;l
DEC - 7 2000 1)
All residuals generated at the Twelve Mile facility will be aerobically digested. The
residuals will be considered stable and therefore suitable for land application when the
following criteria are met:
1. At least seven (7) residuals samples will be collected and analyzed for Fecal Coliform
each monitoring period. The geometric mean of the densities of these samples will be
calculated and will be less than 2,000,000 most probable number per gram of dry
solids, or less than 2,000,000 Colony Forming Units per gram of total dry solids prior
to application.
2. Vector Attraction Reduction (VAR) will be met through one of the following options:
a) volatile solids reduction of 38% or greater b) biosolids injection or incorporation or
c) biosolids alkaline stabilization.
All residuals will be disposed of in accordance with Residuals Land Application Permit
No. WQ0007486.
Respectfully Submitted,
C. Dyer, P.
blic Works Director
400 North Church St. . Monroe, North Carolina 28112-4804 . Phone: [phone] . Fax: [phone]