NC0025461_Instream Assessment_19991006

NPDES DOCIMENT SCANNING COVER SHEET
NC0025461
Bakersville WWTP
NPDES Permit:
Document Type:
Permit Issuance
Wasteload Allocation
Authorization to Construct (AtC)
Permit Modification
Complete File - Historical
Special Order by Consent (SOC)
Speculative
Limits
Instream Assessment (67b) t
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Permit
History
Document Date:
October 6, 1999
Miss document is prizatecl oa reuse paper - ighnare azzy
cork -beat oa the reYerse side

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Point Source Branch
NPDES Unit
October 6, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Forrest Westall
Mike Parker,ARO
Dave Goodrich
12G1
Jacquelyn M. Nowell)
Instream Assessment for SOC 67(b) Request
Town of Bakersville WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NC0025461
Mitchell County
Summary and Recommendation
The NPDES Unit has reviewed the request for an instream assessment for the
Bakersville WWTP. The Town is requesting a Special Order of Consent (SOC) during
improvements to the wastewater treatment plant. The existing design flow is 0.075
MGD. Two final SOC flows of 0.150 MGD and 0.200 MGD have been requested, which
includes 0.01375 MGD of domestic wastewater with the remaining flow being excess
inflow/infiltration (I/I) occurring at the plant. Additional SOC limits requested are BOD5
= 45 mg/I, TSS = 45. mg/l, and fecal coliform = 400/100mI.
The results of the Level B model analysis indicated that according to the EMC
67(b) criteria, the predicted dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration in Cane Creek was not
significantly affected by the additional flow and higher BOD5 levels proposed. The
EMC 67(b) criteria states that the discharge will not increase the DO minimum by more
than 0.5 mg/1 or will not extend the stream length of the DO minimum by more than 0.5
miles. This criterion was not violated with the addition of 58,000 GPD and 108,000 GPD
at the higher BOD5 limits. Our analysis determined that the stream could assimilate the
additional flow and loading as requested.
Background
The Town of Bakersville discharges into Cane Creek, a tributary to the North Toe
River in the French Broad River Basin and has a stream classification of C Trout. The
stream is not listed on the North Carolina 303(d) Degraded List. Cane Creek drains
approximately 22.4 square miles at the discharge point. The estimated summer 7Q10
flow (1989) with an average flow of 3.6 cfs.

Instream Assessment for Bakersville SOC
Page 2
A review of compliance evaluation data shows that for the past year, Bakersville
has consistently violated the limit for wasteflow. From June 1998 through May 1999, the
monthly wasteflow limit was exceeded in ten of twelve months. In addition, there were
contraventions of the fecal coliform (3), BOD5 and TSS limits.
Analysis and Discussion
An instream assessment was performed using the Level B model framework. The
current design flow of the Bakersville WWTP is 0.075 MGD. The yearly average
wasteflow from June 1998 to May 1999 of 0.0922 is listed as the pre-SOC flow. It
should be noted that monthly average flows have been much higher than 0.0922 MGD as
a result of inflow/infiltration. The post SOC flows used in this analysis were 0.150 MGD
and 0.200 MGD, which allows for the additional 13,750 GPD of domestic flow plus any
additional inflow and infiltration that may occur during the SOC. The monthly average
effluent limits recommended for the SOC are 45 mg/1 of BOD5 and 45 mg/1 of TSS.
Three models were run at the flows of 0.0922 MGD, 0.150 MGD and 0.200
MGD. Waste inputs into the models included 60 mg/1 of CBOD (45 mg/1 of BOD5 *
1.5) and 90 mg/I of NBOD (NH3 value of 20 mg/1* 4.5). The models results predict DO
minimums of 7.43 mg/I at 0.0922 MGD, 7.25 mg/I at 0.150 MGD, and 7.11 mgll at 0.200
MGD. The differences between the DO minimum at the pre-SOC flow of 0.0922 MGD,
and the two other flows are 0.18 mg/1 and 0.32 mg/1, respectively. These differences do
not demonstrate a significant depression of the instream DO level per 67(b) criteria.
Regarding the recommended SOC fecal coliform limit of 400/100m1, it is
recommended that this SOC limit be approved since this is also the permitted daily
maximum limit for fecal.
Recommendation
Based on the model results, the NPDES Unit recommends approval of the 13,750
GPD of domestic waste, allowing for additional excess inflow/infiltration for the
Bakersville WWTP. Model results indicate that a final SOC flow of 0.150 MGD or
0.200 MGD and the SOC limits of 45 mg/I BOD5 (mo. avg.); 60 mg/I BOD5 (daily max.)
will meet the 67(b) criteria. We also recommend approval of the SOC limits for TSS
limit of 45 mg/1 (mo. avg.); 60 mg/1 of TSS (daily max.) and fecal coliform of 400/100m1.
It is recommended that the other permitted limitations remain the same as in the existing
NPDES permit.
If you have any questions, please call me at 733-5083, extension 512.
cc: Shannon Langley
Central Files
NPDES Permit File

Table 1. Instream Assessment Summary for the Town of Bakersville
Wasteflow Assumptions
Design Capacity
Pre-SOC Flow
Domestic Flow Requested
1) Pre-SOC + Domestic Flow +Inflow
2) Pre-SOC + Domestic Flow +Inflow
Model Input Summary
Headwater conditions:
s7Q 10- flow 3.6 cfs
w7Q 10 flow 5.0 cfs
Average flow 34.0 cfs
Design Temperature 23 C
CBOD 2.0 mg/1
NBOD 1.0 mg/1
DO (90% saturation) 7.72 mg/1
Wastewater Inputs:
0.075 MGD
0.0922 MGD
0.01375 MGD
0.150 MGD
0.200 MGD
Pre- SOC Qw 0.0922 MGD
1) Requested SOC Qw 0.150 MGD
2) Requested SOC Qw 0.200 MGD
CBOD 67.5 mg/1
NBOD 90 mg/1
Model Output Summary
Qw DO Net Distance DO Net
(MGD) min. Change <5.0 mg/1 Change
(mg/1) (mg/I) (mi.) (mi.)
0.0922 7.43 NA 0.0 NA
0.150 7.25 0.18 0.0 0.0
0.200 7.11 0.32 0.0 0.0

Bakersville WWTP Instream Assessment
Cane Creek C-Trout
040306
jmn
ARO requesting instream assessment for SOC for Bakersville. SOC limits are for BOD5,
TSS, fecal coliform and flow.
SOC limits requested: BOD5 = 45 mg/I (mo. avg.) and 60 (da. max.)
TSS = 45 mg/1 (mo. avg.) and 60 (da. max.)
Fecal coliform = 400/100m1
Flow = 0.150 MGD and 0.200 MGD
( only 13,750 GPD of this flow will be domestic ww, the remaining flow will be allowed
for inflow/infiltration, which is the major reason for facility's noncompliance with
permitted flow limit.)
Model inputs: BOD5 at 45 mg/1 * 1.5 multiplier = 67.5 mg/1 CBOD
NH3 at 20 mg/1 * 4.5 multiplier = 90 mg/I NBOD
Qws of 1) 0.0922 MGD, average Qw from June 1998 thru May 1999
2) SOC flow limit of 0.150 MGD and 3) SOC flow limit of 0.200 MGD
Model was run to compare predicted instream DO minimum. Cannot violate the criteria
of 0.5 mg/1 difference in DO min. between initial flow of 0.0922 MGD and SOC flows.
Also cannot exceed the zone of degradation greater than 0.5 mg/1. Model results indicate
that all criterion are met. See memo for specific DO min., etc.

SUMMER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : BAKERSVILLE WWTP
Receiving Stream : CANE RIVER
The End D.O. is 8.43 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 3.58 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 3.14 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.43 0.00 1
Reach 1 67.50 90.00 0.00 0.09220

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger
Receiving Stream
: BAKERSVILLE WWTP
: CANE RIVER
Summer 7Q10 : 3.6
Design Temperature: 23.0
Subbasin : 040306
Stream Class: C TR
Winter 7Q10 : 5.0
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY DEPTH Kd Kd Ka Ka KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design C4)20° design Q20° design
Segment 1
Reach 1
2.00
43.30
0.294
0.94
0.43
0.37
24.49
22.94
0.63
Flow
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste
Headwaters
Tributary
* Runoff
0.143
3.600
0.000
0.200
CBOD NBOD D.O.
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
67.500 90.000 0.000
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

SUMMER
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi ( D.O. I CBOD I NBOD
1 1 0.00 7.43 4.50 4.40
1 1 0.10 7.81 4.45 4.32
1 1 0.20 8.04 4.40 4.25
1 1 0.30 8.18 4.34 4.18
1 1 0.40 8.27 4.29 4.11
1 1 0.50 8.32 4.24 4.04
1 1 0.60 8.35 4.20 3.97
1 1 0.70 8.37 4.15 3.90
1 1 0.80 8.38 4.10 3.84
1 1 0.90 8.39 4.05 3.77
1 1 1.00 8.40 4.01 3.71
1 1 1.10 8.40 3.96 3.65
1 1 1.20 8.41 3.92 3.59
1 1 1.30 8.41 3.87 3.53
1 1 1.40 8.41 3.83 3.47
1 1 1.50 8.42 3.79 3.41
1 1 1.60 8.42 3.75 3.36
1 1 1.70 8.42 3.70 3.30
1 1 1.80 8.42 3.66 3.25
1 1 1.90 8.43 3.62 3.20
1 1 2.00 8.43 3.58 3.14
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD
1
1
Flow I
3.74
3.76
3.78
3.80
3.82
3.84
3.86
3.88
3.90
3.92
3.94
3.96
3.98
4.00
4.02
4.04
4.06
4.08
4.10
4.12
4.14
Flow I

SUMMER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : BAKERSVILLE WWTP
Receiving Stream : CANE RIVER
The End D.O. is 8.37 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 4.71 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 4.56 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.25 0.00 1
Reach 1 67.50 90.00 0.00 0.15000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger
Receiving Stream
: BAKERSVILLE WWTP
: CANE RIVER
Summer 7Q10 : 3.6
Design Temperature: 23.0
Subbasin : 040306
Stream Class: C TR
Winter 7Q10 : 5.0
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY DEPTH Kd Kd Ka Ka KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design @20° design @20° design
Segment 1
Reach 1
2.00
43.30
0.299
0.95
0.43
0.37
24.91
23.33
0.63
Flow
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste
Headwaters
Tributary
* Runoff
0.232
3.600
0.000
0.200
CBOD NBOD D.O.
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
67.500 90.000 0.000
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

SUMMER
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow
1 1 0.00 7.25 5.97 6.40 3.83
1 1 0.10 7.68 5.90 6.29 3.85
1 1 0.20 7.93 5.83 6.18 3.87
1 1 0.30 8.09 5.76 6.08 3.89
1 1 0.40 8.18 5.69 5.97 3.91
1 1 0.50 8.24 5.62 5.87 3.93
1 1 0.60 8.28 5.55 5.77 3.95
1 1 0.70 8.30 5.49 5.68 3.97
1 1 0.80 8.32 5.42 5.58 3.99
1 1 0.90 8.33 5.36 5.49 4.01
1 1 1.00 8.34 5.30 5.39 4.03
1 1 1.10 8.34 5.23 5.30 4.05
1 1 1.20 8.35 5.17 5.22 4.07
1 1 1.30 8.35 5.11 5.13 4.09
1 1 1.40 8.35 5.05 5.04 4.11
1 1 1.50 8.36 4.99 4.96 4.13
1 1 1.60 8.36 4.94 4.88 4.15
1 1 1.70 8.36 4.88 4.80 4.17
1 1 1.80 8.37 4.82 4.72 4.19
1 1 1.90 8.37 4.77 4.64 4.21
1 1 2.00 8.37 4.71 4.56 4.23
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I Flow I

SUMMER
Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O.
1 1 0.00 7.25
1 1 0.10 7.68
1 1 0.20 7.93
1 1 0.30 8.09
1 1 0.40 8.18
1 1 0.50 8.24
1 1 0.60 8.28
1 1 0.70 8.30
1 1 0.80 8.32
1 1 0.90 8.33
1 1 1.00 8.34
1 1 1.10 8.34
1 1 1.20 8.35
1 1 1.30 8.35
1 1 1.40 8.35
1 1 1.50 8.36
1 1 1.60 8.36
1 1 1.70 8.36
1 1 1.80 8.37
1 1 1.90 8.37
1 1 2.00 8.37
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O.
1
1
CBOD
5.97
5.90
5.83
5.76
5.69
5.62
5.55
5.49
5.42
5.36
5.30
5.23
5.17
5.11
5.05
4.99
4.94
4.88
4.82
4.77
4.71
CBOD
1
1
NBOD
6.40
6.29
6.18
6.08
5.97
5.87
5.77
5.68
5.58
5.49
5.39
5.30
5.22
5.13
5.04
4.96
4.88
4.80
4.72
4.64
4.56
NBOD
1
1
Flow I
3.83
3.85
3.87
3.89
3.91
3.93
3.95
3.97
3.99
4.01
4.03
4.05
4.07
4.09
4.11
4.13
4.15
4.17
4.19
4.21
4.23
Flow I

SUMMER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : BAKERSVILLE WWTP
Receiving Stream : CANE RIVER
The End D.O. is 8.33 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 5.65 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 5.75 mg/1.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.11 0.00 1.
Reach 1 67.50 90.00 0.00 0.20000

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger
Receiving Stream
Summer 7Q10
Design Temperature:
BAKERSVILLE WWTP
CANE RIVER
3.6
23.0
Subbasin : 040306
Stream Class: C TR
Winter 7Q10 : 5.0
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY DEPTH Kd Kd Ka Ka KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design @20° design @20° design
Segment 1
Reach 1
2.00
43.30
0.304
0.95
0.43
0.38
25.27
23.67
0.63
Flow
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste
Headwaters
Tributary
* Runoff
0.310
3.600
0.000
0.200
CBOD NBOD D.O.
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
67.500 90.000 0.000
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

I
I
Seg #
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Seg #
(
I
Reach # I Seg Mi
1 0.00
1 0.10
1 0.20
1 0.30
1 0.40
1 0.50
1 0.60
1 0.70
1 0.80
1 0.90
1 1.00
1 1.10
1 1.20
1 1.30
1 1.40
1 1.50
1 1.60
1 1.70
1 1.80
1 1.90
1 2.00
Reach # I Seg Mi
I
SUMMER
D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I
7.11 7.19 8.06
7.57 7.10 7.92
7.85 7.02 7.79
8.01 6.93 7.65
8.12 6.85 7.52
8.18 6.76 7.40
8.22 6.68 7.27
8.25 6.60 7.15
8.26 6.52 7.03
8.27 6.44 6.91
8.28 6.37 6.80
8.29 6.29 6.68
8.30 6.22 6.57
8.30 6.14 6.46
8.31 6.07 6.36
8.31 6.00 6.25
8.31 5.93 6.15
8.32 5.86 6.05
8.32 5.79 5.95
8.33 5.72 5.85
8.33 5.65 5.75
I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD I
Flow I
3.91
3.93
3.95
3.97
3.99
4.01
4.03
4.05
4.07
4.09
4.11
4.13
4.15
4.17
4.19
4.21
4.23
4.25
4.27
4.29
4.31
Flow I

GKEX88/MP 09/29/1999
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT PAGE 1
PERMIT--NC0025461 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9808-9907 LOC---E
FACILITY--BAKERSVILLE, TOWN OF - WWTP DESIGN FLOW-- .0750 CLASS--2
LOCATION--BAKERSVILLE REGION/COUNTY--01 MITCHELL
50050 00310 00530 00610 31616 50060 00010 00400
MONTH Q/MGD BOD RES/TSS NH3+NH4- FEC COLI CHLORINE TEMP PH
LIMIT F .0750 F 30.00 F 30.0 NOL F 200.0 NOL 9.0 6.0
98/08 .1060F 9.82 13.3 .65 2541.8F .147 20.95 6.9-6.1
98/09 .0959F 37.38F 69.2F .45 42.5 .423 20.22 6.5-6.1
98/10 .0670 11.12 27.6 .50 10.1 59.090 17.66 6.6-6.0
98/11 .0685 11.40 31.9F .35 319.5F 55.789 14.97 6.6-6.0
98/12 .0892F 9.90 21.2 1.05 176.8 55.238 13.01 6.6-6.0
99/01 .1418F 11.17 11.9 1.95 145.6 56.000 10.74 6.6-6.1
99/02 .0960F 5.37 8.1 4.20 5.3 44.500 11.50 6.6-6.4
99/03 .1178F 13.70 16.2 .55 45.7 40.000 10.65 6.5-6.2
99/04 .0753F 11.82 8.6 1.05 311.9F 42.380 14.65 6.6-6.4
99/05 .0922F 5.07 7.8 3.15 16.4 49.000 16.69 6.6-6.2
99/06 .0710 2.77 6.3 1.55 3.9 40.909 19.93 6.6-6.1
99/07 .0774F 4.68 2.4 1.00 16.4 33.636 22.35 6.7-6.1
AVERAGE .0915 11.18 18.7 1.37 302.9 39.759 16.11
MAXIMUM .2320 150.00 288.0 4.80 29400.0 60.000 23.40 6.980
MINIMUM .0590 2.00 1.0 .20 2.0 .050 7.70 6.090
UNIT MGD MG/L MG/L MG/L #/100ML UG/L DEG.0 SU

GKEX88/MP 09/29/1999
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT PAGE 2
PERMIT--NC0025461 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 9808-9907 LOC---E
FACILITY--BAKERSVILLE, TOWN OF - WWTP DESIGN FLOW-- .0750 CLASS--2
LOCATION--BAKERSVILLE REGION/COUNTY--01 MITCHELL
00600 00665
MONTH TOTAL N PHOS-TOT
LIMIT
98/08
98/09
LIMIT NOL NOL
98/10 16.500 2.2300
98/11
98/12
99/01
99/02
99/03
99/04 9.200 2.0800
99/05
99/06
99/07
AVERAGE 12.850 2.1550
MAXIMUM 16.500 2.2300
MINIMUM 9.200 2.0800
UNIT MG/L MG/L

-
SUMMER
MODEL RESULTS
Discharger : BAKERSVILLE WWTP
Receiving Stream : CANE RIVER
The End D.O. is 8.41 mg/l.
The End CBOD is 3.86 mg/l.
The End NBOD is 3.49 mg/l.
WLA WLA WLA
DO Min CBOD NBOD DO Waste Flow
(mg/1) Milepoint Reach # (mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1) (mgd)
Segment 1 7.38 0.00 1
Reach 1 67.50 90.00 0.00 0.10600

*** MODEL SUMMARY DATA ***
Discharger .
Receiving Stream .
Summer 7Q10
Design Temperature:
BAKERSVILLE WWTP
CANE RIVER
3.6
23.0
Subbasin : 040306
Stream Class: C TR
Winter 7Q10 : 5.0
LENGTH SLOPE VELOCITY DEPTH Kd Kd Ka Ka KN
mile ft/mi fps ft design @20° design @20° design
Segment 1
Reach 1
2.00
43.30
0.296
0.95
0.43
0.37 24.59
23.04
0.63
Flow
cfs
Segment 1 Reach 1
Waste
Headwaters
Tributary
* Runoff
0.164
3.600
0.000
0.200
CBOD NBOD D.O.
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
67.500 90.000 0.000
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
2.000 1.000 7.720
* Runoff flow is in cfs/mile

SUMMER
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD I NBOD
1 1 0.00 7.38 4.86 4.88
1 1 0.10 7.78 4.80 4.80
1 1 0.20 8.02 4.74 4.72
1 1 0.30 8.16 4.69 4.64
1 1 0.40 8.25 4.63 4.56
1 1 0.50 8.30 4.58 4.48
1 1 0.60 8.33 4.53 4.41
1 1 0.70 8.35 4.47 4.33
1 1 0.80 8.37 4.42 4.26
1 1 0.90 8.38 4.37 4.19
1 1 1.00 8.38 4.32 4.12
1 1 1.10 8.39 4.27 4.05
1 1 1.20 8.39 4.22 3.98
1 1 1.30 8.40 4.17 3.92
1 1 1.40 8.40 4.13 3.85
1 1 1.50 8.40 4.08 3.79
1 1 1.60 8.40 4.03 3.73
1 1 1.70 8.41 3.99 3.66
1 1 1.80 8.41 3.94 3.60
1 1 1.90 8.41 3.90 3.54
1 1 2.00 8.41 3.86 3.49
I Seg # I Reach # I Seg Mi I D.O. I CBOD NBOD
Flow I
3.76
3.78
3.80
3.82
3.84
3.86
3.88
3.90
3.92
3.94
3.96
3.98
4.00
4.02
4.04
4.06
4.08
4.10
4.12
4.14
4.16
Flow I

03/16/1995 20:37 4
PAGE 01
TO:
FAX # :
PROM:
DATE:
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OP WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
ASH TILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
59 WOODFIN PLACE
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801
PHONE: 928/251_6208 FAX: [phone]
# OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER: XI."
MESSAGE: If qupatign8 _p1satiQ c4.11 a28/3 1- 20

03/16/1995 20:37 4
PAGE 02
Re uest E'orm for In -stream Aesesement for 67B
NAME OF FOCI I.ITY - _ Al L#zJu,/&.
COUNTY 4184.2.4841___
REGION
RECEIVING STREAK _n e
•wi
BACKGROUND DATA :
b$ I GN FLOW
At406713/4
SUBBASINZ814 Q�---
A. Why is sOC needed? (Facility is out of compliance with Which
effluent limits?)
v
a.
History of soC requests:
1. Monthly Average waste
prior to any SOC
Time period averaged
b. Total pant flow post-SOc
(sum of or igina 1 flow and
soc flow minus losses)
flow
--.—�„_, O �.s• m g d
4www�'�ww
- 5 _-�-- t h ru ar://9 /
2, Previously approved SOC's:
Date: flow: 0 mgd
Date: flow: 4, mgd
total of previously approved SOC flow:
d) mqd
3. Flows lost from punt
(facilities tha. have flows mgd
off line)
4. Currynt SOC request /�
f low : -T.-��'S J ' g d
flow:-4X4742119__mgd
Is this an accurate flow balance for plant? Why/why not?
CANVIUAILAL4 y40 4Dp0.-'L 'Lb .i21A VV4L- •S o4A.A et..S fJV r aN
7�

03/16/1995 20:37 4
PAGE 03
C. Please attach DMR summary for past year for all permitted parame-
ters. If possible, include reports from previous years if
facility has been under SOC for more than a year.
CURRENT SOC; RQUEST
J. Request is for domestic or iaduetria1 waste? If it is a combin-
ation, please specify percentages.
entAl*IC.r
R. what type of industry? Please attach any pertinent data.
W%
C. The region proposes the foljqt
P g SOC ll.mits. 41'0�
SOD5 �149/ 1 6 0 S
NH3_ m9/ 1
DO Mg/1
T s S._..._
f e cd l col i form..�•�_, 4/0 6 #/10om1
PH S U
other her p:,xsmetors tX,J .zoC rit•'d.2
71)16,
Wr. it is the basis for these limits? d
7C7IN Ai ?-r 4.1 p.0,Lot
44.eaALA-<1, 4-42,
vV� 14 .sr a 04 At. a«. I
141 _i, .

03/ 16/ 1995 20:37 4
I CD -DWo
Fax :[phone] Jul 6 '99
PAGE 04
GRWRB UNP
9:43 P. 0if01
C LIAbTcB 5VJLm1T3(N
PERMIT- AMMIS REMIT 070,g 1999
FACrLZTER-NCOU2S461 PIPR--092 2490RT 80 rim s
LOCAMON BAAFRsy� � TOWN OF - 9806-9905 stsE�rxr.r.griRS , PLoa-- �oC- --8
R 1 .0750
-- 01 I4XT a
MONTR U/MOD 00310 00530
BOD RE6/Ts4 �S a. -0610 FBC �= CR10R 00010
ZIMTT P .0750 7 3Q _ 00 7 v0 P1#
98las .uiso a.rz 3b.o , $ aao.0
34.3 .75 6570.15' 44.090 3 bEg..96 7.0 6-3
9Al07 8.86 7.1-6.3 .11.70P 4.18 10.5
-Oa 43B.9P 45.454 20.4/ 7.x-B.2
98lc�g iQ�OF y.82
13.3 .65 9541.91
.147 20_9s 4.9-6.1
90/31 .0605 11.40
31'9p .Ss 3Y4..sp Ss.799
94/42 14.97 •6.6-6.0
. 0092P 9.90 21.2 a.. 0s 176.E 53.23B 1.3. ai
8.6. 6.0
94/A9 .0956r•
37.388 69.2F .45 42.,g
46/10 .433 20.22 6.5-6 .a67a 13..12 .l
27.6 -$0 10.1 59.090
17.66 6.6-•6, 0
99/81 iaig i1.i7
11.9 1.95 145.6 36.000 10.74 8.0-6.1
99/02 .0960F 5.37
4.1 4.20 8.3 44.S00 11,50 6.6-6.4
A .0992 20.0
M�I/1 .0590MMI 0390 153Q,3a 2S 4.99 �9 $5.3 di.099 �.5.85
biITM[�M MOD a.�0 60.O090 21.40
1�ICi L Mk! Nog 0/3.00N4 an ail ' 050
C �
99/03 . ].17eF 2.3. !o
16.2 .55 45.7 40.00p
99/04 :L0.65 6.5.6.2
.07$3F 17..82 8.6
2..05 311.991 1=.300 14.65 6.6-6.4
99/0$ .05227 5 _ 0?
7.0 3.15 16.4 49.000 16.69 6.6-6.2
W►t
r IVt rcaa WI/a-

03/16/1935 20:37 4
PAGE 05
.` C Ly tON READY FOR TNPUTOKEX78/DIY
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION ANALYSIS REPORT
PEr M:tr --Ncoo25461 PIPE--001 REPORT PERIOD: 97 1 1 -99 1 ()
FAC:ILITY-•••bAKEFi?\,',ILLE. TOWN Of - WWTP DESIGN FLOW- .0750 CLASS---2
LOCATI:y.r..-eAxrRIvILLE REGYON/COUNTY-•-01 MITCHELL
50060 C0310 00530 00610' 31616 50000
MONTH (4/MU) ( CD RES/TSS i•JH3'1•NH4- FEC COLT CHLORINE
97./11 .1002E 4.C2 14.9 .80 579.5F 54.2.1E
07/12 . 1021F 13.67 24.0 1.25 2118.2F 51.579
9./ 0 1 .165t1F 2.33 1 1 . 0 2.90 ; 809.5F 5 . E)$2
98102 .2129P 15.62 101.2E .50 1045.5F 9,500
98/03 F 2.00 6.4 1.20 ¢6s.9F' 41.919
Sri/ 04 .J.§.; 7E 2.45 1 3. 3. .45 130.9 33.819
G0/ 05 , i�Ii.LL 4.05 1 6 . 2. 3 : 80 1123.2P 49.00o
93/0EE 4.67 14.3 .75 6570,1F 44.090
P8/ 0' . 1170E 5.ie '10. 5 .25 436. $F 45.454
98/Gti . ' pi's 53.82 1 . 3 .65 • ' 2541 . 8F , 147
0,5/0rz, rim "ai 1 692F .45 42.5 .42
�38/10 .0670 11.12 27.S. .50 10.1 so.a o
A'vl=RAGC .=:296 8.52 26.0 1.12 1523,0 32.817
MAXIMUM ,34";!0 150.00 300.0 4.40 65500.0 60.000
rtili•JI'r:i[Jh1 :06 •:0 2.00 11 , 0 .20 ' 2 , 0 .000
UNIT hG5 Iv1G/L M 3/L. MG/L 11./'P001+iL uia/L